Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1994.volume.14/vol14.iss401-450

Text File | 1994-12-20 | 1MB | 34,338 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29713;
          18 Oct 94 20:47 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25118; Tue, 18 Oct 94 15:25:16 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25111; Tue, 18 Oct 94 15:25:11 CDT
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 94 15:25:11 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #401

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 18 Oct 94 15:25:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 401

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO (John Higdon)
    Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO (Steve Kass)
    Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO (Carl Moore)
    Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO (Tom Lowe)
    Re: MCI's 1-800 CALL INFO (Jonathan D. Loo)
    Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO (Phil Ritter)
    Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Testing 1-800-CALL-INFO (Jeffrey A. Harper)
    Re: Testing 1-800-CALL-INFO (Mark E. Daniel)
    Re: Testing 1-800-CALL-INFO (Steve Cogorno)
    Charging For 800 Calls (was Re: 1-800-CALL-INFO) (Barry Margolin)
    Charges For Calling 800 Numbers (Jeff Buckingham)
    Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned* (Lauren Weinstein)
    800-Number Billing (Stephen Tihor)
    Re: Billable 800 Service (Dave Levenson)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. 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, 18 Oct 1994 11:01:30 -0700
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO


[e-mail] (Brian Brown) writes:

> FYI, a LD carrier can provide two "information" digits in addition to
> ANI via digital lines -- although, for some mysterious, unexplainable
> reason (someone comment please), they must do this via MF, not DTMF.

Any number of carriers, including MCI, will supply DNIS/ANI in FGD
format via DTMF. If your particular carrier claims that it cannot be
done, look at other carriers.

> The two-digit code for payphones is "27".

There are actually two payphone codes. One is for LEC payphones; the
other for COCOTs.

> I would be interested to know what happens when you call from a
> payphone.

The operator asks for billing information. But this has nothing to do
with the status digits. It comes from a check of the screened call
database. All payphones have collect and third-party billing blocked
in a national database that is available on-line to any company that
wants to pay for it.  Residential and business telephones that have
this screening in effect will get the same response when calling
CALL-INFO. Otherwise, the billing is via the collect call mechanism.

> Incidentally, the two MF digits make the ANI-DNIS string look like:
> *AABBBCCCDDDD*EEEFFFF*, a total of 22 digits outpulsed!!!

Question: what is a "*" in MF? Is it KP? KP2? Just wondering.

> Is it possible that MF can outpulse faster than DTMF?  It seems
> strange that MF is necessary for this service, but it definitely is.

I don't know how to break this to you, but I am getting FGD format
(including status) delivered via DTMF. And it is a small reseller, to
boot!

> You may be able to get some employee at a carrier to agree to give
> you this info via DTMF, but they will soon learn that they can't and
> apologize to you.

This is misinformation. The only carrier that promised it to me and
could not deliver was MCI. I believe they now can do it. In any event
there are a number of other carriers who will be happy to provide you
with FGD format DNIS/ANI using DTMF.

> One more thing -- these desription digits can also tell you when the
> ANI represents a hotel, hospital, prison, cellular, business or
> residential site, and who knows what else.

Actually, they don't distinguish between residential and business POTS.
And if the cellular company is using certain types of interconnectivity
with the LEC, the status code returns "00" (POTS).

> Please don't ask how I know all this.

Judging from the holes, I don't think I want to know. I got my info
from designing and writing software for such systems.


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

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

Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 01:00:43 EDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO


Patrick seems to be saying that charging 75 cents for 1-800-CALL-INFO
is in line with using 800 numbers for Western Union or for charges to
a credit card.  I disagree.  No other 1-800 number does (or should)
result in a charge on the telephone bill without some verbal or other
authorization from the caller, nor without some indication from the
called party that a charge will apply.  That was certainly the
situation with Western Union the few times I used it.

Patrick, do you propose that I could set up a phone number within my
exchange, say 201-514-FOOD, to provide a recorded recipe at a $5
charge on the phone bill, offering no indication in the recording of
the charge?  Of course my advertisements would mention the charge.

No.  Calls within an exchange are free (*), though they can result in
a transfer of money from the calling to called parties with a credit
card number and verbal authorization.  The same should be true for 800
numbers.  (*)metered service aside

Does MCI's service have a name?  If you call 1-800-555-1212 and ask
for the number, do you get a recording saying "The toll-free number is
 ..."?  I agree with those who lament the devaluation of 800 service by
MCI's practice, and I also agree with Patrick that nothing should be
charged to a telephone bill beyond the cost of carrying the call.


Steve Kass/ Math & CS/ Drew U/ Madison NJ/ [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know how far the proprietor of
such services should be required to go to make notification. Even though
they mention it in their advertising, some people will later insist that
they did not see it. The operator can mention it in the process of getting
the customer's lookup request and yet later some people will still claim
they did not know about the charge.  One information provider gets around
the later claims of ignorance on the part of users by tape recording the
opening seconds of conversation where the intake operator advises the party
of the charge and asks the person's permission to charge it. If the person
later claims no permission was given, the IP need merely reference the
index or location of the 20-30 second spot on a large reel of tape where
that particular person consented and provide them with it.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 18 Oct 94 11:34:24 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO


So just what gets printed on the phone bill when a call to
1-800-CALL-INFO gets billed?

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Lowe)
Subject: Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 13:40:05 EDT


> FYI, a LD carrier can provide two "information" digits in addition to
> ANI via digital lines -- although, for some mysterious, unexplainable
> reason (someone comment please), they must do this via MF, not DTMF.
> The two-digit code for payphones is "27".  In fact, MCI can look at
> the two ANI description digits before deciding to go off hook, and
> simply not answer the call.  I would be interested to know what
> happens when you call from a payphone.

> Incidentally, the two MF digits make the ANI-DNIS string look like:
> *AABBBCCCDDDD*EEEFFFF*, a total of 22 digits outpulsed!!!  Is it
> possible that MF can outpulse faster than DTMF?  It seems strange that
> MF is necessary for this service, but it definitely is.  You may be
> able to get some employee at a carrier to agree to give you this info
> via DTMF, but they will soon learn that they can't and apologize to
> you.

The INFO/ANI digits can also be sent via ISDN or SS7.  I don't know
why they can't be sent with the DTMF option.  I'm converting some DTMF
signalled trunks to MF trunks just so I can get the info digits.  This
should happen sometime this week, I hope.

I don't think that MF is any faster than DTMF signalling.  After
listening to some MF circuits and DTMF circuits side by side, the MF
almost sounded slower to me.

The *AABBBCCCDDDD*EEEFFFF* string you mention is the signalling for
DTMF, and it does not include the info digits (AA in your string).
The MF signalling goes like this:

DMS-250                            PBX

SEIZURE ------------------------>
        <------------------------  WINK
KP + IINPANXXXXX + ST ---------->
KP + DNIS + ST ----------------->
        <------------------------  WINK
        <------------------------  OFF HOOK  (answer)

Where the KP and ST are the MF "Key Pulse" and "Stop" signals
II = Info Digits, NPANXXXXX is the ANI, and DNIS is the dialed number.
The possible values for the Info digits are:
00 - Regular
01 - Multi Party line (ANI not delivered)
02 - ANI failure
06 - Hotel/Motel
07 - Prison
27 - Coin
61 - Cellular

There are slight variations to the contents of the digits, depending
on whether or not full ANI is available and/or configured on the trunk
group and/or 800 number.  If ANI is configured, the you get AT LEAST
the area code.  Also, at least with DTMF signaling, I've been getting
the originating country code on ITFS (International Toll Free Service)
numbers that are terminating on the switch.

I got most of this information from the "Real Time ANI Training Booklet"
that Sprint publishes.

As far as making calls from cellular phones to 800-CALL-INFO, they
didn't restrict me!  That means that my cellular company got billed
$0.75 for my call plus the toll charges, and all I'll pay for is
airtime for an 800 call.  I also tried it from one hotel and it went
through with no problem (although the hotel tried to charge me $0.65
for that and all of my other 800 calls, but that's another story.

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

From: Jonathan D. Loo <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 01:59:01 -0400
Subject: Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO


TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> I went out yesterday afternoon and tried it also to see what payphones
> around here would do. I got through and got the request to provide
> billing information in the form of a credit card number or third party
> phone number. When I asked why there was a charge for a call to an 800
> number the answer I got was that the call itself is free; what I would
> be paying for was the information provided as a result. This is
> basically the way all the information providers via 800 phrase their
> answer: carriage itself is indeed 'free' or reverse charged. You pay
> for the information we give you while chatting.

So if you get a non-published number, then it should NOT be billed, because
you get no information.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Certainly you get information. You were
informed that the person you are trying to reach has chosen to not be
listed. Or perhaps you were informed that the person you are trying to
reach is not listed at all and (by implication) does not have phone service,
at least in his name. The operator did not just ring off and tell you
nothing at all.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Ritter)
Subject: Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO
Organization: AirTouch Cellular, Los Angeles
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 16:14:03 GMT


All "800" services that reverse bill are a special problem for most
cellular carriers (and, presumably, for some smaller telco's and CAPs
that are providing line service) because there is generally no way to
get a bill from the service provider and return it to our customers
the way that the LECs do (it is a really long story, and kinda ugly,
but true).  In most cases, they just get billed back to the cellular
carrier (who refuses to pay...).  Its similar to the reason that most
cellular carriers block all "900/976" calls from cell phones.

Up 'till now, there have been very few of these that are actually
likely to get called by cellular customers (but the ones that exist
sure can be interesting  ;-).  MCIs 1-800-CALL-INFO service, however,
is providing a "legitimate" service that is actually quite attractive
to cellular users (no need to write down the number and re-dial,
something that can be quite tricky while driving).  It is also being
heavily advertised in ways that I would say expressly target cellular
(radio commercials ten to twelve times an hour on news stations in the LA
area during rush-hour(s) [which are almost all day in LA]).

During the first two or three days that MCI offered this service, I
noticed that they were not blocking calls from cellular (I also
noticed that their database includes, and they will connect call to,
certain international numbers).  This, of course, provides a massive
hole for long-distance fraud (place your calls from a cellular phone,
and never receive a bill for the LD -- better still if you are using a
cloned cell phone, and we particularly dislike any service that might
encourage the airtime bandits).

Anyway, they assumed that they would receive correct ANI-II on all
cellular originiations to identify and screen those calls.  Guess what
 -- they don't.  On the evening of 10/13 they implemented a "temporary"
fix that forces them to use a LIDB dip on every call and screen based
on the "no collect" class of call screening indicator (I think that
they will be forced to leave this on forever, further crimping their
profit marings with the cost of the LIDB dip [too bad...]).

[On the topic of profit margins, unless their operators and/or directory
database get faster, they'll never make money at $.75 -- they currently
have too much "work time" per call.  Of course, they could be counting on
the un-discounted MCI LD for their profits.  But this is really another
topic altogether ...].

This, of course, also allows anyone else who wants to block the "800
reverse billing" feature of their service and force them to request a
billing option by asking their LEC to mark their billing telephone
numbers "no collect".  For a PBX, you usually only have to mark your
pilot number(s) and/or billing telephone number(s), since your calls
normally all forward one ANI no matter what line origininated the
call.  You will also not be able to accept collect calls, but that may
not be so bad after all ;-).  And, for most organizations, that would
be preferable to restricting all "800" calls.


Phil Ritter    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 09:57:56 PDT


Dave Levenson said:

> How about it MCI? AT&T? SPRINT? et al.  You can't have it both ways.
> Either go back to the original design and guarantee the calling party
> that calls to 800 numbers are toll-free, or don't charge your 800
> customers a premium for using them.

This might be a way to free up 800 numbers since there was mention of
a shortage.  800 could be for no-way-could-there-possibly-be-a-charge-toll-
free and 8xx could be for toll-free-but-information-costs-extra.


Steve   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Or just continue using 900/976 for that
purpose. 900 is 'toll-free' to the caller (like 800 the carriage is
charged to the IP who collects it with the charges for his service).

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey A. Harper)
Subject: Re: Testing 1-800-CALL-INFO
Date: 18 Oct 1994 07:36:58 GMT
Organization: Netcom


In <[e-mail]> Les Reeves <[e-mail]> writes:

> After giving the operator Pat's name and city, and waiting about 45
> seconds, I was told that there were two listings, one non-published
> and one unlisted.  Hmmm.  I asked for another name and the operator
> informed me that I had used up my two searches.

If you have two numbers, it's still considered one search.  Two searches
consititutes the operator to clear the screen and input another name
into the database.

Sounds like you were taken advantage of from what you said.

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

Date: Tue, 18 Oct 94 16:22:16 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Mark E Daniel)
Subject: Re: Testing 1-800-CALL-INFO


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> operator requests it ... but then, how were *you* to know a call to
> an 800 number costs you money?   <grin> ... remember the astrologers

I was at a COCOT payphone a few weeks ago and had the bright idea of
wanting to call 1 800 555 1212 to find out the 800-number to Greyhound
so I could find out where the local station was (I was in Downtown
Cleveland BTW) and it wanted .75 for the first 3 minutes.  I hung up
and got an Ameritech operator to complete the call for me, which the
phone was gracious enough to call. :) After I got the info, I called
the 800 number.  It let that go through without a problem.  I HATE
COCOTs!  There should be a regulatory body for these people.  Maybe
someone in the know could meet with them once a month and tell them
how to really handle phone calls.  I've half thgought of typing up
something to let people know that they won't be able to use their
voicemail or pagers from these phones.  But sometimes a COCOT is all
there is in an area.  It's depressing.


[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a regulatory body for 'those
people'. It is called the Federal Communications Commission. How effective
it is can be debated. In some matters, the FCC is ineffectual.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Testing 1-800-CALL-INFO
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 10:27:21 PDT


> been different.  I wonder if MCI is using any sort of legitimate data-
> base from the local telcos or if they have strung together some sort
> of outdated cross-reference books where half the entries are out of
> date and a couple years old.  Sounds like a ripoff to me; best limit
> use of the service to coin phones (Genuine Bell or COCOT, I don't care)
> and of course be prepared to deposit the 75 cents in coins when the
> operator requests it ... but then, how were *you* to know a call to

Would this work?  I was under the impression that only AT&T had the
equipment to handle coin calls.  Could an 800 service request coins
from a coin phone?


Steve    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No it cannot. I was only joking. AT&T
is the only carrier with arrangements to collect coins in payphones,
and that goes back to the relationship they had with the various
Bell Companies for so many years until about a decade ago.    PAT]

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

From: Barry Margolin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Charging for 800 Calls (was Re: 1-800-CALL-INFO)
Date: 18 Oct 1994 18:38:59 GMT
Organization: NEARnet, Cambridge, MA


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Digest Editor noted
in response to [e-mail] (Jody Kravitz):

> When I asked why there was a charge for a call to an 800 number the
> answer I got was that the call itself is free; what I would be paying
> for was the information provided as a result. This is basically the
> answer all the information providers via 800 phrase their answer:
> carriage itself is indeed 'free' or reverse charged. You pay for the
> information we give you while chatting.  PAT]

I suppose this makes some sense.

Imagine a law office that provides an 800 number, to make it easier
for clients to reach them from out of state.  If I use that number to
call my lawyer, I wouldn't be surprised to be billed later for the
time that we spent on the phone.

The kicker is that I would also expect to be billed for the time if I
called their normal number.  In fact, I would expect the bill to be
the same in either case -- I'm paying for the lawyer's time, not the
phone service.

The giveaway that the charge in 800-CALL-INFO is for the information
is that they charge by the query, not by the call or minutes.  If you
call and just chat with the operator (asking about the service, as
several of the posters did, or negotiating payment options), you
shouldn't be charged.


Barry Margolin     BBN Internet Services Corp.    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Buckingham)
Subject: Charges For Calling 800 Numbers
Date: 18 Oct 1994 02:38:33 GMT
Organization: Call America, San Luis Obispo CA USA Earth Sol


I work in the long distance/operator services business and MCI does
not have the right to charge people for calling 800 numbers. The FCC
just clarified this within the last few weeks. My suggestion is not to
block 800 but just refuse to pay any charges to 800 numbers wihen they
appear on the local phone bill. The local phone company will not
disconnect service for these types of charges.


Jeff Buckingham ([e-mail])
Call America 4251 South Higura Street, Suite 800, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805-545-5100 (Voice)  805-541-7007 (Fax)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: MCI disputes that they are charging you
for calling their number. They say they are charging you for providing
information.   PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 15 Oct 94 19:50 PDT
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned*


Greetings.  The wave of publicity for the MCI 800-CALL-INFO nationwide
directory assistance service is putting into sharp focus the utter
stupidity of *any* 800 numbers being allowed to be charged to the
caller.

Even if one doesn't assume a rash of "caller pays services" being
marketed behind 800 numbers, the mere existence of this one heavily
advertised number will result in consumer confusion ("I thought 800
numbers were free?!") and many businesses being forced to program
their phone systems to block 800 numbers as they currently do 900
numbers.  (Many phone systems do not have the ability to block on
other than a full area code basis -- and many businesses might well
choose to block the entire code in any case out of fear of other
charging 800 numbers popping up without warning).

And of course, most people don't have phone systems with programmable
area code/prefix blocking -- are the telcos going to offer free 800
number blocking now?  And then what about the conventional "callee
pays" 800 numbers that most people have to use on a frequent basis?
How will they reach those and still block the chargeable 800 numbers,
which might have any arbitrary charge associated with them?

I had thought that recent FCC decisions (attempting to crack down on
"adult conversation" lines using 800 recharging schemes) were requiring
that a formal, pre-existing billing agreement (specifically accepting
such charges) be in place before such charging could be done.  How
does 800-CALL-INFO fit into this?

Having 800 numbers that charge the caller is far worse than 900 or 976
numbers!  At least with the latter two you always knew that calls to
those prefixes would cost the caller.  But if 800 numbers start to
charge callers, with no obvious way for the caller to know which calls
will charge, how much they will cost (is there any limit?), and no
generally available mechanism to block those charging calls, it's a
blueprint for the demise of 800 service.

As far as I can tell, caller charging 800 numbers are simply an
attempt at an "end-run" around 900 blocking, and they should simply be
banned.  The carriers/telcos should not be permitted to use the one
area code that has finally been firmly established in people's minds
as "toll free" for chargeable calls.  Businesses with conventional 800
numbers should be outraged that the value of their 800 numbers will be
reduced by consumer confusion and possible blocking -- and they should
make their feelings known to their local telcos and long distance
carriers.

The telcos, carriers, and the FCC should take action immediately to
put a stop to the entire ill-conceived concept of 800 numbers that
bill to the calling party.


 --Lauren--

P.S.  I have a call in to MCI consumer affairs (800-695-4405) on this
      issue.  I'll report back about what they have to say officially
      about this.  The 102220 operator who gave me the number made
      a point of telling me (after we finished talking about
      1-800-CALL-INFO) that at least the MCI consumer affairs
      number was still a *toll-free* 800 number.  How wonderful.

 --LW--


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Would you also ban 1-800-CALL-ATT? As
memory serves, you can place long distance calls via that number and
one of the options is 'press (x) to have this call billed to the number
you are calling from ...'  Would you ban all the long distance companies
which use some 800 number as a way to reach their switch when other
access is unavailable (such as 10xxx being blocked) under the same
rationale, or is this National Pick On MCI Week?

Unfortunatly, the established method of getting directory assistance
(by dialing areacode-555-1212) is monopolized by AT&T and the telcos
who properly suck up to them. No matter who you have as your presubscribed
long distance carrier, what happens when you dial areacode-555-1212?
Well, your call goes to AT&T and they charge you 75 cents!  So MCI is
charging 75 cents just like AT&T, for two requests just like AT&T, but
how are they supposed to get access?   I guess they could go on 900
and do it, but the trouble with 900 is its rotten reputation these days.
Maybe they could use 700 (since all carriers get to use the entire 700
space as they wish).    PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 11:14:20 EDT
From: Stephen Tihor <[e-mail]>
Subject: 800-Number Billing


Given the numebr of toll restrictor schemes that can not easilly block
800 number calls I think what we wought to be petioning the FCC to
establish is the principle that a caller to an 800 number can _not_ be
presumed to have the autority to authorize billing to the calling
number.

If one wants to sell information that way get them to provide some
other billing mechanism.  The current scheme can not be blocked by a
"reasonable man" without heroic efforts and is an unfair burden.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Billable 800 Service
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 14:45:08 GMT


800 service was designed to allow a business to attract prospective
customers by offering something free.  Devices which attract
prospective customers are called advertising.  The called party is
generally billed more for inbound 800 calls than for other calls of
the same distance and duration.  The premium is payment for
advertising.

Pat correctly points out that a toll-free call to an 800 number has
often been used to buy something -- information, merchandise, or
services, paid-for by out-of-band means such as credit cards.  He
also points out that Western Union Telegraph Company has, for many
years, offered its services via 800 numbers, and used in-band
billing to the calling telephone number.  The advertising works!

Today, when we dial a 900 or 976 number, the law requires the
service-provider to announce the cost of the call and to offer the
caller the opportunity to end the call before any service has been
dispensed, to avoid being billed for it.  On my test-call to
800-CALL-INFO, I was merely asked for a city, state, and name to be
looked up.  I was never told that a charge was being applied to my
telephone bill.  After I provided a city and name, and was given a
telephone number, the operator offered to connect me, at
MCI's "regular low rate" or something similar.  Had I not listened
to the radio commercials or read this Digest, I would very likely
have had the impression that charges only applied if the connection
offer was accepted.

I propose that 800 service-providers which apply charges to the
caller's phone bill be subject to the same regulations which apply to
900 and 976 service-providers.  Warn the caller and offer a quick
exit.  Perhaps after a few years, and after the demise of the public
expectation that 800 numbers are free calls, this regulation can be
relaxed.  At that time, the premium price paid by recipients of 800
calls should also dissappear -- the 800 number will lose its
advertisement value.  If it doesn't attract prospective customers,
I'll discontinue advertising an 800 number and simply offer the 908
number which appears below.


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For many, many years, calls to 555-1212
were also free. Do the operators there now announce the fact that your
call to that number costs 75 cents?  Local calls to 411 used to be free
and there is no announcement made when dialing that there is now a
charge ... and yes, in some places directory assistance offers to make
the connection afterward for the low price of thirty cents or something
like that.

People, you can protest all you want and say you are not going to pay
for a call to 800-CALL-INFO but in the case of 555-1212 the 75 cent
charge is tariffed. If 800-CALL-INFO is also tariffed by MCI, and I
have no reason to suspect it is not, then you *will* pay for that also
or risk disconnection of service. The rule about being allowed to renege
on payment to information providers only applies with 900/976 and
probably with *non-tariffed* guys on the 800 side like the astrologers
and the sex lines. Whenever a service is *tariffed* then the law says
you pay. Ignorance is not an excuse, although it is probably sufficient
one time for a goodwill writeoff.

The only answer, as Lauren and others point out, is to disallow any
so-called 'in-band' billing to telephone numbers via 800. You have to
have a 900/976 number if you want telco to bill, or conversely, you
must do credit card or open account or prepayment if you want to give
information on 800 (or make no charge at all, such as airlines, etc).
I would also require everyone who wishes to bill to a telephone number
to subscribe to the national database of 'no collect' or 'billed number
screening' subscribers, and require AT&T/MCI/Sprint (the three joint-
proprietors of that database) to make it available fairly at arms-length
to all subscribers.     PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #401
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00236;
          18 Oct 94 21:08 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27605; Tue, 18 Oct 94 16:30:39 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27595; Tue, 18 Oct 94 16:30:34 CDT
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 94 16:30:34 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #402

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 18 Oct 94 16:31:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 402

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Dynamic Negotiation in the Privacy Wars (Ross E. Mitchell)
    Virtual Phone Numbers Are Not the Same as Real Ones (Paul Robinson)
    Will Video Dial Tone Have the Same Old Vices? (John Robert Grout)
    Voice, Data, Video All at Once? (Greg Corson)
    A and B Boxes (Clive D.W. Feather)
    Cellular Local/Long Distance Problem (Jeff Bamford)
    MCI Local Service in Chicago? (Robert A. Book)
    Do I REALLY Need an EIR? (Mike Lyman)
    What Does *67 Do? (Robert Patterson)

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 America
On Line. 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, 18 Oct 1994 00:46:06 EDT
From: Ross E Mitchell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dynamic Negotiation in the Privacy Wars


The following article, which I co-authored, has just appeared in the
November/December 1994 issue of MIT's Technology Review.  This article
is distributed with permission of the publisher.  The entire issue is
available on the World Wid Web.  The home page can be found at:

http://web.mit.edu/afs/athena/org/t/techreview/www/tr.html

If you would like to re-post this article elsewhere, please be sure to
include the Copyright notice.  Also, if you discuss "dynamic
negotiation" in relation to electronic privacy issues, I would appreciate
it if you would credit me as the source of the term/concept.

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

        Dynamic Negotiation in the Privacy Wars

Ross E. Mitchell and Judith Wagner Decew

New telecommunications technologies are undermining our ability to
remain anonymous. The situation has inspired a sensible solution that
would make privacy self-regulating.

People want information about others but are reticent to divulge it
about themselves. Nowhere is this conflict more apparent than in the
telephone feature known as caller identification, or caller ID, which
allows those receiving calls to see the telephone number and name of
the caller before answering the phone.

Telephone companies are promoting and installing caller ID throughout
the country. Proponents of the technology argue that it provides a
valuable service to those pestered by obscene or harassing phone calls
or persistent telemarketing. But some privacy advocates vehemently
disagree, maintaining that callers should be able to choose to remain
anonymous. In a world of interlinked computer networks and massive
data banks, they say, people already give away too much personal
information without their knowledge and consent. They further worry
that the prospect of identification will deter anonymous police
tipsters and callers to hot lines for drug abusers, AIDS victims, or
runaways.

There is, however, a logical and intuitive way to implement this
technology that should satisfy both camps. This new way of thinking
about privacy regulation, which we call "dynamic negotiation,"
permits us to enjoy the benefits of new telecommunications
technologies - including, but not limited to, caller ID - without
sacrificing our right to privacy.

Most caller ID systems automatically release the caller's phone
number. To prevent this information from being divulged for a
particular call, the caller must enter a code (typically *67) before
dialing the number. In other words, callers must take an extra step to
retain the privacy that they had taken for granted. They must learn
how to block transmission of the data, and must remember to dial the
code each time. This is known as "per-call" blocking.

Some phone systems allow "per-line" blocking - the caller's number is
kept private by default and is released only when the caller enters an
"unblocking" code. But in rules scheduled to take effect next April,
the Federal Communications Commission has decided that the potential
public value of caller ID outweighs the privacy concerns of those who
want automatic blocking of numbers. The commission stated that per-line
blocking was "unduly burdensome" and ruled that on interstate calls,
only per-call blocking is to be permitted -- preempting state regulations
that allow per-line blocking.  We propose an alternative - a system
that allows people to dynamically negotiate the degree of privacy they
wish to sacrifice or maintain.

Here's how such a system would work with caller ID. Initially, all
phone subscribers' lines would, by default, block the release of the
caller's number.  Subscribers could choose to release their number on
a per-call basis by dialing an unblocking code (other than *67). So
far, this is just per-line blocking. But in the system we suggest,
phones with caller ID displays can also be set up to automatically
refuse calls when the number has not been provided by the caller.
When an anonymous call is attempted, the phone doesn't ring. The
thwarted caller hears a short recorded message that to complete the
call, the originating phone number must be furnished. This message
then instructs the caller what code to dial to give out the number.
Otherwise, the call is incomplete and the caller is not charged. Thus,
a caller has the chance to decide whether a call is important enough
that it is worth surrendering anonymity.

This solution preserves choice and ensures privacy. Callers can
control, through a dynamic and interactive process, when to give out
their numbers; recipients can refuse anonymous calls.

Most callers, of course, will want to release their number when
calling friends and associates. And if such calls dominate their use
of the phone, they might choose to change the default on their line so
that it automatically releases their number unless they dial in a
blocking code.  Thus, a dynamic negotiation system may well lead many
people to change from per-line to per-call blocking - precisely what
the phone companies and the FCC favor. But when these customers change
their default setting, they will know what they are choosing and why;
they will be actively consenting to give out their numbers as a matter
of course.

Most businesses will want to take all calls, whether numbers are
provided or not. But certain establishments might want to reject
anonymous calls - for example, pizzerias that want incoming numbers
for verification to avoid bogus orders. Most callers will happily
unblock their numbers when such a business asks them to.

Some display units that can be purchased for use with caller ID are
already able to reject anonymous calls, but they are a far cry from
the dynamic negotiation system that we propose. With these caller ID
units, every call, whether accepted or not, is considered to have been
answered - and charged to the caller. But a call that is rejected
because of its anonymity should entail no charge. This requires that
the call be intercepted by the phone company's central office
switchboard before it reaches the recipient's line.

Although inspired by the debate over caller ID, the concept of dynamic
negotiation of privacy can apply to other telecommunications
technologies. One likely candidate is electronic mail. With
traditional paper mail, people have always had the right - and the
ability - to send anonymous correspondence.  Delivery of the envelope
requires neither that a letter is signed nor that a return address is
provided. On the receiving end, people have the right to discard
anonymous mail unopened.

Applying the principles of dynamic negotiation, senders of electronic
mail would have the option to identify or not identify themselves.
Recipients could reject as undeliverable any e-mail with an
unidentified sender. The sender would then have the option to
retransmit the message - this time with a return address. As with
caller ID, the users negotiate among themselves. The system itself
remains privacy neutral.

Several criteria guide such an approach: the need to protect
individual privacy for all parties to a communication, the importance
of letting new technologies flourish, and the need for national
guidelines to provide consistency in system use and privacy
protection. Since technological innovation proceeds rapidly, we must
continually examine how best to make possible new features while
preserving or enhancing our existing level of privacy.  The technology
for implementing dynamic negotiation is already available. All that is
needed is for the FCC to amend its recent ruling. If the FCC refuses,
the House Telecommunications Subcommittee should propose legislation
to require dynamic negotiation. With this system as the national norm,
privacy concerns would become self-regulating.

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

ROSS E. MITCHELL, based in Newton, Mass., is a designer of
telecommunications software. JUDITH WAGNER DeCEW is a professor of
philosophy at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.; she is working on a
book on legal and ethical disputes over privacy protection, to be
published by Princeton University Press.

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

TECHNOLOGY REVIEW ON-LINE COPYRIGHT NOTICE
Technology Review (ISSN 0040-1692) , Reg. U.S. Patent Office
Copyright 1994, Technology Review, all rights reserved.

Published eight times each year by the Association of Alumni and
Alumnae of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The editors seek
diverse views, and authors' opinions do not represent the official
policies of their institutions or those of MIT.

Articles may not under any circumstances be resold or redistributed
for compensation of any kind without prior written permission from
Technology Review.

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

Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 11:51:03 EST
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Virtual Phone Numbers are Not the Same as Real Ones


Due to new hardware and software, Bell Atlantic offers several new
features for telephones including a "virtual telephone number"
feature, which is marketed under the service mark "Identa-Ring".

A virtual telephone number causes the ring cadence to change when that
number is dialed in place of the "real" number, "real" being the one
generated for ANI or Caller-Id when the line with a virtual number
places a call.  A real number will ring with "RING!  (5 second pause)
RING!", repeated until answered.  A virtual phone number generates a
ring similar to the one used in Great Britain, which consists of
"RING-RING!  (5 second pause) RING-RING!", repeated until answered.

One day I was out of change at a pay phone and didn't want to try to
find my credit cards which were back in my bag, so I decided to call
my number collect.  I dialed 0+301+ the virtual, Identa-Ring number
and when the automated attendant asked me to dial my credit card or 11
for collect, I dialed 11 and got a recording saying the number did not
accept collect calls.

That's funny; I've never asked Bell Atlantic to refuse collect calls.
I tried MCI's 1-800-COLLECT.  It also told me that my number refuses
collect calls as does AT&T's 1-800-32-10ATT.  I walked back, got my
credit card and placed the call.

Once I got hone I tried some tests. I have three phone lines in my
house.  I used the restricted one to call the other line collect and
it accepted it; the other way was refused.  So I called repair service
and explained the problem, giving them the main number all three lines
are billed under (the one that a collect call works to).

I had the repair service woman call me back so I could demonstrate the
problem from my third line. I demonstrated that if I called my number
collect it refuses it.  If I call the number she had called me on, the
call goes through for collect and is stopped because it is busy.

So she suggested that maybe it has something to do with the
identa-ring number.  I had to go and find an old bill with the number
on it; I don't even use the main number of that line (the only person
who calls that number is my sister and the occasional telemarketer.)

I tried calling that number collect and the system attempted to do so;
I sheepishly admitted that this is the problem, e.g. that an
identa-ring number can't be called collect.

So this capability works either as a problem or as a feature; if you
only give out a virtual telephone number, people can't call you
collect on it, but neither can you.  But you still have the main
number if you can remember it.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Robert Grout)
Subject: Will Video Dial Tone Have the Same Old Vices?
Date: 18 Oct 1994 20:08:19 GMT
Organization: U of I College of Engineering Workstations
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Two incidents (one in the late 1980's near where I used to live in NJ,
and one here in Illinois in 1994) have made me wonder about the role
of the US Federal government in guaranteeing competition in the new,
supposed Golden Age to come of "video dial tone" (telecom-carried
television programming).

In the late 1980's, a condo complex in Mahwah, NJ wanted to set up
their own program delivery system which would act like a cable
operator ... it would combine community antenna service and
redistribution of cable networks fed to them through their own large
satellite dish.  When the complex tried to get zoning approval for the
satellite dish, the township government fought them.  During the
ensuing legal proceedings, it was revealed that the township
government was acting mostly to protect the exclusive cable franchise
they had signed with the local cable operator ... and (if I remember
correctly) they won.

Earlier this year, the cities of Champaign and Urbana in Illinois
signed a new, fifteen-year exclusive cable franchise with the local
cable operator (Time-Warner of Champaign-Urbana), who promised a new
system (the "Gateway System") to provide many channels at low cost ...
but the catch involved did not become public knowledge until six weeks
ago.

To avoid stringing fiber-optic cable to households (which, admittedly,
is expensive), Time-Warner will only string fiber-optic cable to whole
neighborhoods and convert them all, en masse, to the "Gateway System".
However, when a neighborhood is converted, the conventional cable into
their homes will have only TWELVE unscrambled, uncompressed channels.
Receiving any of the others must be done with a converter box which
serves as a TV tuner for every TV, every VCR on which one wants to
pick up a separate channel, and every "picture-in-picture" feature;
and each one _must_ have a separate box. Because the boxes are
brand-new, the FCC is allowing Time-Warner of C-U to charge $4 a month
for them ... and, because they are descramblers (not just decompressors),
they can't be purchased.

To make things even worse, the initial software release for the stupid
boxes wouldn't even change the channel at a preset time to allow
recording of multiple programs on different channels ... but, in recent
weeks, Time-Warner announced that a new version of the software will
allow such things.

Since a clear majority of Time-Warner's customers in Champaign-Urbana
have expanded basic service (about 35 channels) without any premium
channels which require a descrambler (e.g., HBO, Cinemax), this
franchise agreement has become a political hot potato (e.g., a local
attorney running for State Assembly is a law partner in the firm which
represented Time-Warner during the franchise negotiations). In
the discussion which has followed the announcement of the "converter
box" requirement for the "Gateway System", people here are beginning
to question the advisability of allowing municipalities to sign _any_
such exclusive franchise agreement for television programming.

Picture the following scenario ...

It's October 2004...  Ameritech (our local telephone company) now
provides "video dial tone" throughout Champaign and Urbana, and
several different program providers (ITT/Cablevision, IBM and SunSoft,
among others) offer their wares through Ameritech.  Even though
Federal law doesn't require a program provider whose programs are
distributed through a common carrier to obtain a franchise agreement
with a municipality [the result of a recent real-life court decision],
program providers and municipalities are still allowed to negotiate
such agreements voluntarily [are they? will they be?].

Since many residents have complained about the high cost of
programming delivered through Ameritech, IBM offers the cities of
Champaign and Urbana a wonderful deal ... they'll provide programs at
a lower cost for everyone ... but there's a catch: Champaign and Urbana
must sign a franchise agreement which will require Ameritech to unplug
all rival program providers from its network in Champaign-Urbana.

Back to the present ...

I would like to see Federal laws enacted which will prevent consumers
from being tied by their municipalities into the kind of provider-friendly
practices we have endured here in Champaign-Urbana ... such as the
Gateway System's converter box, Time-Warner of C-U's refusals (before
the Gateway System) to carry Showtime (because their parent company
owns rivals HBO and Cinemax), and the hypothetical right of program
providers to voluntarily franchise themselves through municipalities.

To borrow a slogan from the candidate running against the attorney
mentioned above ... once common carriers provide "video dial tone" to
an area, I believe that local municipalities should be "unplugged"
from any power to make exclusive agreements with program providers.


John R. Grout    Center for Supercomputing R & D        [e-mail]
Coordinated Science Laboratory     University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why John, that would take all the fun
out of local politics. Imagine the Chicago City Council for example,
with one less source of bribe money.  Nah, your idea will never work.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Corson)
Subject: Voice, Data, Video All at Once?
Date: 17 Oct 1994 23:36:36 CDT
Organization: MCSNet Subscriber Account Chicagos First Public-Access Internet!


Ok ...this is probably a question that's been done to death ... but
here goes anyway.

I'm trying to figure out how to setup a private "internet" between a
number of locations scattered across the US.  There is a fair amount
of data, fax, telephone and videophone calling between these locations
and we want to get it all onto a private network where we can
consolidate all the data and have better control.  Right now each site
uses a combination of dedicated ISDN and analog lines/modems.

What I'm looking for is some sort of "all in one" setup that works as
a phone switch for analog, ISDN, PBX-style phones and can accept sync,
async or ethernet as data inputs.  On the phone company side would be
something like PRImary rate ISDN, a frame relay cloud or something
similar.

Most of the suppliers I've talked to have offered only very expensive
solutions that involve stringing together a lot of boxes from
different companies.  I'm thinking there must be a better, more
integrated solution by now.

Whatever the network is that connects all the sites together, within
the site we need 10 voice phones, FAX, at least one routed ethernet
and in some cases a switched async connection with another site
running around 128kbps. An automated operator feature is also required
to answer incomming calls and play messages about store hours and
such. Any site must be able to contact any other site through the
private network using voice, FAX, videophone, ethernet or by the async
line.  The sites must also be able to make and receive normal
local/long distance telephone calls.

If anyone knows of some kind of box that knows how to integrate all
these functions, please contact me.  As I've said, all the
non-integrated systems I've looked at come out too expensive because
of all the hardware needed to interface one communications "world"
with another.


Greg Corson     Virtual World Entertainment Inc.
[phone]  [e-mail]

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

Subject: A and B Boxes
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 1994 14:04:06 GMT
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>


Pat:

The following just appeared on uk.telecom. I'm sure your readers would
be interested.

 From: [e-mail] (Alan J. Flavell)
 Subject: Re: Badly designed payphone
 Date: Sun, 16 Oct 1994 12:55:36 GMT

I thought I would have a go at writing up the rudiments of the old
button A/B boxes.  I'm sure there are plenty of people on uk.telecom
who can correct or expand any points.

Are you sitting comfortably...?

Remember that we are back in the days when only local calls could be
dialled, all trunk calls had to be made through the operator.  (Hmmm,
well, that was the theory, eh Robin?).  All coins referred to below are
what we would now call "old" or "pre-decimal" coinage.  And AFAICR
local calls were always untimed.

It its "normal state" the button A/B box had its handset active but
the dial was inoperative, apart from digits 0 (for operator), 9 (for
emergency) (and, I think, later on, 1 for transition to operator=100).

The coin box accepted three different coins: the penny (1d), the sixpence
(tanner) 6d, and the shilling (bob, 1/- , which was 12d for those who
might not know that).

When preparing for dialling a local call, one had to insert the correct
fee, which at the time I remember was four pennies.  Inserting the
first coin had the effect of thrusting a bar aside, which disabled
the handset microphone.  The pennies collected in an internal bucket
which acted as a kind of weighing machine - when four had been put in,
the bucket dropped and enabled the dial to work.

You then dialled the call and waited for the called party to answer,
whereupon you would press button A.  This deposited the contents of
the internal bucket into the cash box, re-enabled the handset
microphone, and brought the bar back across the coin slots and
put the dial out of action again.

As was remarked in an earlier posting, you could hear enough to
recognise who had answered, and if you were not satisfied you could
take the same action as you would if you got busy tone or no-one
answered, namely to press button B.  This caused the line to be
disconnected and the contents of the internal bucket to be dropped
into the coin-return chute,  A noisy clockwork timer was then
heard which kept the line disconnected for some tens of seconds,
presumably to make utterly sure that the call had been disconnected
before letting you try again.

Just to remark that if you didn't have four pennies, you could not
make a local call.  No chance of inserting a sixpence or a shilling,
and forgo the change, as they could not weigh down the bucket.
In such a situation you might persuade the operator to do it for
you.

Now we come to operator connected calls.  What I have not yet
mentioned is that inside the coin box, the pennies passed a chime
and the other coins passed a bell (single bong for sixpence, two
bongs for a shilling), with a microphone inside the coin box to
pick up the sounds.  To make an operator call, you did NOT insert
any money (otherwise the operator would not have been able to hear
you), just dialled 0 and (after a sometimes considerable wait) got
asked for the desired number.  The operator would then tell
you how much money to insert, and would count the jangles and bongs
to see you had done it right.  In the event of a disagreement you
could not argue (your mike was dead after inserting the first coin,
as I said) but had to press button B and start the whole thing again.

The operator would then attempt to connect you and in the event of
success would say the immortal words "Please press button A, caller"
after which you had 3 minutes.  You would then be offered the
opportunity to insert a further 3 minutes worth or be disconnected.
And so on.

There were umpteen ways circulating amongst us schoolboys for getting
local calls free.  (Getting operator calls free was a matter of being
able to make convincing jangles and dongs, I guess).  This posting should
not be read as a confession that I ever did any of these things ;-)

The slotted pennies trick enabled pennies to be inserted without
thrusting the bar aside and disabling the microphone.  Five slotted
pennies would be needed to get the right weight for the bucket to fall
and enable the dial.

After finishing the call, one pressed button B and recovered the slotted
pennies.  However, if discovered, there could be a prosecution for
defacing coins of the realm, so it was better to use penny-sized disks,
then the charge would only be misuse of the Postmaster General's
electricity.

(Is it really true that someone got off an earlier charge of "stealing
the Postmaster General's electricity" on the grounds that it couldn't
be theft because he hadn't actually taken any of it away with him?).

Later models of box were designed to prevent the slotted pennies trick.

Back-dialling was a reputed method of winding the dial up to the "free"
positions 0 or 9 but only releasing it far enough to dial the desired
number of pulses.  One school friend claimed to have mastered the trick,
but never successfully demonstrated it to me.  There were several quite
different designs of dial mechanism (as we assiduously read up in Atkinson
in the local reference library) and this probably depended on getting a
dial of a vulnerable type.  I've forgotten the details.

Briskly rattling the rest was another way to create dial pulses without
needing a working dial.  This was said to produce a characteristic
irregular noise at the exchange, alerting the engineer and perhaps
resulting in a call trace.  As I said, 0 and 9 could be dialled
freely, so a number such as 20109 would be a doddle.

It's all a long while ago now...  you can imagine the nostalgia seeing
that Papa Stour box on the tv news.

[Papa Stour 224 was apparently the last A&B box, and has just been replaced.
Most went during the 1970s. Papa Stour 224 is [phone].]


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] (Jeff Bamford)
Subject: Cellular Local/Long Distance Problem
Organization: Audio Research Group, University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 10:24:42 -0400


    Okay, here is the background: A couple weeks ago I went to
Toronto, Ontario with a friend and brought along my Cell Phone.  Since
it was the weekend my air time was free, so I thought I'd use it.

    From Toronto I dialed back to Hamilton (a long distance call
from a regular phone) calling my home phone number, I dialed as
905-570-xxxx.  I got the message that "Long Distance Call, Dial 1 blah
blah blah".  I then tried calling the number to retrieve messages from
the Telco's voice mail service, this number was 905-312-xxxx.  This
call went through as if it were a local call, i.e. there was no
message to indicate that it was long distance.

    On the bill I was charged for the call to voice mail service.
Cantel (Cellco) indicated that it would be Bell Canada's (Telco) that
let it go through.  They said they just put the call into Bell's
network and whatever happens to it after that would be Bell's doing,
i.e. In their mind, I dialed a number and it was long distance and
since Bell accepted it I was dinged for the long distance charge.  The
Bell woman that I talked to was hopeless, she really didn't understand
why it went through but wasn't willing to give me someone else to talk
to about the problem.

    In this case I knew that Toronto-Hamilton was long distance
but there could obviously be a time when I don't know that something
is long distance.  I had thought that maybe the 905-312 exchange was
in a community between Toronto and Hamilton for billing purposed and
hence local on a cell phone.  This is the only time that this has ever
happened.  Any other time I call a long distance number the call does
not go through unless I dial the 1 first.  I always dial calls as 10
digits because outside of my home area code local calls don't go
without the local area code, so that is not the problem.  Anyone have
ideas on this one?


Jeff Bamford       [e-mail] -- NeXT Mail welcome
Office/Lab: [phone] x3814     Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert A. Book)
Subject: MCI Local Service in Chicago?
Date: 18 Oct 1994 11:25:39 -0500
Organization: Tezcat.COM, Chicago


I recently heard a news report on the radio that MCI will begin
offering local telephone service in the Chicago area.  As a Chicago
resident intensly frustrated with the local provider (Ameritech), I
want to be first in line for this.  I called MCI and they said that
they had planned to go on-line with this by the end of this year, but
FCC regulatory problems were slowing things down, and they were hoping
for the first half of next year.

Does anyone know anything more about this?  How will it work?  In
particular, (how) will MCI be able to provide the dialtone and local
service on already existing wires?


Robert Book   [e-mail]   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Lyman)
Subject: Do I REALLY Need an EIR?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Motorola Satellite Communications
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 1994 22:04:14 GMT


Regarding the use of Equipment Identity checking in GSM or DCS1800
systems, I trust that those systems currently deployed are not using
this mechanism ( since it's probably not available ? ). Has anyone
working in any functioning GSM-type system really missed having an EIR?

In general, I question the real usefullness or practicality of an EIR
to prevent fraud. I'm wondering if the cost of purchase and
maintaining this piece of equipment justifies it's existance?

As a side issue, is the prevalence of fraud in GSM networks of the
same magnitude as in traditional analog cellular networks (and can
they be defeated by IMEI checking)?


Michael Lyman   Motorola S.E.D. ( Iridium )
Chandler, Az.   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Patterson)
Subject: What Does *67 do?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 1994 16:01:55 GMT


I live in the San Francisco Bay Area under the auspices of PacBell.
They do not offer CallerID.  When I dial *67 (apparently the CallerID
on/off signal) I get a couple of clicks and a dial tone.  The
switching department at PacBell vehemently claims that nothing is
happening.  Anyone with an idea?


Bob Patterson ([e-mail])


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What's happening is that the local
switch is accepting your command to 'do not pass calling number ID
to call recipient' just as it is supposed to do. And then, it proceeds
not to give out that information ... which it wouldn't do anyway
under the present circumstances there, but that is beside the point.
They are using a version of software which allows for *67 and it
is probably easier for them to leave it as is rather than disable
the use of that command (which does nothing anyway). For instance,
in some exchanges in Chicago which were not Caller-ID equipped, meaning
calls from phones in that area showed up as 'out of area' on caller
identification boxes elsewhere, *67 still worked as you describe. I
guess they figured soon enough it would have a purpose, so they just
left it alone. I imagine PacBell feels the same way. Why bother to
change/eliminate it everywhere then possibly have to go and put it
back in at a future time.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #402
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11150;
          20 Oct 94 21:51 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26371; Thu, 20 Oct 94 16:22:06 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26361; Thu, 20 Oct 94 16:22:01 CDT
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 94 16:22:01 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #403

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 20 Oct 94 16:22:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 403

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    FCC Q & A on Broadband PCS Auctions (Bob Keller)
    "The Road to Banning Encryption" (Gordon Jacobson)
    AT&T 800 Directory Release (Monty Hoyt)
    Comparison of Missouri Intrastate Rates (Will Martin)

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 America
On Line. 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, 20 Oct 1994 13:37:54 EDT
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Q & A on Broadband PCS Auctions


ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING BROADBAND PCS AUCTIONS

In late August, 1994, the Commission conducted a series of seminars to
familiarize the public with the rules that will apply to the upcoming
auctions of licenses to provide Personal Communications Services in
the 2 GHz band (broadband PCS).  Attendees were invited to submit
written questions to the Commission, which many did.  In addition,
over the last several weeks the Commission has received numerous
informal inquiries concerning our auction rules for broadband PCS.  In
this Public Notice, the Commission hopes to provide guidance to
prospective bidders on broadband PCS licenses.  Some issues regarding
the Commission's broadband PCS auction rules are addressed in the
recently released reconsideration order (see Fourth Memorandum Opinion
and Order in PP Docket No. 93-253, FCC 94-264 (released October 19,
1994)) while others are still subject to reconsideration. These issues
are not treated in this Public Notice.

Some of the inquiries we received have posed similar questions in
slightly different ways that reflect the questioner's particular
circumstances. Rather than provide specific guidance to some but not
all questioners, the Commission has recast the questions in general
language that incorporates the most commonly asked questions.
Questions and answers are grouped in the following categories: general
questions, questions pertaining to the auction process, and questions
pertaining to designated entity applicants.


General Questions

Q: How will applicants be notified if there is a problem with their
Form 175 short-form applications?

A: Shortly after the deadline for submission of Form 175 applications,
the Commission will issue a Public Notice informing applicants of
their status.  That Public Notice will identify applications that are
accepted, those that contain minor defects that may be resubmitted,
and those that are rejected.  It is each applicant's responsibility to
review that Public Notice to determine the status of its Form 175
application. The Commission will not individually notify applicants of
defects that may be corrected through resubmission.

Q: Can an individual participate in the auction?

A: In the broadband PCS auction for licenses in frequency blocks A and
B, which is scheduled to begin on December 5, 1994, individuals may
participate freely as applicants or as investors in applicants.  The
same will be true of our third broadband PCS auction -- for licenses
in frequency blocks D and E. However, in the second auction, for
licenses in frequency blocks C and F, only individuals who meet the
eligibility requirements set forth in our Rules may participate.

Q: What is the FCC doing to ensure that businesses acquiring licenses
have the capital necessary to provide service and that they do not
fail?

A: The FCC does not provide any guarantees of success in the
marketplace to winning bidders.  Applicants are required to certify as
part of their Form 175 short-form applications that they are
financially qualified.  The FCC does not require that applicants make
a showing of their financial qualifications; however we take all
certifications very seriously, and penalties for a false certification
could include loss of any auction payments made, loss of other
licenses held by the applicant, disqualification from future auctions,
and possible criminal prosecution.

Q: Where can I obtain information and maps regarding what area is
within each BTA and MTA?

A: On September 22, 1994, the FCC issued a Public Notice listing of
all of the counties contained in each BTA and all of the BTAs
contained in each MTA.  This Public Notice (Report No.  CW-94-02) is
accessible on the Internet through anonymous [e-mail], and copies
of the Public Notice can be obtained through the FCC's copy
contractor, International Transcription Service, by calling (202)
857-3800.  The information contained in the Public Notice is based on
material copyrighted by Rand McNally and Company.  Maps of BTAs and
MTAs can be obtained from the Personal Communications Industry
Association (PCIA) under a licensing agreement PCIA has entered with
Rand McNally & Company.

Q: How will bidders be able to submit bids on broadband PCS licenses?

A: On-site bidding will take place at The Postal Square Building, 2
Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., Washington, D.C.  (adjacent to Union
Station). Bidders will also be able to submit bids through bid
assistants via telephone, with bid confirmation transmitted via
facsimile.  The Commission is considering whether to enable bidders
also to participate in the auction through remote computer access via
a value added network.  In a future Public Notice, the Commission will
inform prospective bidders of the procedures if the latter option is
to be made available.

Q: What happens to a PCS license after the 10-year license term?  Will
the licensee have to be subjected to another auction?

A: The legislation authorizing the FCC to conduct auctions
specifically limits this authority to "initial" licenses, so renewal
applications will not be subject to auction. The Commission has not
yet set forth standards for renewal of PCS licenses.  In the cellular
services, however, licensees who have operated cellular systems in the
public interest, and who have met all applicable performance
requirements, are entitled to a renewal expectancy at the expiration
of their initial license term.

Q: What does it mean when the FCC says that no one can have more than
40 MHz of PCS spectrum in one area?

A: This restriction, contained in Section 24.229(c) of the
Commission's Rules, provides that no entity may be licensed to provide
PCS to any particular geographic area over more than 40 MHz of
spectrum.  In addition, no person or entity is permitted to hold an
attributable interest in PCS licensees that, when considered together,
are licensed to provide PCS on more than 40 MHz of spectrum.  This
rule was promulgated to further the development of a competitive
post-auction PCS market structure by ensuring that no entity could, in
effect, "corner the market" on PCS spectrum.

Q: Will the FCC grant all PCS licenses at the same time or will
licenses be issued in the order in which they are auctioned?

A: The FCC currently does not plan to delay the grant of any PCS
license so as to coincide with the grant of any other PCS license.  To
do so would contravene our stated policy designed to foster the rapid
initiation of new competitive services to the public.  The time that
will be required to review an auction winner's long-form application
for a license will vary depending on the complexity of the information
submitted, the resources available to the Commission for processing,
whether any petitions to deny have been filed against the application,
and the complexity of the issues raised in any such petitions.

Q: If an auction winner defaults on its payment obligation, what would
be the procedure for someone else to acquire that license?

A: If an auction winner to whom a license has been granted defaults,
the license will automatically be cancelled.  The license will then
revert to the Commission, and the Commission will re-auction the
license in a later auction event.  The public would be informed
through public notices if licenses are to be re-auctioned.

Q: Many of the likely applications of PCS technology involve direct
interconnection with local exchange equipment and switches.  Does this
create an advantage for the local exchange carriers who are bidding on
PCS licenses in the wireline service areas? What is the FCC doing to
address the interconnection issue?

A: If a LEC also owns a cellular system in its wireline service area,
it is ineligible to own more than 10 MHz of PCS spectrum in that area.
Thus, as a PCS operator, it would not be in a position to benefit from
its LEC status vis-a-vis a competing 30 MHz PCS operator.  The FCC has
instituted a proceeding in which we are asking whether interconnection
rates should continue to be set by agreement or by tariff.  The
Commission will use its authority under Title II of the Communications
Act to monitor what is happening to make sure that non-RBOC licensees
will not be discriminated against and we will be vigilant in our
efforts to prevent abuses from arising.


Questions Pertaining to the Auction Process

Q: Why did the FCC choose such a complex auction process?

A: The simultaneous multiple round auction design the FCC is using for
PCS auctions has a couple of important advantages over the simpler,
sequential auction design.  First, the simultaneous multiple round
design conveys to bidders the most information about the true value of
licenses during the course of the auction, thereby improving bidders'
confidence and enabling them to minimize the "winner's curse" (i.e.,
the tendency to overbid).  In addition, in a sequential auction, the
results of later auctions will likely tell a bidder too late that it
should have bid (or not bid) on an earlier-auctioned license.  By
offering all substantially identical or complementary licenses at the
same time, bidders will be better able to effectuate their aggregation
strategies.  This will tend to result in the creation of more
efficient service that will bring greater competition, better service
and lower prices to consumers.

Q: The activity rules force bidders to bid in each round.  Why should
this be required?

A: If there were no requirement that bidders place bids in each round
of the auction, bidders would naturally tend to hold back, waiting to
see what others bid.  If a substantial number of bidders adopt this
strategy, the Auction might proceed exceedingly slowly, or it might
close prematurely.  Activity rules are necessary to ensure that
auctions progress at a reasonable pace and that useful information
about the value of licenses is conveyed to bidders throughout the
auction.

Q: How will the FCC determine what licenses I may bid on in the
auction?

A: Bidders will be allowed to place bids only on licenses for which
they applied on their FCC Form 175 application, but the precise amount
of bidding eligibility (i.e., the amount of bids, in terms of
MHz-pops, that a bidder may place in any round) will be determined by
the amount of upfront payment submitted by the bidder prior to the
auction.  The FCC will translate the dollar amount of the upfront
payment into a MHz-pop figure, and the computer system will not allow
a bidder to enter a set of bids if the total number of MHz-pops
represented by the licenses on which bids are placed exceeds the
number of MHz-pops to which its upfront payment translates.  If the
bidder's eligibility drops during the course of the auction (due to
bidding below the required activity level), the revised eligibility
will be applied by the computer system. Therefore, in order to avoid
having its eligibility reduced, a bidder must pay attention to the
number of MHz-pops associated with each license on which it places
bids, and ensure that its bidding in each round of the auction exceeds
its required activity.

Q: Could you explain the activity rules in terms a layman can
understand?

A: As explained above, each bidder's upfront payment will determine
its "required activity level."  The term "required activity level"
refers to the number of MHz-pops on which a bidder must be "active"
(i.e., submit a valid bid or hold the high bid from the previous
round) to avoid having its eligibility reduced in future rounds.  In
stage I of the auction, each bidder must be active on of the MHz-pops
on which it is eligible to bid.  In stage II of the auction, each
bidder must be active on of the MHz-pops on which it is eligible to
bid.  In stage III, each bidder must be active on all of the MHz-pops
on which it is eligible to bid.  Unless an activity rule waiver is
applied, the following eligibility reduction will occur if a bidder's
activity falls below the required activity level in a round:

   Auction Stage I:  Loss of 3 MHz-pops in eligibility for
             each MHz-pop below required level

  Auction Stage II:  Loss of 1.5 MHz-pops in eligibility for
             each MHz-pop below required level

 Auction Stage III:  Loss of 1 MHz-pop in eligibility for each
             MHz-pop below required level

The Commission has retained the discretion to reduce the required
Stage III activity level by Public Notice in advance of each auction,
but in no event will a bidder's required activity level in Stage III
be less than 95 percent of the MHz-pops on which it is eligible to
bid.

Q: How do activity rule waivers work?  Can an activity rule waiver be
submitted by the bidder, or is it only entered automatically by the
FCC if a bidder does not bid or if its bids fall below its required
activity level?

A: When a bidder's activity in a round falls below its required
activity level, a waiver will automatically be applied if the bidder
has a waiver available.  In this event, however, a bidder will be
offered the option of overriding the automatic waiver mechanism,
enabling it to intentionally reduce its eligibility and save the
waiver for later use.  Bidders also will be able to submit an activity
rule waiver "proactively".  A bidder may wish to do so if it is unable
or does not desire to bid in a particular round of the auction and
wishes to ensure that the auction will not close in that round.
(Submission of a proactive waiver keeps the auction open even if no
other valid bids are submitted, but application of an automatic waiver
will not.)

Q: Is a bidder who withdraws a high bid in a round considered to be
"active" on that license in the next round?

A: Yes.  Withdrawal of a high bid does not negate the fact that the
bid was made and that it was the high bid.  Bidders should keep in
mind, however, that they may be required to pay a penalty if they
withdraw a high bid.

Q: How will bidders know when a round is over?

A: The FCC will announce at the beginning of each round when the bid
submission period will end.  After the round results from the bid
submission period are posted, we will announce the bid withdrawal
period.  This information will be available both at the auction site
and over any value added network created for remote bidding.  A
countdown clock also will be provided to inform bidders as to the time
remaining in each period.

Q: How will auction results be made public?

A: Results from each round of the auction will made available 1) at
the auction site, 2) on the Internet, and 3) to bidders over the FCC
BIDDER ONLINE value added network, if the FCC decides to offer the
option of remote electronic bidding.  Prospective bidders interested
in the remote electronic bidding option must register with Business
Information Network by November 15, 1994 by calling [phone].
Charges of $200 for the Set-up Kit and software and $23 per hour of
online access will apply. Results posted on the Internet can be
accessed at the following Internet address: anonymous [e-mail]


Questions Pertaining to Designated Entity Applicants

Q: What provisions are available for small businesses, rural telephone
companies and businesses owned by minorities and/or women (the
"designated entities") in the auction for MTA licenses on frequency
blocks A and B?

A: The FCC did not adopt special payment provisions to benefit
designated entities in the bidding itself in this first auction.
Thus, the bidding credits and installment payment plans that will be
available in the auction for licenses on frequency blocks C and F (the
"Entrepreneurs' Blocks) are not available in the auction that begins
on December 5, 1994.  The Commission's tax certificate policy,
however, will apply to sales of block A and B licenses and to
investments in certain applicants for these licenses.  In addition,
the FCC's partitioning policy with respect to rural telephone
companies will apply to the MTA license auction.  Rural telephone
companies will be able to be licensed for partitioned broadband PCS
service areas in one of two ways: 1) they may form consortia to bid on
MTA licenses, with the license to be partitioned among the consortia
members in the post-auction licensing process; or 2) through private
post-licensing negotiation with an MTA licensee, they may obtain
licenses for partitioned areas that are reasonably related to their
wireline service areas.  A proceeding is currently pending to
determine whether the partitioning policy should be extended to
businesses owned by minorities and/or women. See Further Notice of
Proposed Rule Making in PP Docket No. 93-253, FCC 94-198 (released
August 2, 1994).

Q: What are tax certificates and how do they benefit designated
entities?

A: Under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, the Commission may
upon request grant tax certificates.  A tax certificate enables the
grantee to defer recognition of gain For tax purposes on the sale of
an investment in a communications property.  With respect to
designated entities bidding on PCS licenses, the tax certificate
policy could work in two ways.  First, an investor in a minority- or
women-owned PCS licensee would be able to defer the payment of capital
gains tax upon the sale of its investment, if it satisfies certain
conditions regarding reinvestment of the gain.  Second, a non-
designated entity PCS licensee would be entitled to deferral of gain
if it transfers its license to a business owned by minorities and/or
women, again subject to reinvestment conditions.  The tax certificate
policy is intended to serve both to attract investment capital to
entities that have historically faced discrimination in gaining access
to capital, and to encourage sales to minority- and women-owned firms.

Q: How can a designated entity licensee avoid having to pay penalties
if its owner dies during the holding period, causing the licensee to
lose its designated entity status?

A: In the event of the death of a designated entity owner, the
licensee could make a request with the Commission for a waiver of the
holding rule requirements and the unjust enrichment provisions
applicable to installment payments and bidding credits.

Q: If a license obtained with a bidding credit is transferred more
than 10 years from the date of the initial license grant, would the
bidding credit have to be refunded?

A: No.

Q: Has the FCC prepared a Designated Entities FCC Auction Guidebook?
If so, how can I obtain a copy?

A: The FCC has not prepared such a document.  Law firms or trade
associations such as the Personal Communications Industry Association
(PCIA) may have developed such guidebooks.

Q: Are there any "designated" financial institutions that will
provide/offer funding to designated entities?  Are there qualified
brokers and/or consultants who are reputable, who can assist with the
process?

A: The FCC is not in a position to recommend specific potential
sources of financing to prospective bidders.  However, our Office of
Communications Business Opportunities (formerly the Office of Small
Business Activities) is available to provide assistance to individuals
or groups seeking to enter the PCS industry. OCBO's telephone number
is [phone].

Q: Are advance payments also discounted like the actual bid?

A: The upfront payment for all entities bidding in the entrepreneurs'
blocks is $0.015 per MHz pop.  That is a 25 percent discount from the
$0.02 per MHz pop required in the other auctions.  In addition, the
down payment for small businesses and minority and women-owned
businesses will be calculated based on the bid price after the bidding
credit is subtracted.  So, if a small minority-owned firm bid $1
million, its total payment would be $750,000 after subtraction of the
25 percent bidding credit.  The 10 percent down payment would be
$75,000, one-half payable five business days after close of the
auction and the other half due five business days after grant of the
license.

Q: Does a university (a non-profit institution) which applies for an
"Entrepreneurs' Block" license it intends to use in training students
in the development and use of PCS technology qualify as a designated
entity?

A: If the university meets our gross revenue and total assets tests it
may qualify as an entrepreneur or as a small business.  The Commission
has adopted no PCS rules specifically benefitting universities or
entities that wish to acquire licenses for training purposes.

Q: Does the FCC have any guidelines regarding the incorporation date
or length of time a minority- or women-owned business must have been
in existence in order to bid in an auction?

A: There are no requirements regarding the length of time a designated
entity business must have been in existence before the auction.  All
affiliates of a new business will be counted toward applicable
financial caps, however.

Q: Can a designated entity use a limited partnership or a limited
liability company or any other lawful structure, so long as control
mechanisms are equivalent and within FCC guidelines?

A: Yes.  In fact, in the Fifth Report and Order the Commission has
specified various guidelines for limited partnership applicants.

Q: Can a major telecommunications company provide debt in any amount
to a designated entity?

A: Debt is not attributable unless it appears to be equity disguised
as debt.  Factors such as the interest rate and length of the
repayment period would have to be considered.

Q: Can a major telecommunications company enter into agreements with a
number of designated entity applicants around the country for bidding
purposes, so long as each designated entity remains in control?

A: The rules applicable to investment in designated entities would
apply to each such investment, and assuming that none of the
designated entity applicants had applied for licenses in any of the
same markets, the rules do not restrict such arrangements.

Q: Can designated entities bid at the A and B band PCS auction? If so,
do they receive any special benefits?

A: Designated entities are free to bid in any auction.  The only
benefit available in the non-entrepreneurs blocks, however, is the tax
certificate program for businesses owned by minorities and women.

Q: Is there minimum capitalization needed for a designated entity?

A: No, although designated entities must be prepared to pay half of
the 10 percent down payment five business days after the auction
closes.

 - FCC -

Robert J. Keller, P.C. (Federal Telecommunications Law)
<[e-mail]> Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
4200 Wisconsin Ave NW #106-261 Washington DC 20016-2146
finger me for info on F.C.C. Daily Digests and Releases

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

Date: Thu, 20 Oct 1994 13:35:37 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Gordon Jacobson)
Subject: The Road to Banning Encryption


Pat -

        I got this from David Farber.  It sure is a telling tale!  Let
me know what you can do about posting it.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, it is interesting. I thought the
readers might enjoy seeing it today.   PAT]


CyberWire Dispatch // Copyright (c) 1994 //

Jacking in from the "Sooner or Later" Port:

Washington, DC -- If private encryption schemes interfere with the
FBI's ability to wiretap, they could be outlawed, according to recent
comments made by the agency's Director Louis Freeh.

Freeh told attendees here at the recent conference on Global
Cryptography that if the Administration's Escrowed Encryption System,
otherwise known as the Clipper Chip, failed to gain acceptance, giving
way to private encryption technologies, he would have no choice but to
press Congress to pass legislation that provided law enforcement
access to *all* encrypted communications.

If, after having pushed Digital Telephony through Congress (which
hadn't yet happened when Freeh spoke at this conference), all the
Bureau ended up with during wiretaps were the scratchy hiss of digital
one's and zeros being hurled back and forth, Freeh made it clear that
he would seek a congressional mandate to solve the problem.

In other words:  Roll your own coded communications;  go to jail.

Freeh's comments, made during a question and answer session at the
conference, are the first public statements made by an Administration
official hinting at a future governmental policy that could result in
the banning of non-governmental, unbreakable encryption methods.

Freeh's remarks were first reported on the WELL by MacWorld writer and
author Steven Levy.  The FBI confirmed those statements to Dispatch.

The Administration, however, continues to state that it has no plans
to outlaw or place any restrictions on private encryption methods.

A White House official said there are "absolutely no plans" on the
table to regulate domestic encryption "at the present time." He
wouldn't comment, however, as to whether the Administration would back
an FBI attempt for such legislation.  "Freeh doesn't seem to need a
lot of White House support," to get things done, the official said.

FBI sources said any moves to approach Congress about regulating
private encryption are "so far out there" time wise, that the subject
"doesn't merit much ink," as one FBI source put it. "We've got to make
sure the telcos rig up their current networks according to the new
[digital wiretap] law before we go worrying about private encryption
stuff," he said.

An FBI spokesman confirmed Freeh's position that the Bureau would
aggressively seek to maintain what the spokesman called "law and order
objectives."  If that meant getting laws passed so that the Bureau's
"authorized wiretap activities" couldn't be thwarted by "criminal
elements using non-governmental" encryption schemes, "then that's what
he [Freeh] would do," the spokesman said.

When the Administration went public with its Clipper Chip policy, it
stressed that the program would be mandatory.  Many civil liberties
groups wondered out loud how long it would be before private
encryption was banned altogether.  The White House, anxious for the
public to buy into its one-trick pony the Clipper Chip, said that
wouldn't happen.

But the Administration hedged its bet.

Buried in the background briefing papers of the original Clipper
announcement, is a statement that the White House doesn't consider the
public's right to use private encryption methods are protected
anywhere in the Constitution.

Meeks out ...

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

Regards, - GAJ
Home Page: http://www.seas.upenn.edu/~gaj1/home.html

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

Date: Thu, 20 Oct 1994 09:28:11 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Monty Hoyt)
Subject: AT&T 800 Directory Now on Internet


Patrick,

    AT&T issued two Internet-related events yesterday.  We
announced AT&T's own World Wide Web Internet server, http://www.att.com/,
that will be the primary "home page" for visitors to AT&T on the Web.
This site will carry information about the company and its operations
and will have hotlinks to AT&T business units, many of which will
support their own home pages.

     AT&T also announced a separate Web site, http://att.net/dir800,
and an initial offering of a service giving access to the AT&T 800
Directory.  This site will be the primary AT&T location on the Web for
customer services.  The release for this directory service is
attached.

*******************************

Monty Hoyt
908-221-8789 (office)
908-953-9172 (home)

Susan Reiche
908-221-4855(office)
908-233-4357 (home)


AT&T INAUGURATES 800 DIRECTORY ON THE INTERNET

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  WEDNESDAY, October 19, 1994

    BASKING RIDGE, N.J. -- Consumers and business people anxious
to find toll-free 800 numbers for travel reservations, catalogs or
other services can now locate that information easily on the Internet,
thanks to a new directory source from AT&T.

    AT&T announced today that through the new AT&T 800 Directory
on the Internet more than 150,000 listings from AT&T's business and
consumer yellow-page 800 directories are now found on the Internet's
World Wide Web.  The Internet is the global information superhighway
that links thousands of public and private computer networks.

    An estimated 30 million Internet users can look up numbers by
company name or category, or browse through the directory
alphabetically.  With each free inquiry, users will receive the
company name, 800 number and main corporate location.

    "While some companies have posted advertising and self-promotional
materials on the Internet, AT&T has moved ahead with a practical,
universal application -- a national directory source that enables
millions of Internet users, for the first time, to look up 800 numbers
for their favorite products and services," said Kathryn Sullivan, AT&T
marketing vice president for new business services.

    "This directory is literally a gateway to the national
marketplace.  And this is just the beginning.  In the near future, our
electronic 800 directory on the Internet will contain display ads like
those shown in the printed directories.  These ads will provide
valuable information on a myriad of products and services being
offered by the business community -- and the toll-free numbers to
reach them," Sullivan said.

    Early in 1995, the AT&T Internet directory will compensate for
misspelled company names entered by users, and provide multiple
choices on look-ups if there are several company listings with the
same or similar names.

    To access the AT&T 800 Directory, which is situated on the
Internet's World Wide Web, users should key in the address:
"http://att.net/dir800" Users will then be able to conduct a company
or category search for the appropriate 800 numbers.  The 800 numbers
listed are reachable only when dialed within the United States.

    Listings in the AT&T 800 Directory on the Internet are updated
monthly, making it a convenient, up-to-date source for current
national 800 number listings.  Future versions of the service will
enable AT&T Internet directory advertisers to update messages in their
ads to reflect current promotions, sales or new business offerings.

    Consumers or advertisers with questions about the AT&T 800
Directory on the Internet should call 1-800-562-2255.

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

Date: Wed, 19 Oct 94 13:18:42 GMT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Comparison of Missouri Intrastate Rates


I just did a little research and thought I'd share the results of it
with the group. Recently, Southwestern Bell lost a battle with the
Missouri PUC over a mandated rate reduction. (At least, that was the
public front on it; I'm not privy to the back-room info that might
show that they really didn't "lose" anything, since most telco-vs-PUC
affairs are really stage shows and the results are probably
orchestrated by the powers that be in any case ...)

Anyway, I had just received a flyer from an alternative LD outfit
called "Budget Call LD, Inc." (based in Rochester, NY) that uses 10368
as their prefix.  The ad touted great savings over AT&T rates, but
what we are interested in is savings over Southwestern Bell rates for
the weekly long-duration intrastate call my wife makes from St. Louis
to her aunt in Warrenton, MO. We've been using "Show-Me Long Distance"
(prefix 10778) for that for over a year now and I've been wondering if
the new reduced SW Bell rates would eliminate such savings.

So I called SW Bell, Budget Call, and Show-Me for rate quotes. Here
they are:

For a call from 314-351-XXXX to 314-456-XXXX

            First minute    Subsequent minutes
SW Bell:

Day               $0.37        .23

Evening          .296        .184    (80% of Day rate)

Night             .2405        .1495    (65% of Day rate)

Budget Call LD:

Day             .3875        .225

Evening          .3075        .18

Night             .2525        .145

Show-Me LD:

Day             .3649        .2136

Evening          .2919        .179

Night             .2372        .1388

So you can see that not only are savings from the alternates rather
slim, in some cases it looks like Budget Call is actually a smidge
higher that SW Bell. Show-Me still comes out lowest, but there isn't
much distinction any more. We call on Sunday so the Night rate
applies.

I called the MO PUC a while back and asked them if they were going to
try to get these alternate LD providers to lower their intrastate
rates at least by the same percentages as SW Bell has, but the person
I spoke with didn't appear to know much about the issue and didn't
indicate that such reductions would be likely. SW Bell is being
required to give refunds to customers that made calls during the
earlier part of this year, because the new rates are actually
retroactive -- they had been ordered imposed a long while back and the
telco fought a delaying battle, with monthly notices in the bills
about the need for customers who left to provide addresses for the
possible later mailing of refunds.  I haven't seen any credits show up
on the bill yet, though.

It would be nice if the same thing could be done with the alternate
carriers, but I have no idea what authority, if any, the Missouri PUC
has over these companies, especially if they are based out-of-state.

I do note that the advertising text NEVER claims a percentage savings
over SW Bell rates -- only over AT&T rates, with side-references to
Sprint & MCI. But if AT&T cannot carry the call (and that seems to be
the case for these St. Louis <-> Warrenton intrastate calls), that
comparison is meaningless.

If anyone out there has any suggestions for alternate LD services that
WOULD provide significant savings in this circumstance, I'd like to
hear about it. We've even investigated the possibility of getting my
wife's aunt a number that would be local to St. Louis, and paying for
that premium charge above her regular phone-bill rate ourselves in
lieu of paying for these LD calls, but it seems that isn't possible.
One big hurdle is that Warrenton is in a GTE (I think) enclave within
normally-SW-Bell territory. We don't make other LD calls to any
extent, so we'd only be interested in intrastate savings.


Regards,

Will     [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As happens so often, it appears the choice
of carrier for your calls is an application-driven thing based in large
part on the time of day/day of week the call is made. If you study the
rates listed above, there can be some differences and possibly some savings
based on the carrier if your calls are mostly at night and weekends. On
the other hand, if you make mostly daytime calls during business hours,
the best carrier might be totally different.  Probably the most effecient
and least expensive arrangement would be to use a computer program which
examined the dialed digits then sent the call by one carrier or another
depending on the time of day and the inter/intrastate destination, etc.
But software and hardware designed to route calls like that is itself
rather expensive, and I don't know at what point it would be amortized
or justified.  Pennies do add up to be sure, but I think for the average
user these days, cost-comparisons on long distance are of little real
value. Just pick a carrier and go with it. Make switches based on other
things that matter (unless nothing but money matters to you!) such as
customer service, reliability and political/social considerations (the
presence/absence of a labor organization for workers, etc).    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #403
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17668;
          28 Oct 94 6:39 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21285; Fri, 28 Oct 94 01:38:13 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21277; Fri, 28 Oct 94 01:38:09 CDT
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 94 01:38:09 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #404

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 28 Oct 94 01:38:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 404

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    New Area Code for Georgia (Atlanta Constitution via Michael King)
    Services Available For a Small Fee :-) (Jonathan A. Solomon)
    LAA Operator Reference Data Base (Carl A. Wright)
    NPTN Policy on Free-Net/Commercial Conflicts (Monty Solomon)
    Duplicate Post-Split NXXes in Toronto (Dave Leibold)
    Wierd Experience With Payphone (John W. Barrus)
    FCC Rulemaking on Wireless E911 (Joe Hersey)
    Cellular Phone Fraud Operator Arrested (Washington Times via 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 America
On Line. 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 King)
Subject: New Area Code for Georgia
Date: 27 Oct 1994 17:57:42 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


According to a recent article in the {Atlanta Constitution}, Southern
Bell has announced that area code 770 will be assigned to the Atlanta
metropolitan area in October 1995.

The article indicates that Southern Bell/Bell South has not decided
the specific area for the new code yet ... there are three proposals:

         1> Split 404/770 geographically with either one of the
            new codes taking up one side of the area or with the
            older 404 AC being relegated to the area inside the
            Perimeter (I-285) or 404 as the city of Atlanta
            proper.

         2> Flat-out overlay 770 on top of 404 so that two houses
            next to each other could concievably have two different
            area codes (!?)

         3> Use 770 as a cellular overlay much in the same fashion
            as other metropolitan areas around the US. (this is the
            form that is preferred by Southern Bell)

The article indicates that the method of the split along with the
boundaries of the split-area will be announced early next year.


Michael King  --  General Manager WIGO/AM - Atlanta
Morning Talk Show Host & Chief Cook & Bottle Washer

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 17:57:07 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Jonathan A. Solomon)
Subject: Services Available For a Small Fee :-)


I offer help in setting up computers, fax machines, copiers, and also
support in ordering residence and business telephone service including
extra services and centrex/PBX service, and private telephone
networks. Public and Private computer networks, as well.

If you are interested in my services, you can send me mail as
[e-mail]. You will get a response even if you can't afford
it. Say whether or not you will be able to pay before asking the
questions ... your ability to pay will influence my ability to serve
you.

The fee is optional, if you can afford it, you can pay me. If you
can't afford it, then it is free.  I would say about $25.00/hour, but
again that is optional.


Cheers,

JSol


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Jon Solomon was the founding moderator
and editor of TELECOM Digest; he started this e-journal back in 1981
and maintained it for a few years prior to it being passed on to me in
1988.  Like myself, Jon has seen his share of problems over the past
few years and I would highly recommend his work to persons or firms
seeking a highly qualified expert on telephone systems/networks and/or
Unix computer systems. In fact, Jon arranged for me to get my first
internet account many, many years ago. Please, don't anyone else ask
me for a raw promotional plug like this, but in Jon's case he really
does deserve it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: LAA Operator Reference Data Base
Date: 27 Oct 1994 23:39:56 GMT
Organization: Lynn-Arthur Associates, Ann Arbor, MI
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. (LAA) announces its Operator Reference
Data Base (ORDB) for the A.T.& T. 5ESS(R) telephone switch. The ORDB
provides on-line access to a suite of databases used by telephone
operators to answer caller questions and to handle emergency
situations. The ORDB connects to the specialized telephone operator
workstations through the A.T.& T. 5ESS(R).

The ORDB will be delivered by year end to three telephone companies,
Minnesota Equal Access Network Services (Plymouth, MN), Compania
Dominicana de Telefonos (Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic), and
Brazoria Telephone Company (Brazoria, TX). Minnesota Equal Access is a
network services company owned by more than sixty small telephone
companies in Minnesota. Compania Dominicana de Telefonos is a GTE
owned wireline telephone company which serves the entire Dominican
Republic.  Brazoria Telephone Company is a small family-run company
located an hour's drive from Houston, TX.

The ORDB is implemented in Objective-C in the NextStep operating
system using distributed objects. It is available to run on Intel and
Hewlett- Packard computers. The ORDB is a high-demand mission-critical
applic- ation delivered on two redundant computer systems. The A.T.&
T. 5ESS(R) switch is connected to the ORDB over a number of X.25
digital links. The number of links is dependent on the number of
operators and expected transaction loads.

LAA delivers the ORDB as a turn-key solution of hardware, software,
tariff database, training, and installation support. Delivery takes
approximately six weeks from contract signing.

ORDB consists of five major software components. Three of these
components run on NextStep and the fourth and fifth run in the
DOS/Windows environment.

1. The "Operator Service" component receives all the queries from the
operators connected to the 5ESS switch, processes them, and answers the
transactions. All knowledge of the 5ESS switch is within.

2. The "TeleRate(tm) Rating" component performs all pricing of telephone
services. All knowledge of telephone services, their costs, and the
database of tariffs is within. This service provides rate information
for customer queries.

3. The "ORDB Control" component is an application which communicates
with the real-time process to stop, start, monitor, and modify the
mission-critical ORDB application.

4. The "ORDB Data Control" is a Windows application for the operator
service data clerks who control the data on which operator services are
based.

5. The "RTRS Data Control" is a DOS/Windows suite of applications for
the tariff analysts who control the data on which pricing is based.

"TeleRate(tm) Rating" and "RTRS Data Control" components are used in our
real-time rating product and act as servers when more than one applica-
tion which use them is running.

For more information, contact Mr. Carl Wright at [phone] or at
"[e-mail]".

Mailing address: Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc.
                 2350 Green Road, Suite 160
                 Ann Arbor, MI 48103

Fax phone:   [phone]

Immediate availability

5ESS(R) is a trademark of A.T.& T.


Carl A. Wright       Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc.   [phone]
[e-mail]         Operations Support Systems     [phone] (fax)
2350 Green Road      Suite 160                      Ann Arbor, MI, 48105 USA

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 13:08:04 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: NPTN Policy on Free-Net/Commercial Conflicts


Passed along to the Digest FYI:

  Date: Mon, 17 Oct 1994 18:22:01 -0400
  From: [e-mail] (peter f. harter)
  To: [e-mail] (action mailing list)
  Subject: Policy

<<< PERMISSION IS GRANTED TO RE-PRINT OR RE-POST THE FOLLOWING
TO ANY MEDIUM, PROVIDED THE CONTENT IS IN NO WAY ALTERED. >>>

NPTN POLICY ON POTENTIAL FREE-NET/COMMERCIAL CONFLICTS

   Recently several incidents have come up which have focused
attention on the relationship between NPTN community computer systems
and commercial providers.  Rather than answer a zillion individual
e.mail messages, I thought I'd outline our position in one official
policy statement.

THE FREE-NET MODEL

   There are a variety of approaches to community networking, the
"Free-Net(R) model" being one of them.  Under our model we see no
conflict between the operation of our systems and ANY commercial
provider.  Indeed, it is quite the reverse.

   A Free-Net, properly run, is first and foremost a local system, run
by local people, using local resources, to meet local needs.  Our
Internet connections are incidental to our primary mission and our net
effect is to INCREASE the pool of telecomputing literate people to
whom commercial services could eventually be sold.

   A Free-Net, properly run, does NOT simply dump people onto the
Internet.  We believe in building community networks that are
locally-oriented "electronic cities," not simply "electronic bus
stations."  We believe that "cyberdumping" people--especially K-12
students--onto the raw Internet will NOT accomplish the goal of
bringing this nation into the information age with equity.

   We believe what is needed is a national network not just for the
people who are already on it, but for the people who are maybe two or
three waves back -- factory workers, farmers, blue collar people and
others.  This will not be accomplished by offering them access to the
card catalog at the University of Paris.  It MIGHT be accomplished if
we can create systems that allow them to find out what's going on at
their kids school, or what's happening with the latest flu-bug going
around town, or what's going on with their local pro sports team or,
for that matter, their own local bowling league.

   This does not conflict with any reasonable commercial interest; and
THIS is the heart and soul of Free-Netting.

   With regard to commercial providers who DO see a problem with our
work, there are two ways we can approach a resolution.  We can do it
via conflict; or we can do it via cooperation.


THE CONFLICT APPROACH

   Recently several small IP providers have threatened to bring legal
action against a number of community networks including at least one
of our organizing committees.

   Let me be absolutely clear on NPTN's position with regard to this:

   If anyone so much as touches one of our affiliates or organizing
committees with this kind of action -- we will jump in with both feet.
We have full-time legal council on staff; we have the money; we have
the time; and most importantly we have the WILL to fight this kind of
BS.  NPTN will simply not put up with it -- not with OUR systems --
not now, not ever.

   We are not trying to be adversarial in taking this position.  But
this kind of thing is one of the reasons why it is so important that
there BE an NPTN and why it's important for community networks to
affiliate.  Standing alone you can be picked-off and harassed into
submission on any number of fronts -- not because you are in the wrong
but because you simply do not have the resources to defend yourself.
There is indeed something to be said for the notion of "strength in
numbers" and NPTN represents that strength.

THE COOPERATIVE MODEL

   In many ways all this is reminiscent of a hundred years ago when
the free public library movement was gaining momentum.  The people who
were most in opposition were a handful of commercial bookstore
operators.  They argued that they would be "ruined" if public
libraries were allowed to take hold, and that spending governmental
funds represented unfair competition with them.  Who would ever BUY a
book, they argued, if you could get it from the library for FREE?

   I suspect everyone reading this document knows what actually
happened -- a synergy formed.  Public libraries introduced books,
reading, and in some cases literacy itself to whole classes of people
who would otherwise not have been exposed.  These people then became
customers of commercial bookstores, which made for a very healthy
publishing industry, which allowed the libraries to offer an
incredibly rich and diverse mixture of materials to their patrons, who
then went out and purchased even more books.

   It is EXACTLY that kind of synergy we would like to see form
between commercial providers of Internet and information-based
services, and the Free-Nets.  We seek a cooperative model, not a
conflict-based one.

   How can this occur?  In many ways, the answer to this question is
limited only by the creativity of the people involved.  To cite some
current examples:

   * In some areas commercial companies are, in whole or in part,
funding the development of local Free-Net systems -- because they
understand the importance of systematically developing a customer-base
for the future.

   * In other areas, commercial systems are purchasing NPTN
cybercasting services which not only provides their system with some
of the finest online content available anywhere in the world, but
helps to support the work of NPTN in developing further systems.

   * We are currently actively working with several commercial
companies on models which provide both free local Free-Net services
and "on-ramp" services for which a fee could be charged.  The Free-Net
provides a critical mass of potential customers, the on-ramp provides
the revenue stream necessary to operate the Free-Net in perpetuity.


   As mentioned above, our goal is cooperation with the commercial
world and we think that can be attained.  But we will not tolerate ANY
of our affiliates or organizing committees being legally harassed by
anyone.

   NPTN was there long before most of the commercial world knew there
was a "there" there.  We believe that calls for cooperation and
support -- not conflict.


Tom Grundner
President, NPTN
10/17/94

Tom Grundner
President, National Public Telecomputing Network
Office Address: 34555 Chagrin Blvd.  Moreland Hills, Ohio 44022
Mail Address:  P.O. Box 1987  Cleveland, Ohio 44106
e.Mail: [e-mail]  Telephone: [phone]  Fax: [phone]


Peter F. Harter, Executive Director & General Counsel
National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN)
P.O. Box 1987, Cleveland, Ohio  44106-0187
E-mail: [e-mail]    Voice: 216/247-5800    Fax: [phone]

***
"Free-Net" is a servicemark of NPTN registered in the U.S. and Canada.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have wanted, for such a long time, to
see a FreeNet started in the Chicago area. If ever there was a need to
be connected, it would be in the Chicago public schools and the Chicago
Public Library system. Both have extremely urgent needs. I'd like to
be able to install network access for every child and young person living
in the ghettos here known as the Chicago Housing Authority. What is
stopping me?  Pure and simple, a lack of resources and funding; a lack
of anyone willing to *feed and clothe me and my family* while I work
to bring this medium to the masses of people who need it in our community.

God knows I work cheap and live even cheaper, and a very generous grant
to the Digest from the International Telecommunication Union has kept this
part of my educational activities afloat. But when I think of the work
that needs to be done, I get very depressed. We don't need anything fancy:
a terminal and modem in each school with an internet connection; ditto in
each library facility. Some short term assistance in training one or two
people at each location in how to use the Internet so they can supervise
the students and/or patrons who seek to be connected.  Is that really
so much to ask?  Yet it seems such a long way down a very dark tunnel
at this point. I won't take sides on the freenet vrs. commmercial provider
argument. As the article writer points out, cooperation is the ONLY way
to go, and I for one am not too proud to accept assistance from commercial
providers and Freenet people alike if it means that sometime within my
lifetime, I'll see my dream come true: a 'wired' Chicago.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 94 07:31:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Duplicate Post-Split NXXes in Toronto
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Looks like a milestone has been reached following the Toronto-area
416/905 area code split. The first verified duplicate post-split NXXes
have been found (other than common or special cases like 555, 976
(premium charge), 210 (voice mail access), 310 (business office/ 7
digit 800# access), etc).

416-983 is a new Toronto NXX; 905-983 is Orono, northeast of (and long
distance from) Toronto.

905-242 is a new Oshawa exchange (east of Toronto); 416-242 has been
a Toronto NXX for some time.

These were verified in the past day or so; no exact date of
implementation is known. The 416/905 split was finalised in late March
1994. Thus, it seems at least six months was allowed before NXXes were
duplicated in 416/905.

The Durham Region phone books are out (area east of Toronto); 905-665
is claimed to be a new Whitby exchange, though no evidence of its
activity has been found yet (416-665 is active in Toronto). Some
anomalies between what Bell Canada prints in its directories, and what
actually exists in the central offices, are to be expected.


* Origin: The Super Continental - North York, Canada (1:250/730)

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

From: [e-mail] (John W. Barrus)
Subject: Wierd Experience With Payphone
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 08:11:22 -0400
Organization: Mitsubishi Electric Research Labs


When I was in Salt Lake City last month, I tried (at a payphone) to
dial 102880 to use a calling card and when I dialed, I noticed that
the 8's sounded different.  I hung up and tried dialing 12222 or some
similar sequence of numbers and noticed that the phone always gives
out the same sequence of DTMF tones through the earpiece, even when
different numbers are being dialed.  Finally I got an operator and had
her put the call through for me with my calling card number because
none of the normal 800 or 10xxx0 access numbers would work.

Is this typical for payphones now?  I had the same trouble in a hotel
where I could not use my 800 access number and finally dialed direct,
only to find a $1 per minute charge on my hotel bill the next morning.
I couldn't get them to take the charge off.

What should I do in those circumstances? Any suggestions?


John Barrus                                           Research Scientist

Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories, Inc.     voice 1.617.621.7535
201 Broadway                                          fax [phone]
Cambridge, MA  02139                                     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (USCG TELECOMMS)
Subject: FCC Rulemaking on Wireless E911
Date: 28 Oct 1994 00:32:51 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail]


The FCC, at the request of the State of Texas and others (including
the Coast Guard), has released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on
requiring new wireless services (PCS, AMSC Regional Satellites, big
LEO's etc) to provide similar emergency calling capability as wireline
services.  Although the ability of cellular users to call 911 has been
a big benefit, there are problems which will worsen as more
cellular-type systems become available.  For example, the identity and
location information Enhanced 911 centers receive from wireline calls
are unavailable from cellular.  Worse, you may be unabale to make a
911 call from a satellite provider (calls from portable Inmarsat
terminals work like an overseas call to the U.S ... you simply cannot
call 911).  We are also interested in Caller ID capability ... most
telephone calls to a Coast Guard rescue center go directly to the
center, not through a 911 provider.

Comments to the FCC are due January 9th.  CC Docket 94-102 applies.

We are interested in any comments you have in this matter,
particularly those concerning system limitations from providing Caller
ID and E911 capability, and the use of wireless (including cellular)
for making distress calls from boats.


JoeHersey

               COAST  GUARD  COMMUNICATIONS

     Telephone: [phone]         U.S. Coast Guard (G-TTM)
     Fax:       [phone]         Washington DC 20593
     Internet:      CGComms/[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 20:37:55 EST
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Phone Fraud Operator Arrested


{Washington (DC) Times} 19 Oct 1994 Front Page
High-Tech sleuthing busts cellular phone fraud ring
By Doug Abrahms, The Washington Times

   A Jesse James of the cellular telephone industry was nabbed this
week in California in the latest episode of the high-tech war between
cops and robbers being fought with electronics.

   Secret Service officials in San Jose arrested Clinton Watson and
two other persons on Monday, charging them with a scheme in which they
built counterfeit cellular phones and sent the bills to unsuspecting
owners.

   In a raid on Mr. Watson's house, authorities seized 30 bogus
phones, 16 altered memory chips and about 600 mobile phone
identification numbers used to fool the phone companies' billing
systems, according to the indictment filed in U.S. District Court in
San Jose.

   The phone bandits employed integrated circuits, scanners that pick
up cellular information and sophisticated software to build
counterfeit phones that never received bills.  These "lifetime" phones
sold for $1,200 to $1,500 apiece and have been discovered all over the
continent, said Ron Nessen, vice president of the Cellular
Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA).

   Police and cellular companies have fought back with vans and
helicopters with customized electronics to track illegal cellular
signals.  They also are testing a voiceprinting system that will match
people's unique voice prints with their calling numbers.

   "This is the high tech crime of the 1990s," Mr. Nessen said, who
estimates that phone fraud costs the nation about $1 million a day.
"Every solution we come up with in our labs get attacked by the hackers."

   In many cases, cellular pirates stand outside parking lots,
tunnels, and airports with scanning equipment that picks up the ID
numbers of cellular users, Mr. Nessen said.  Those ID numbers then can
be programmed into other phone handsets for calls that get charged to
the original customers, he said.

   Mr. Watson went one step further and installed up to a dozen ID
numbers into one handset so the user wouldn't alert authorities that a
barrage of calls was emanating from one phone number, said Michael
Houghton, the CTIA's research director.  Mr. Watson's phones would
allow users to program in new numbers periodically so the phones could
be used indefinitely, he said.

   "If he spreads them around, he can make a phone that doesn't create a
calling pattern," he said.  "This type of cloning is the next generation."

   The CTIA estimates Mr. Watson was responsible for hundreds of
thousands of dollars in cellular fraud.  He fases a $50,000 fine and
15 years in jail for each of the three counts against him, Mr. Nessen
said.  Mr. Watson was a computer programmer who created his own
software and had ties to the criminal underground, he said.

   The cellular industry has been fighting phone bandits such as Mr.
Watson, especially after last month's report that New York Mayor
Rudolph Giuliani and Police Commissioner William Bratton each had
their cellular phone numbers stolen six times this year.

   Nynex Mobile Communications in New York assigns personal
identification numbers that must be entered before each call, said Kim
Ancin, a spokeswoman.  Other cellular companies analyze calling
patterns and investigate major changes in users' phone behavior.

   TRW Wireless Communications of Santa Clara developed a system that
records and stores a customer's voice print, which is as unique as a
fingerprint, said Lynn Fisher, a TRW spokeswoman.  On every call, the
company's computer checks the ID number and caller's voice print
against the customer's file and cuts off any call when they don't
match, she said.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It must be remembered that in the
United States, our constitution requires that Mr. Watson and his
alleged associates be presumed innocent of the charges lodged against
them until their guilt is proven by the government in a court of law
before a judge and/or jury.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #404
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17936;
          28 Oct 94 7:06 EDT
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22041; Fri, 28 Oct 94 02:35:03 CDT
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22033; Fri, 28 Oct 94 02:35:00 CDT
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 94 02:35:00 CDT
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #405

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 28 Oct 94 02:35:00 CDT    Volume 14 : Issue 405

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Bell Canada Ends Messaging Trial (Dave Leibold)
    Mounties Join Video-on-Demand Test (Dave Leibold)
    Pac*Bell Touch-Tone Refunds (Linc Madison)
    Pac*Bell Info About New Dialing Procedures (Linc Madison)
    AT&T Launches WWW Server (Andrew B. Myers)
    T1 Costs and Specifications (Dan Kahn)
    RochesterTel Calling Cards Dump 10XXX Dialing (Rob Levandowski)
    AM Expanded Band Allotments (Monty Solomon)
    AT&T Throws in the Towel ... err Card (Paul Robinson)
    AT&T Takes Action Against MCI 800-CALLINFO (Will Martin)
    New List for Telecommunication Rules (David Devereaux-Weber)
    Phone Fun 800 (Monty Solomon)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. 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: 28 Oct 94 00:03:20 -0500
Subject: Bell Canada Ends Messaging Trial
Organization: FidoNet: The Super Continental - North York, Canada


[from Bell News, 24 Oct 94; content is Bell Canada's; e&oe]

Star Messenger to be withdrawn

Our new Star Messenger[tm] service will be withdrawn at the end of the
trial period ending October 31.

"The disappointing trial results and the requirement for further
technological development played a major part in the decision to
remove the service," says Janet Garrod of Consumer Market Management.

Star Messenger, a pay-per-use service, allowed customers to leave a
one minute voice message when they received a busy signal or no answer
on an alternately billed long distance call to most points in North
America.

A new trial to address the needs of local and direct distance dialing
(1+ calls) messaging along with possible payphone messaging is being
considered in selected locations during the first quarter of '95.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is interesting, since Illinois Bell
is testing the same thing on a limited basis including a couple of
exchanges here in Skokie, Illinois. I found out about it only by chance
when using a payphone about a week ago at the bus station. I dialed a
local number, it rang *only three times* and a recorded message popped
on the line while the ringing continued in the background. It said,
"your party did not answer. You may leave a one minute message which
we will attempt to deliver every thirty minutes for the next eight hours
by depositing 25 cents, then wait for instructions before beginning to
speak your message; or if you prefer, stay on the line and continue to
wait for your party to answer."  I've never heard that before, and only
hear it when I use payphones on the 708-675 exchange.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 28 Oct 94 00:03:32 -0500
Subject: Mounties Join Video-on-Demand Test
Organization: FidoNet: The Super Continental - North York, Canada


[from Bell News, 24 Oct 94; content is Bell Canada's; e&oe]

RCMP joins our Video on Demand trial in Ottawa

RCMP staff and hundreds of Ottawa-based public school students have
just gained access to a storehouse of educational and training videos
through personal computers at on-site locations.

The delivery of this information last Monday marked the beginning of
Phase II of the Business Video on Demand Trial (VOD), involving
programs in three RCMP locations in the Ottawa area and eight
Ottawa-Carleton public schools in four school boards.

The trial is part of the recently-announced Bell Canada and Stentor
Beacon Initiative, a 10-year, $8 billion plan to build a
coast-to-coast broadband infrastructure for the delivery of new
multimedia services.

Phase I of the trial, which tested the underlying technology and the
design for users of VOD, offered video on demand from key locations
at the University of Ottawa and Carleton University.

Phase II expands on the earlier test by simulating a city-wide
environment, serving more customers and testing operational methods
and procedures and an enhanced user interface.

The trial, scheduled to last until May 1995, connects a minimum of 14
sites in the Ottawa-Carleton area. Through computers in their school
libraries, students have access to more than 70 video titles to
complement their learning environment. Video content for the echools
is provided by Magic Lantern Communications Limited.

RCMP users are able to obtain easy access to the force's own wide
range of training videos. The system offers full VCR-like controls
such as rewind, fast-forward, pause, etc.

There's great potential in new multimedia services as educational and
business tools. Possible serving applications include training,
product and service information, stock footage for advertising and
public relations, as well as video clippings for educational,
industrial and financial use.

The trial is funded by Bell Canada and Stentor with technical
assistance from Bell-Northern Research and MPR Teltech.

The first VOD services for business customers should be available
starting in late 1995.

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 23:55:37 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Pac*Bell Touch-Tone Refunds


In the insert with my monthly Pacific Bell bill is a notice that some
customers who had Touch-Tone service between 5/4/87 and 5/3/90 may be
due a refund of up to $66.20 (business) or $48.20 (residence), plus
12% interest.  The affected customers are those who moved or
discontinued Touch-Tone service during the time in question, in
certain, mostly rural, prefixes.  There is a complete list in the
insert, but I'll just hit a few highlights:

209: Chowchilla, Coalinga, Lodi, Modesto, Turlock, Yosemite
408: Ben Lomond, Felton, Salinas
415: Crockett*, Moss Beach, Pescadero, Pittsburg*    (* now in 510)
619: Borrego, Furnace Creek, Imperial, Shoshone
707: Arcata, Eureka, Napa, Ukiah
805: Bakersfield, Mojave, Morro Bay, Ventura
916: Mount Shasta, Placerville, Redding, Yreka

For more information, contact Pacific Bell, Sacramento CA 95851.

The same billing insert also has a form to remove your listing from
the Street Address Telephone Directories, explaining that they are
"sometimes used by businesses or emergency services to contact you
when they don't know your last name.  For example, lost children may
know their addresses but not how to spell their last names."

There are also blurbs about the statewide uniform dialing plan and the
new 562 area code for Los Angeles; I'll include those in a separate
message.


Linc Madison  *  Oakland, California  *  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 23:55:42 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Pac*Bell Info About New Dialing Procedures


I got my Pacific Bell bill today, including an insert with information
about several things, including the touch-tone refunds and the new
area code 562.  Here is the blurb about the dialing changes required
for 1995:

STATEWIDE UNIFORM DIALING IS ALMOST HERE!

On October 11, 1994, dialing procedures will become standard
throughout California.  After that, you'll dial calls the same way, no
matter where you are in the state.

HERE'S HOW CALIFORNIANS WILL DIAL:

-> Always dial "1" first when you call *outside* the area code you're in.
-> Never dial "1" to begin a seven-digit call.
-> *Always* dial the area code on any operator-assisted or Calling Card
   call (calls that begin by dialing "0"), whether you're calling long
   distance or not.

OUR CHARGES FOR CALLS WILL REMAIN THE SAME.

[map of California with 916, 209, 805, 310, 562, with middle digits
emphasized, and a 1+ to the side]

WHAT DO YOU NEED TO DO?

If you have Speed Dialing or Call Forwarding, you *may* need to re-enter
the numbers you programmed into your telephone.  Also, if you have a PBX
or other customer-provided equipment, you *may* need to make programming
changes.  Please contact your vendor if you need more information or
assistance.

WHY IS THIS HAPPENING?

Telephone companies are running out of numbers for new area codes.  In
the past, either a zero or a one was used for the middle number of any
area code.  When the uniform dialing project is completed, new area codes
will use any of the numbers two through nine as the middle number.  This
allows for 640 new number combinations for area codes throughout the
United States, Canada and the Caribbean Islands.


Linc Madison  *  Oakland, California  *  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 94 10:53:54 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Andrew B Myers)
Subject: AT&T Launches WWW Server


AT&T LAUNCHES WORLD WIDE WEB INTERNET SERVER

     CHICAGO, Oct. 19, 1994 -- AT&T is extending its commitment to
global communications and computing with the launch of its own
information site, or "home page," on the Internet.

     AT&T's new Internet site was described yesterday by William
Holland, a technical manager at AT&T Bell Laboratories, in a talk at
the Second International World Wide Web Conference here. Holland heads
a group responsible for AT&T's electronic gateway services.

     The AT&T site, called "www.att.com," is situated on the
Internet's World Wide Web -- often abbreviated as "the Web" or
"WWW"--a fast-growing and user-friendly section of the Internet.
Offering a range of information about AT&T, its products and services,
a sampling of what's available includes:

   o Historical, current and financial information;
   o Descriptions of business units, joint ventures and global operations;
   o News releases;
   o Full text of the current annual report;
   o Product and service descriptions, including many color images;
   o Product and service customer contact numbers;
   o Product and service technical data and specifications;
   o Product and service monthly featured items;
   o Access to research and development activities at Bell Labs;
   o Access to the company's Customer Information Center;
   o AT&T's YOU WILL commercials (graphic, audio and video versions);
   o An AT&T Phone Center locator;
   o Offerings of AT&T Technical Education Center courses, with on-line
     registration, and other AT&T technical consulting services; and
   o Other features, data bases and pointers to additional
     resources in AT&T and elsewhere on the Internet.

     Visitors to the AT&T Web home page may also win T-shirts, books
and other prizes that will be offered through random drawings and
other promotional activities at the site.

     AT&T's home page has been designed for access by Internet users
of all kinds, from those with multimedia (sound, graphics and video)
capabilities to text-only browsers. The system offers a number of
full-color images and sounds.  In the near future the AT&T Web site
will offer a number of leading edge "You Will" type technology
demonstrations, lists of frequently asked questions (FAQs), and a
self-guided electronic tour of AT&T and its global operations.

      "This is just the beginning for AT&T," said Ron Ponder, AT&T
chief information officer.  "We believe we have some interesting
things to offer, but we want to listen to our readers and customers.
In response, we will ensure that our site always carries information,
capabilities, features and tools that people tell us they want."

     It is estimated that some 20 to 30 million people have access to
the Internet, either directly or through various commercial on-line
services, Internet access providers, and corporate and academic
networks. The number of Internet users is also growing dramatically as
more user friendly browsing software, such as National Center for
Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) Mosaic, becomes widely available.
(Mosaic is the most popular graphical browser for the Internet. More
than two million copies of Mosaic are in use, and an additional 30,000
copies are being downloaded each month from the Internet.)

     The World Wide Web is based on "hypertext" documents and files
linked to each other through key words or "pointers" so that readers
may pursue whatever interests them by pointing and clicking on
highlighted words with a computer mouse, or by moving their cursor to
the highlighted text and hitting the ENTER key.

     The linked file or document may be located anywhere on the global
Internet on any one of several thousand graphical, hyperlinked
databases around the world.  Users may download any information they
are reading, or request the file or document to be sent via e-mail.

     Ponder said AT&T's home page on the Web is expected to expand as
more AT&T business units and organizations join the company-wide
project. He said the company envisions three primary uses for its
World Wide Web Internet server:

  1. Customers can have real-time access to products and services with video,
     graphical and audio support capabilities.
  2. Customers can access distributed databases, such as information help
     line numbers, easily, quickly and on-line.
  3. Customers can provide real-time feedback on their needs to enable AT&T
     to provide faster and better quality service.

     AT&T also expects to use the Web internally in various ways. For
example, AT&T employees in one unit could use it to locate or identify
resources or people in other AT&T organizations, faster and easier
than they ever could before. Other internal applications may include
database or resource sharing, collaboration on product and service
development, and various other communications and data processing
activities.

     As AT&T's Web server continues to evolve, the company will enable
customers to place orders for products and services directly while
on-line.  Work is continuing on the development of processes and
systems to facilitate on-line ordering, purchasing and other financial
transactions.

     Internet users may access the AT&T site from various "What's New"
pages and directories available on the Web, or they may connect
directly by providing the proper Universal Resource Locator (URL)
address of http://www.att.com/.


CONTACTS:
  Andrew Myers, 908-221-2737 (office), 908-522-9485 (home)
  Jim Byrnes, 908-221-7876 (office), 908-689-6040 (home)

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Kahn)
Subject: T1 Costs and Specifications
Date: 28 Oct 1994 00:17:32 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Physics and Astronomy, UNC


Hi,

I'd like to get the answer to some questions -- which may not make
much sense since I'm new to the telecom world.

I'm trying to get some other folks interested in doing a more detailed
study of getting T1 between our facilites (about 1/4 mile apart) so I
only need to be armed with some ballpark figures and ideas about T1.

I'd like to know what T1 services costs, and how it is billed.  I'm
interested in a connection within a small town, so only the local
phone company would be involved.  Is it billed monthly, per amount of
data what does the equipment on the ends of the line run, etc.

I'm also interested in installation costs, is in necessary to install
special wires or are ordinary voice lines used (T1 is supposed to be
equivilent of 24 voice lines, but does that mean one only needs 24
voice lines, or does coax need to be run?)

The line would be used for data communications not voice communications,
so if T1 would be less appropriate than something else please let me
know.

The project is short term (about a year) which means equipment could
be rented, instead of purchased, so if anyone can give me ideas about
the cost of renting necessary equipment I'd appreciate it.


Thanks,

dan

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Levandowski)
Subject: RochesterTel Calling Cards Dump 10XXX Dialing
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 94 00:40:55 GMT


I got an interesting letter from Rochester Telephone the other day.
They recently sent me a new (hideous purple) calling card, which had
my old PIN imprinted (but not my phone number), along with
instructions for dialing an 800 access number for RCI, RochesterTel's
long-distance arm. The letter, which trailed the card by several
months, explains that the Rochester Telephone calling card can no
longer be used for 0+ dialing after November 15th. In order to use
your standard RochesterTel calling card, and have the call billed to
your local telephone bill, you must dial the access number and use RCI
Long Distance.

I called their customer service and asked: will I still be able to use
10XXX codes to select an alternative long-distance carrier for my
calling- card calls? The answer is NO. Apparently they're taking their
cards out of the database.

The letter explains that this change is to help prevent calling-card
fraud.  I'm concerned ... how much fraud can an 800 access code
prevent? Is the savings in fraudulent calls worth relinquishing the
ability to choose which carrier your local-telco calling card calls
are carried by? Is it even legal for RochesterTel to prohibit 10XXX
dialing on their cards?

I suppose I could just get an AT&T card for those times I want to use
AT&T, or whoever ... I already have an RCI calling card, which is
completely seperate from my RochesterTel calling card, because if I
use RCI via my RochesterTel card, I don't get any of my plan
discounts. The RCI Pronto card does. Two cards for one phone number is
bad enough ... will I have to have accounts with any LD company I want to
use in the future?

I'm writing a letter of complaint to RochesterTel and the PSC and FCC,
in hopes that someone else will see that forcing calling card users to
use an affiliated division's LD service is kind of fishy. (Isn't this
what Bell used to do before it was broken up?) If anyone else reading
this is a RochesterTel customer, I urge them to do the same. The
addresses are in every RochesterTel phone book.

Most of all, I'm amazed at RochesterTel's hypocrisy. They've been
patting themselves on the back for months now, in every billing and
throughout the newspapers and TV, on their "Open Market Plan" that
will, as of January 1, enable local telephone service to competition
with recipocrity, etc. Now, they turn around and monopolize their
customer's calling card service. This sounds more like lip service
than phone service to me! :)


Rob Levandowski
Computer Interest Floor associate / University of Rochester
[e-mail]     [Opinions expressed are mine, not UR's.]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My understanding is that independent
telcos are under *no legal obligation* to offer 10xxx dialing or for
that matter access to any long distance carrier other than whatever
they choose.  Certainly there are a large number of tiny little telco
cooperatives and the like around the USA who still shunt all their
long distance traffic to AT&T. Divestiture only applied to AT&T and
the Bell Companies. GTE also implemented much of the same when it
became common knowledge that the Justice Department was going to get
after them next when it finished with AT&T if they did not voluntarily
change their ways ... so they did.  But as for Rochester and the
other independents, I think they are still pretty much free to do as
they please. Certainly where their own calling card -- thus, an extension
of credit they are granting to you -- is concerned, they are perfectly
free to say what the card (account) can and cannot be used for.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 13:10:18 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: AM Expanded Band Allotments


Forwarded to the Digest, FYI.

 Date: 19 Oct 1994 05:33:47 GMT
 From: [e-mail] (FCC World)
 Subject: AM Expanded Band Allotments
 Organization: Capital Area Internet Service
 Newsgroups: rec.radio.broadcasting


            FCC UPDATE
         October 18, 1994

    An update on news from the
  Federal Communications Commission
            written by:

       Shaun A. Maher, Esq.
       Smithwick & Belendiuk, P.C.
       1990 M Street, N.W.
       Suite 510
       Washington, D.C.  20036
       [e-mail]   INTERNET E-MAIL
       [phone] VOICE
       [phone] FAX
       [phone] FCC WORLD BBS

FCC ANNOUNCES AM EXPANDED BAND ALLOTMENTS

               In its Review of the Technical Assignment Criteria for
the AM Broadcast Service, 6 FCC Rcd 6273 (1991), recon. granted in
part and denied in part, 8 FCC Rcd 3250 (1993)["AM improvement
Order"], the Commission adopted measures to facilitate an overall
improvement and revitalization of the AM broadcast band and to
effectuate the necessary incorporation of new spectrum between 1605
and 1705 kHz into the AM broadcast band.  The Commission concluded
that the public interest would be best served by using the expanded AM
band to improve the overall quality of the AM service by lessening
interference and congestion in the existing band. On May 3, 1993, the
Commission opened a filing window for existing AM stations to file
petitions to migrate to the expanded band. On December 3, 1993, the
Commission announced a ranking of all petitions to migrate in
accordance with the priority groups and improvement factors described
in the AM Improvement Order.

     This Public Notice announces the expanded band Allotment Plan,
and identifies the stations that are eligible to apply for
authorizations associated with specific allotments, based upon the
previously announced ranking of the petitions. Stations not receiving
an allotment were precluded by one or more of the following: the
Canadian agreement, the Mexican agreement, the Region 2 agreement,
Federal Travelers' Information Service Stations ("TIS"), harmonic
frequency relationships with existing stations, or preclusion by
stations of higher ranking.  The Canadian agreement restricts the
assignment of stations within 500 km of the common border to 1620,
1640, 1660, 1680, and 1700 kHz with a US priority on 1680 kHz and a
Canadian priority on 1630 kHz. Stations on 1620, 1640, 1660, and 1700
kHz must be notified to Canada. A comparable restriction applies to
Canadian stations. The Mexican agreement restricts assignments within
450 km of the common border to 21 specified frequencies at specific
locations. If an expanded band proposal for a station was within 45 km
of an allotment specified in the Mexican agreement it received an
expanded band allotment provided it was not precluded by a station
with a higher ranking or other factors.  U.S. Government TIS
facilities were protected in accordance with the guidelines of 47
C.F.F 90.242(a)(2)(i). Expanded band stations were not allotted within
30 km of an existing station if the frequency relationship being
considered was twice the frequency of the existing station. The
allotments also maintain a separation of 53 km from existing 1590 khz
stations and 200 km from existing 1600 kHz stations. Finally a
proposed station may have been precluded by the allotment of a
frequency to a station(s) having a higher ranking. Stations not
selected for migration will be afforded thirty (30) days to file for
reconsideration of the Allotment Plan with arguments limited to
addressing errors in the selection process. After the Allotment Plan
has become final and no longer subject to Commission reconsideration,
the Commission will enter the allotments into the Commission's AM
Engineering Data Base. The Commission will issue a Public Notice of
the finality of the Allotment Plan and call for applications to be
filed. Stations selected for migration will be afforded sixty (60)
days from the date the plan becomes final in which to file an
application for construction permit on the allotted channel The
application should be filed on Form 301 and must be accompanied by the
normal filing fee for such application. After acceptance of the
application for filing, the Commission will then put the application
on a cut-off list. The application will then be subject to petitions
to deny but not to competing applications. After grant of the
construction permit application and construction of the authorized
facilities, the expanded band permittee will then file a covering
license application on FCC Form 302.

Licenses for stations in the expanded band will be issued for a term
that is concurrent with the existing license for operation in the
535-1605 khz band.

For more information, contact Jim Buttle at [phone].

AM EXPANDED BAND ALLOTMENTS

                              Pres.Ex.Bd.
Call Licensed to    State     kHz  kHz
WEUP Huntsville     AL        1600 1610
KFVR Cresent City   CA        1310 1610
KECN Blackfoot      ID        690  1610
KENN Farmington     NM        1390 1610

KXBT Vallejo        CA        1190 1620
KHMO Hannibal       MO        1070 1620
WVMI Biloxi         MS        570  1620
WLNC Laurinburg     NC        1300 1620
KQWB West Fargo     ND        1550 1620
WEHH Elmira Heights NY        1590 1620
KPAR Granbury       TX        1420 1620
WGOD St. Thomas     VI        1090 1620
KRIZ Renton         WA        1420 1620
KSHY Fox Farm       WY        1530 1620

KIDR Phoenix        AZ        740  1630
WPGS Mims           FL        840  1630
KCJJ Iowa City      IA        1560 1630
KYUU Liberal        KS        1470 1630
WSYD Mount Airy     NC        1300 1630
KTMT Phoenix        OR        880  1630
WTAW College StationTX        1150 1630
KTKK Sandy          UT        630  1630

KLOQ Merced         CA        1580 1640
KRKS Denver         CO        990  1640
WAOK Atlanta        GA        1380 1640
WIWO South Bend     IN        1580 1640
KLXX Bismark/Mandan ND        1270 1640
WTRY Troy           NY        980  1640
KTRT Claremore      OK        1270 1640
KPHP Lake Oswego    OR        1290 1640
KURV Edinburg       TX        710  1640

KITA Little Rock    AR        1440 1650
KFRN Long Beach     CA        1280 1650
KNRO Redding        CA        600  1650
WBIT Adel           GA        1470 1650
KCFI Cedar Falls    IA        1250 1650
KSVE El Paso        TX        1150 1650
KSOS Brigham City   UT        800  1650
WPMH Portsmouth     VA        1010 1650


KBLU Yuma           AZ        560  1660
KRCX Roseville      CA        1110 1660
KCOL Ft. Collins    CO        1410 1660
WCCF Punta Gorda    FL        1580 1660
KAGY Port Sulphur   LA        1510 1660
WRGC Sylva          NC        680  1660
WJDM Elizabeth      NJ        1530 1660
WPJC Adjuntas       PR        1020 1660
KHVN Fort Worth     TX        970  1660
KEYF Dishman        WA        1050 1660
WNNO Wisconsin DellsWI        900  1660


KWHN Fort Smith     AR        1320 1670
KECR El Cajon       CA        910  1670
WRCC Warner Robins  GA        1600 1670
WTGM Salisbury      MD        960  1670
KKOJ Jackson        MN        1190 1670


KKIS Concord        CA        1480 1680
KQXI Arvada         CO        1550 1680
WELX Callahan       FL        1160 1680
WKCT Bowling Green  KY        930  1680
WNSW Brewer         ME        1200 1680
WEBC Duluth         MN        560  1680
WNED Buffalo        NY        970  1680
KDSX Denison-ShermanTX        950  1680
KPOZ Seattle        WA        1590 1680

WKRG Mobile         AL        710  1690
KFRE Fresno         CA        940  1690
WBCI Normal         IL        1440 1690
WGHB Farmville      NC        1250 1690
KCRC Enid           OK        1390 1690
WRRA Frederiksted   VI        1290 1690

WFMH Cullman        AL        1460 1700
KCEE Tuscon         AZ        940  1700
KAHI Auburn         CA        950  1700
WOKB Winter Garden  FL        1600 1700
KRGI Grand Island   NE        1430 1700
KAHZ Fort Worth     TX        1360 1700
WAGE Leesburg       VA        1200 1700
KCPL Olympia        WA        920  1700
WKSH Sussex         WI        1370 1700

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 20:09:00 EST
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Throws in the Towel ... err Card


AT&T finally gave in and set up an 800 bypass number the way its
competitors did.  AT&T has finally caved in on another marketing
concept.

Visiting Staples, a discount office supply store today, I saw a
display card and brochures for:

THE AT&T PREPAID CARD

It's a typical prepaid calling card in which you purchase telephone
time on it in advance, and you dial a special 1-800 number (800 357
PAID) to use it.  (They are also apparently trying to claim trademark
rights on the term "PrePaid".) Here are some of the points from the
brochure:

  {Where does it work}
  You can use the AT&T PrePaid Card to call anywhere in the U.S and to
  over 200 countries - from any touch tone phone.

(And this one probably is accepted for calls to those countries that
"don't accept AT&T's card".  :)

  {How much is it worth}
  You can purchase PrePaid Cards in 10, 15, 25, 50 and 100 calling unit
  denominations.  Calls within the continental U.S. cost just one unit
  per minute.  Calls outside the continental U.S, are 3-5 units per
  minute, depending on destination.

  {Is it good for more than one call}
  You can use the PrePaid card for as many calls as you like, up to the
  face value of its calling units.  After each call, you'll be told how
  many units remain on the card,  And you'll get a 1-minute warning if the
  card is about to expire during a call.

The two quoted prices at Staples were $11.99 for a 25-unit card (list
price $14.99), and $7.99 for a 15-unit card (list price $8.99).  As
you can see, this translates to a "list" price of 60c per unit,
Staples' price being 48c and 53c a unit for the 25 and 15 unit cards,
respectively, about twice AT&T's highest interstate call, e.g. LA to
DC or New York which is nominally about 26c, and 1 1/2 times their
highest intrastate rate, usually 35 or 40c.

About the only type of call this makes sense on is calls to very
expensive overseas calls such as Israel or Russia, assuming they are
the 5-unit per minute rate ($2.45) vs a credit card call to Israel at
$6.94 for the first minute and $1.39 each additional.  On a call to
Moscow Russia, the prepaid card makes more sense with the credit card
price being 7.25 for the 1st minute and 2.89 each additional, a
25-unit card costs less.

I expect if this continues, that some of the higher overseas rates
will come down or they will soon (if it doesn't already) bar the most
expensive overseas calls via this prepaid card.

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 94 9:31:47 GMT
From: Will Martin <[e-mail]>
Subject:  AT&T Takes Action Against MCI 800-CALLINFO


This was over on misc.consumers -- I don't think it appeared in
Telecom yet:

Topic: AT&T files with FCC challenging MCI on 800- calls

     WASHINGTON (Reuter) - AT&T Corp. said Wednesday it filed a formal
complaint against MCI Communications Corp. over a new MCI charge for
calling an MCI 800 phone number.

     The complaint, filed with the Federal Communications Commission,
charges that MCI is billing customers for 800 calls without informing
them beforehand. ATT said this violates federal legislation
prohibiting phone companies and information providers from charging
800 call customers.

     Charges can only be imposed for 800 calls when the caller uses a
credit card or calling card or has an established billing agreement
with the provider before the call, it said.

     ATT said MCI's newly announced 1-800-CALL-INFO service would
charge customers for directory assistance calls placed to an MCI 800
number.

     MCI had no immediate response.

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

(There wasn't any reference pointer as to where this article came from.)

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 94 10:36:12 CDT
From: David Devereaux-Weber <[e-mail]>
Subject: New List for Telecommunication Rules


Announcing TelecomDocs: An Internet Listserver for the distribution of
telecommunications rules and regulations.  This list is not limited to
just the FCC or even the US.  We also welcome submissions of
telecommunications rules from local, state or international entities.
You are welcome to subscribe.

TelecomDocs is an electronic forum for the distribution of
telecommunications rules, regulations and other official
communications.  It is operated on facilities provided by the
University of Wisconsin - Madison Division of Information Technology
(DoIT).

TelecomDocs is moderated - messages are reviewed by the listowners
before they are posted.  Only messages pertaining to the purpose of
the list will be posted.  For discussion of telecommunications issues,
we refer you to other related lists, like TelecomReg or Telecom
Digest.

Subscriptions are available to anyone, anywhere there is email
(including people connected to the Internet, CompuServe, Prodigy,
America On Line, BIX, Delphi, and so on).

There is no charge for a subscription.

TO SUBSCRIBE, send the message:

subscribe telecomdocs   firstname   lastname

to the host:

[e-mail]

(for example, I would send the message: subscribe telecomdocs David
Devereaux-Weber to the listserver.)

The listserver software will use the FROM address in your subscription
message as the destination address for list messages so send the
message from the system where you would like to receive messages.  The
listserver will attempt to interpret everything in the body of the
email message as a command, including any "signature" text you may
have set in your mail program, so turn off the signature for this
message.

The Listserver software include other features like archiving messages
and collecting messages for delivery in groups (digest). For more
information, send an email with the command HELP in the message
section to [e-mail].  The listserver will email
you back with a help message.

The listowners help resolve problems of people attempting to
subscribe, unsubscribe or post messages.  Our address appears on every
message (Errors to: [e-mail]).  If you have
any questions, please feel free to contact us.


Barry Orton                           Voice/fax: [phone]
Professor of Telecommunications       Internet: [e-mail]
University of Wisconsin-Madison       6l0 Langdon St.  Madison, WI 53703

David Devereaux-Weber, P. E.          Voice:[phone]
The University of Wisconsin - Madison Internet: [e-mail]
Division of Information Technology    1210 West Dayton St. Madison, WI 53706

22-October-1994 v1.01

David Devereaux-Weber, P.E.            [e-mail] (Internet)
The University of Wisconsin - Madison  [e-mail] (Bitnet)
Division of Information Technology     [e-mail] (Internet)
Network Engineering                    [phone](voice) [phone](FAX)

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

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 1994 13:06:10 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone Fun 800


Forwarded to the Digest, FYI.

  Date: Wed, 19 Oct 1994 15:30:52 -0700
  From: "Brock N. Meeks" <[e-mail]>
  Subject: Phone Fun 800

CyberWire Dispatch// Copyright 1994 //

Jacking in from the "There's No Free Lunch" Port:


Washington, DC -- So you think that all calls to an 800 number are
free? Think again.

Not only are some calls to an 800 not free, you may be getting popped
for the bill without knowing it.

I know, I know. Where is the trust? A free call to an 800 number is
one of the few remaining "free lunch" perks us ordinary Joe's and
Jane's had going for us.

Actually, the practice of allowing companies to charge for 800 number
calls has been going for a while now. Funny how such rules slip into
being without much fanfare, eh? Do you recall any of the long distance
phone companies taking out ads to tell you this news?

I mean, MCI could have taken their obnoxious Saturday Night Live
frontman -- the one that does the insufferable 1-800-COLLECT ads --
and had him whine: "Hey, Phoners... not all 800 calls are FREE
anymore. Get a Clue, Phone Dude."

Although there are legitimate uses of "for fee" 800 services, the
practice is still highly dubious. Why? Because it does run against a
certain "trust" telephone companies have built up.

Don't believe me? Try this. Ask the next 10 people you see this
question: Are calls to an 800 number free? I'll bet 9 of 10 tell you
"Yes."

Of course, the Dial-A-Hard-On sex chat lines were the first to learn
how to abuse the "right" of being able to bill for 800 calls. The sex
chat folks would, in essence, issue an instant 'calling card' to some
sweaty, heavy breather, creating an "business relationship" which was
allowed under the for-fee 800 billing rules. The caller would get a
PIN with his instant calling card. On subsequent "visits" the caller
tapped in the PIN and the meter began ticking.

The tricky part came in on the billing side. Businesses, hotels and
college dorms routinely block calls to 900 numbers, afraid of the
potential for untraceable and astronomical bills. But such isn't the
case with calls to 800 numbers. "Why block calls to free 800 numbers?"
goes the thinking.

Here's another bit of "Inside Telco" info for you: Whenever you make
an 800 number call, all sorts of information is "captured" by the
service you're calling. Name, address, telephone number, etc. Neat
trick, eh? It's done using a nifty piece of software called Advanced
Intelligent Network or AIN or short.

Well, these porn lines would issue an instant PIN tied to the AIN
information off the original 800 number call. So, if you called a sex
line using an 800 number from the Rectory of your local Catholic
Church or the office of a congressman and were issued a PIN, any later
calls you made would be *billed to the church or congressman's phone*
because the porn line guys "captured" the billing address information
from that phone.

Suddenly, businesses, hotels and college dorms (don't know about
churches or congressman's offices) were hit with tens of thousands of
dollars in bogus billings, all tied to porn lines.

The FCC and Federal Trade Commission hammered such loop holes last
August after a hue and cry of public complaint.

The trick for billing to an 800 number is that it can done if one of
three criteria are met: (1) The call is billed to a credit card. (2)
The call is billed to a pre-subscribed calling card. (3) An
established billing agreement between caller and service provider is
in place.

For example, say an Internet service provider wants to establish
nationwide service, but doesn't have local calling numbers in place in
every city. The answer might be to buy a huge block of time from a
long distance company to get cheap rates and then allow callers to
connect via an 800 number that is billed to a credit card. Not perfect,
but legitimate.

AT&T To MCI: Hold The Phone
============================

But on Wednesday those madcap pranksters of the long distance market,
AT&T, decided that MCI had pissed on their parade one too many times.
So, AT&T, October 19, filed a formal complaint with the FCC against
its closest competitor over a service it launched called 1-800-CALL-INFO.

AT&T claims the service is illegal because it violates federal rules
governing billable 800 calls.

The MCI service connects the caller to an information operator.
Anywhere, anytime, from any phone. It's an ingenious service, and one
that, if left intact, is sure to eat into AT&T profits just as the
brilliant 1-800-COLLECT service has kicked AT&T's ass in the collect
calling market.

But like the 1-800-COLLECT service, MCI has chosen not to "brand" the
service.  In other words, they don't tell you it's an MCI service. Are
they embarrassed of their own brand? Some folks at AT&T think so, but
they cherish their pension plan and wouldn't go on record saying it.

So, having been embarrassed at the drubbing they've taken in collect
calling market, AT&T's gone to the FCC complaining about the MCI's 800
directory service. AT&T's complaint says that MCI bills customers for
the service without informing them beforehand of the cost. (Hey,
AT&T ... it's right there in *really, tiny print* on the TV screen ...)

Dispatch called MCI for comment; no calls were returned.

1-800-MEEKS-OUT...



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The mail has been rolling in here on
this very topic the past week and perhaps soon I should print another
issue with some responses and commentaries.  I don't think MCI will
lose the case for the simple reason that like all the other information
providers using 800 as their carriage, they are not billing for the
call itself but for the information rendered as a result. You can see
this for yourself if you call from a payphone: they won't give out the
information without asking for alternate billing advice, yet I am sure
the local telco is none-the-less billing MCI for that one minute call
you made (from a payphone) which MCI declined to service.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #405
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29412;
          10 Nov 94 4:51 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08758; Thu, 10 Nov 94 00:21:09 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08745; Thu, 10 Nov 94 00:21:05 CST
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 00:21:05 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #406

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 94 00:21:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 406

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    A Word of Thanks and Other Notes (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    IEEE Southeastcon 95: Call for Papers, Invitation to Exhibit (Benningfield)
    Enterprise Management Summit ([e-mail])
    ISLIP 94 Proceedings via WWW (R. Jagannathan)
    Burning Questions - AT&T, MCI, or Other? (Candice Bergman)
    Description of Pinout on Moto Flip Phone Wanted (Russ Latham)
    International Calling-Cards - Any Suggestions? (Bill Blum)
    How Do RBOCs Train Their Customers? ([e-mail])
    Canadian/US Hospital Telecom Contacts Wanted (David Payne)
    Caller ID and Privacy (Bill Wen)

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 America
On Line. 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, 9 Nov 94 22:46:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: A Word of Thanks and Other Notes


This is just a quick word of thanks to everyone who sent cards,
letters and flowers to me over the past week. There is no way a
personal response can be given due to the high volume received.  I
have to go back to the hospital Friday for more testing and it is
possible another short stay in the hospital may be required, but I
hope not.

Please recall that the Digest is funded in large part by the generosity
of readers like yourself who send 'subscription donations' from time
to time as they see fit. There is absolutely no obligation to do so,
but the financial help received means a great deal and frankly has been
the one reason this Digest has continued publication the past two or
three years.

Some of you did in fact send donations as you felt appropriate with
your notes this past week, and to you, my special heartfelt thanks
go out. If your company or organization would like to be a sponsor of
the Digest, then your name will be included as such in the masthead
of each issue if you wish.

There is a HUGE backlog of subscription requests waiting to be processed
and I will get to these as soon as possible. Right now I want to try
and catch up on some of the telecom news items waiting for publication.

Enough about me for now ... let's have a few letters from the readers
and get back down to business.


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail] (R. F. Benningfield)
Subject: IEEE Southeastcon 1995: Call for Papers, Invitation to Exhibit
Date: 10 Nov 1994 03:57:03 GMT
Organization: Alcatel Network Systems, Raleigh, NC.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


IEEE Southeastcon '95
Visualizing the Future

March 26-29, 1995, Raleigh, North Carolina
Sponsored by Region 3 and the Eastern North Carolina Section
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

If your company is interested in being an exhibitor at Southeastcon
'95 then please contact me.  As Chair of the Southeastcon Exhibits
Committee, I can fax you an Invitation to Exhibit flyer, or I can mail
you a full exhibitor's kit (which includes registration, contract,
booth layout in the Hilton's Grand Ballroom, etc.).


Robert F. Benningfield Jr.           {[e-mail]}
TSM Engineer,             R&D Hardware Design & Development Engineering
Alcatel Network Systems,  2912 Wake Forest Road,  Raleigh,
North Carolina  27609, USA           {NCSU Alumnus: MSEE '90, BSEE '89}
Phone: [phone] (work) or 919/851-5562 (play),  Fax: [phone]

*****************************************************************************

Announcement and Call for Papers
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Southeastcon is the yearly IEEE Region 3 Technical Conference established
to bring regional Electrical Engineering professionals, faculty and
students together to share information, primarily by presentation of
technical papers. It is the most influential outlet in Region 3 for
promoting awareness of technical contributions made by our profession to
the advancement of engineering science and society. Original papers, not
previously published or  presented elsewhere, are invited. Attendance and
professional program paper presentation from areas outside IEEE Region 3
are encouraged and welcomed. Southeastcon '95 will be held in Raleigh,
North Carolina.

This year special emphasis will be given to a number of topics that
have flourished in the Region. Computer Graphics, Visualization and
Telecommunications, core technologies of the Research Triangle Park,
have converged to produce Multimedia, Interactive Television and
Virtual Reality.  The program committee especially invites papers and
tutorials exploring these and related topics of interest to Region 3
IEEE members. In addition to visualizing the future of technology, the
program committee intends to give special attention to papers and
presentations which explore social issues related to the use of
technology. It is hoped that in this way we can better understand the
impact of technology on our society and the role and responsibilities
of engineers which shape the future.

An abbreviated list of other suggested topics is given below; authors
are invited to submit papers on all topics of interest to the IEEE
Region 3 membership.

Suggested Topics for Southeastcon '95:

 Visualization                           Interactive Television
 Acoustics                               ISDN
 Aerospace systems                       Lasers/Photonics
 Analog Systems                          Magnetics
 Artificial Intelligence                 Medical Electronics
 Audio Systems                           Microelectronics
 Bioengineering                          Microprocessors
 Biomedical                              Microwaves
 Cellular Radio                          Modeling and Simulation
 Circuits and Systems                    Multimedia
 Cogeneration                            Network Theory
 Communications                          Neural Networks
 Components                              Nuclear and Plasmas
 Computer Graphics                       Optical Computing
 Computers                               Pattern Recognition
 Consumer Electronics                    Power Electronics
 Control Systems                         Power Systems
 Design Automation                       Professional Activities
 Dielectrics/Insulation                  Radar Systems
 Digital Systems                         Reliability
 Education                               Robotics
 Electromagnetic Fields                  Sensors and Transducers
 Electro-Optics                          Signal Processing
 EMC/EMI                                 Sonet/ATM
 Engineering and Society                 Superconductivity
 Engineering Ethics                      Systems Theory
 Expert Systems                          Telecommunications
 Fiber Optics                            Telemetry
 GaAs/SiGe                               Ultrasonics
 Image Processing                        Vehicular Technology
 Industrial Applications                 Virtual Reality
 Industrial Electronics                  VLSI/ULSI
 Information Systems

Concise Papers Abstract & Summary DEADLINE - NOVEMBER 9, 1994
Full-Length Papers DEADLINE - NOVEMBER 15, 1994

Technical Program Chair:                  General Chair:
   Ralph Begun                               Charles Lord
   9904 Darnell Ct.                          108 Huntington Circle
   Raleigh, NC 27615-1514                    Cary, NC 27513-3805
   [e-mail]                       [e-mail]
   919-558-6147

Vice Chair:                               Student Program Chair:
   Greg Old                                  George Abbott
   Dept. of Electrical Engr.                 North Carloina State University
   North Carloina State University           P.O Box 7914
   P.O Box 7911                              Raleigh, NC 27695-7914
   Raleigh, NC 27695-7911                    abbott @ecesis.ncsu.edu
   [e-mail]


Instructions for Paper Submission

1.    Full-length Papers (Refereed):

Submit four copies of a paper not to exceed twenty (20) double-
spaced, typewritten pages (including references and figures) to the
Technical Program Chairman by November 15, 1994. these papers will be
fully refereed.  Author notification will be mailed by December 5,
1994 and the final camera-ready papers will be due on January 6, 1995.

2.  Concise Papers (May be presented in oral or poster sessions):
Submit four copies of a paper summary and separate abstract to the
Technical Program Chairman by November 9, 1994. The abstract must be
on a separated sheet and limited to one page. The summary should not
exceed 500 words.  The summary should be complete and should include
(a) statement of problems or questions addressed, (b) objective of
work with regards to the problem, (c) approach employed to achieve
objective, (d) progress, work performed and (e) important results or
conclusions. Since the summary will be the basis for selection, care
should be taken in its preparation so that it is representative of the
work to be reported. As an aid to the Papers Review Committee, please
indicate which conference topic from the list above which most closely
represents the subject area of your paper.  Concise papers, not
exceeding four (4) camera-ready Proceedings pages (including
references and figures) will be published subject to acceptance by the
Papers Review Committee and the author's fulfillment of additional
requirements contained in the author's kit. Notification of acceptance
and mailing of author's kit will be on or before December 5, 1994, and
the camera-ready papers will be due on January 6, 1995.

3.    Student Papers:

Students should consult their Student Branch counselor for information
on the Student Paper Contest. Student papers may be a separate program
with a submission deadline of February 14, 1995. The Southeastcon '95
Student Conference Chairman will answer student program inquiries when
local information is not available.

Poster Sessions:

Poster sessions will provide an alternative format for paper
presentation that allows for greater flexibility and expanded audience
interaction.

Publication -

All papers accepted for Southeastcon '95 will be published in the
Proceedings provided they comply with the above deadline dates and
requirements from the author's kit are fulfilled. The length of
concise papers is restricted to four (4) Proceedings pages; a
full-length paper is restricted to eight (8) pages; however more pages
can be provided at an added cost that is explained in the author's
kit.

Tutorial/Workshop Program -

Proposals for tutorial/workshop topics and organizers are invited. A
Workshop/Tutorial description of 300-500 words should be submitted to
the Technical Program Chairman no later than November 15, 1994.
Include instructor biographies, etc. as relevant.

Registration -

Advance registration and hotel reservation forms will be mailed with the
Advance Program described below. The Conference site is the North Raleigh
Hilton and Convention Center, Raleigh, NC.

Advance Program Mailing -

The Advance Program will be mailed only to authors, co-authors and
others (not associated with a technical paper) who make known to the
Technical Program Chairman their wish to receive the Advance Program
when published.  It is anticipated that the advance Program will be
mailed in early February 1995.


Mr. Ralph M. Begun
Southeastcon '95 Technical Chair
9904 Darnell Court
Raleigh, NC 27615-1514
[e-mail]


IEEE Southeastcon '95
Preliminary Announcement and Call for Papers

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

From: [e-mail] (Summit '94)
Subject: Enterprise Management Summit
Date: 10 Nov 1994 02:05:42 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Enterprise Management Summit
Phone [phone] or  800-340-2111
Fax  [phone]
E-Mail  [e-mail]

Summit '94
November 14-18

Summit '94 is right around the corner!

A Panel of Experts has been appointed for the Enterprise Management
Summit '94.  This panel will evaluate the vendor shoot-out in the
Enterprise Management Center, located on the second floor of the Santa
Clara Convention Center.  The panel includes Warren Williams (Pacific
Bell), Steve Waldbusser (Carnegie-Mellon), John McConnell (McConnell
Consulting) and Randy Smith (UPS).  The panel's evaluation will be
made available at the end of the conference.  Theater particpants
include Computer Associates, Hewlett-Packard, IBM, DEC,and Bull.

The Conference Starts Next Week!  Don't miss out on this exciting
event!  Register today.

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

Date: Tue, 8 Nov 94 10:49:08 PST
From: R. Jagannathan <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: ISLIP 94 Proceedings via WWW


See http://www.csl.sri.com/lucid/ISLIP94/electronic-proceedings.html
for an electronic version of ISLIP 94 which was held at SRI in Menlo
Park in September of this year.  (It can also be accessed via
http://www.csl.sri.com/Lucid.html).


Jaggan

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

From: [e-mail] (Candice Bergman)
Subject: Burning Questions - AT&T, MCI, or Other
Date: 8 Nov 1994 18:26:00 GMT
Organization: Boston University, Boston, MA, USA


In the good old U.S. of A., capitalist media capital of the world that
it is, we are constantly blitzed with commercial advertising from all
angles- TV, telephone, periodicals, and of course, the old-fashioned
personal solicitations.

The influx of immigrant populations to the United States within the
past generation has piqued the interest of advertising pundits, who
have broadened their marketing focus to target what they PERCEIVE as
"ethnic" advertising - READ: NOT White Middle Class Americans.  This
term is obviously a bit too broad to be useful, but it serves to paint
a picture of what most definitely deserves further inquiry; thus, I
ask for YOUR help in collecting as much relevant data in the hopes of
extending this into a more comprehensive research project.

More specifically, the question I have in mind is the relationship
between LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE COMPANIES and the non-profit or
for-profit ETHNIC organizations/businesses they focus on.  As a
related example, I was sitting home and tooling around the house one
day and got a call (big deal for me; happens a few times a year).
Anyway, I sprint to my phone (no pun intended), and am greeted by this
Chinese-speaking lady, asking me whether or not I have considered
switching to..."Blah Blah Blah."  Note - she automatically assumed
that because my last name sounds Chinese, I would prefer to speak in
that language, and broached the subject of switching to her
long-distance carrier with what I would label the "common countryman"
approach.  She didn't consider that I could have been adopted in a
London orphanage by a couple of Chinese emigres studying there at the
time and be this English speaking Caucasian.  Which I'm not, but I
diverge.  Now, obviously, I have my perceptions of such relationships
based upon my own experiences but they're not sufficient for making
any kind of real quantitative analyses.  Therefore, I ask you ...  the
ever expansive and experienced net:

===========================================================================

1.  WHAT WAS THE NAME OF THE LONG DISTANCE CARRIER INVOLVED?

2.  WHAT IS THE NAME OF YOUR NON-PROFIT OR FOR-PROFIT COMPANY/ORGANIZATION/
    AFFILIATION?  (ie.  Jewish National Fund, Asiani Airlines, etc.)

3.  WHAT WAS THE NATURE OF THE OFFER TO YOU?  (ie.  sign up for "blah blah
    blah" and we will donate 5% of your long distance bill for the next 3
    months to the Jewish National Fund.)

4.  HOW WAS THE OFFER PUBLICIZED TO YOU?  (ie.  were you called up, were you
    bombed with junk mail, did some representative come knocking @ your door?)

5.  HOW LONG AGO, APPROXIMATELY, DID THIS SOLICITATION OCCUR?
==================================================================

The above, in essense, is the nature of my questionaire.  I am not
looking to use the above data in any statistical sampling or other
analyses at this stage ... I'm just looking for as much raw, relevant
data.  Thus, if you have friends, co-workers, etc. in addition to
yourself who might be able to help me out, I would greatly appreciate
any information you could volunteer.  My GREAT PREFERENCE (hint, hint
:)) would be for you to e-mail your responses to me in private, since
I don't always have access to the newsreader.  If I can convince the
Powers That Be that this is a worthwhile and feasible topic of
pursuit, you would have my sincere gratitude :) Or maybe some cold
hard cash :) Just kidding.  Anyway, I look forward to your responses,
and thanks very much for reading my circumlocutory posting.


David Chou     [e-mail]

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

Subject: Description of Pinout on Moto flip Phone?
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 11:34:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (Russ Latham)


Can anyone tell me what the various lines are in the connector on the
bottom of one of the Motorola flip phones?  (not the three pin
connector for the battery, but the one used with some chargers and
used to connect a hands-free unit, etc.)

What I'm interested in is finding the Audio Transmit and Receive
connections.


Thanks for any info....

Russ Latham   [e-mail] or [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 01:21:44 GMT
From: Bill Blum <[e-mail]>
Subject: International Calling-Cards -- Any Suggestions?


We have a researcher at this location that is visiting the Griffin, GA
(U.S.) from Nigeria.  He would like to be able to make cost-effective
calls to Nigeria (we have a POTS number that is commonly used in the
visitor housing here on our campus that this person can receive calls
to).

Are there cards that cater to International Dialing exclusively?

My biggest problem may be in assuring the provider that this person,
who is here for a short time, is responsible for possible debt.  Any
other foibles to watch out for?

Is it possible to use something like TelePassport in reverse to access
Nigeria?

Any help is appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail] (PatraJones)
Subject: How Do RBOCs Train Their Customers?
Date: 10 Nov 1994 00:44:02 GMT
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


Please help!!  I'm doing research on how RBOCs train their customers
on network services that they have purchased (ie Centrex, voice mail).
I need info on whether training is an additional cost on top of the
price of installation.  Who does it?  Is it conducted at the customer
site, or are customers whisked to the nearest RBOC office?  Are
brochures and computer disks utilized as "professors"?  What
products/services have you as the customer been trained on by an RBOC
employee?  Answers to any of these questions would be greatly
appreciated.  Please e-mail your response to me. Thanks for your help.

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

Subject: Canadian/US Hospital Telecom Contacts Wanted
From: [e-mail] (DAVID PAYNE)
Date: 10 Nov 94 00:28:20 EST


I am interested in establishing some contacts with other
Telecommunication and/or Information Departments in Canadian or
American hospitals.  I would like to start a "information exchange" on
applications, problems and solutions specific to hospitals.


Thank you,

David Payne
Analyst Telecommunications
Victoria Hospital
Box 5375
London, Ontario
Canada, N6A 4G5

[phone] x5107.
[phone] (fax)
Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 00:44:40 GMT
From: Bill=Wen%OS=Quality%Sys=[e-mail]
Subject: Caller ID and Privacy


   The recent discussion on Caller ID and privacy (Ref: Ross E.
Mitchell in "Dynamic Negotiation in the Privacy Wars", Telecom Vol 14,
Issue 402) gave me a rather simple idea:

   Why not just add a feature on programmable phones so that it
generates tones when the phone goes off-hook?

   Programmable phones already give you the ability to store phone
numbers, accessible either through a dedicated set of buttons or
through certain combinations of buttons. Why not add a another
programming option on the phone that gets "dialed" each time you pick
up the phone, like "*67"?  The option would only kick in and "dial"
this number if it detects dial tone, which would eliminate the problem
of the phone dialing *67 if you're picking up to answer a call.

   Any phone gurus out there see a problem with this solution? I know,
I know, this will mean you have to replace ALL the phones in your
house/residence, but I would think that's even better incentive for
phone-makers to include the feature.


BillW


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, someone has experimeted with
that, and I forget who it is. He sent me a prototype of his work about
a year ago. It was a little box you plug in the phone line in series
with the phone itself and when the phone goes off hook this little box
blurts out *67 to the network as the first order of business. By the
time you actually get the receiver to your ear and start dialing your
number the *67 part has already been passed.  It was smart enough to
not sent the code when you answered an incoming call, and in the event
you did want to pass your caller-ID information, there was a way to do
it, I think by going off hook, flashing for a second then going off
hook again and dialing the usual way. I don't know whatever happened
to him and his project. It seemed like an interesting idea at the time
and one that might make some money for its inventor.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #406
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01665;
          10 Nov 94 10:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09650; Thu, 10 Nov 94 01:07:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09642; Thu, 10 Nov 94 01:07:01 CST
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 01:07:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #407

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 94 01:07:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 407

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Russian Satellite Conference Proceedings ([e-mail])
    Re: Dynamic Negotiation and Caller-ID (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Medical Multimedia: MEDIMM (Jean-Bernard Condat)
    AT&T Personal Term 510/510a Help Needed (Alex Jeannopoulos)
    GeoPort Technology (Monty Solomon)
    Summit '94: Sponsors & Exhibitors ([e-mail])
    Re: I'm Back - At Least Part Time ([e-mail])

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 America
On Line. 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]
Subject: Russian Satellite Conference Proceedings
Date: 09 Nov 1994 07:00:00 MST
Organization: University of Arizona (BPA)


Conference Summary:

              THE REPORT ON INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
               ON SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS - ICSC'94
                   October 18-21, Moscow, Russia

The conference was organized by:

 * Russian A.S.Popov Society for Radioengineering, Electronics and
   Communications
 * Institute of Radioengineering & Electronics, Russian Academy of
   Sciences
 * International Centre for Scientific and Technical Information
 * Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
 * IEEE Russia Section
 * IEEE Region 8 (Europe, Africa and Middle East)
 * IEEE Communications Society
 * IEEE Communications Society Russia Chapter
 * IEEE Professional Communication Society Russia Chapter
 * Centro Studi E Laboratori Telecommunicazioni (CSELT, Italy)
 * "TELESPAZIO" (Italy)

The participants from Russia, Ukraine, UK, France, Italy, USA, Israel,
Georgia - total number 250 - have been gathered at the conference
venue - International Centre for Scientific and Technical Information,
Moscow.

Some important organisations acting in satellite communications
research and developments participated with papers and technical
discussion. Among them Inmarsat, Eutelsat, Intersputnik, United
Nations Office for Outer Space and others.

More than 70 papers, 5 plenary talks and about 15 posters have
been presented at plenary and topical sessions:

   Session 1:   Satellite communication systems and broadcasting
   Session 2:   Platform launchers, space complex and equipment for
                satellite communications
   Session 3:   Satellite based systems with high elliptical and
                low Earth orbits, VSAT networking and data transmission
   Session 4:   Satellite based systems for ecological monitoring
                and navigation

The conference proceedings in two volumes were published at the
beginning of the conference. The special feature of the proceedings is
the first time publication of detailed technical description of many
Russia-originated satellite communications projects - Express
Marathon, Gonets, Coupon, Gals and others.

Contents of the Conference Proceedings is following:

OUTLOOK FOR DEVELOPMENT OF MOBILE SATELLITE COMMUNICATION IN
RUSSIA

Yu.G. Milov, Russian Space Agency, Moscow

INTERSPUTNIK'S ROLE IN EASTERN EUROPE
Neil Bakmann, Intersputnik, Russia

INMARSAT SYSTEM AND SERVICES
Vladimir V. Spiridonov, International Satellite Organisation
Inmarsat, London

SOVCAN STAR SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
M.Reshetnev, A.Kozlov, E.Korchagin, NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk-26
V.Bellini, G.Lewis, SCS, Canada

THE ROLE OF VSAT AND OTHER SMALL SATELLITE TERMINALS IN
EVOLVING THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENVIRONMENT
Paolo Amadesi, EUTELSAT, France

SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS IN RUSSIA
Dr. V.I. Khokhlov
President, Joint Stock Company "Telecom"

THE JOINT STOCK COMPANY TELECOM AND PERSPECTIVES OF BUSINESS COOPERATION
OUTLOOK FOR DEVELOPMENT OF MOBILE SATELLITE COMMUNICATION IN RUSSIA
Yu.G. Milov
Russian Space Agency, Moscow

INTERSPUTNIK'S ROLE IN EASTERN EUROPE
Neil Bakmann
Intersputnik, Russia

INMARSAT SYSTEM AND SERVICES
Vladimir V. Spiridonov
International Satellite Organisation Inmarsat, London

SOVCAN STAR SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
M.Reshetnev, A.Kozlov, E.Korchagin
NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk-26
V.Bellini, G.Lewis
SCS, Canada

THE ROLE OF VSAT AND OTHER SMALL SATELLITE TERMINALS IN EVOLVING
THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ENVIRONMENT
Paolo Amadesi
EUTELSAT, France

ON CONSTRUCTION OF GLOBAL SATELLITE MULTIPROGRAM HIGH DEFINITION TELEVISION
AND HIGH QUALITY SOUND BROADCASTING SYSTEM
Y.B. Zoubarev, M.I. Krivosheev, I.S. Tsyrlin, Y.P. Semenov, V.G.
Kravets State Radio Research and Development Institute, JSC
"Informcosmos", NPO "Energy", Russia

"EXPRESS" SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
I. Tsirlin, L. Kantor, A. Karutin, I. Povolotski, A. Kozlov JSC
"Inforcosmos", State Radio Research and Development Institute, NPO PM,
Russia

DIRECT TV BROADCASTING SYSTEM BASED ON GALS AND GALS-R SATELLITES
Yu. Zoubarev, I. Tsirlin, L. Kantor, A. Kozlov, E. Koumysh, D. Zaytsev
State Radio Research and Development Institute NPO PM, JSC
"Informcosmos", Russia

THE PERSPECTIVE OF SATELLITE TELEVISION DEVELOPMENT IN RUSSIA
A.Kozlov, V.Radaikin, A.Belobrov Research and Production Association
"Applied Mechanics" (NPO PM), Krasnoyarsk-26, Russia

INTEGRATED MULTIPURPOSE MULTILEVEL SPACE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
G.Ya. Guskov, A.I. Abolite, B.N. Vinogradov
NPO "ELAS", Moscow, Russia

"COMBINED SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS"
K.I. Kukk
Joint Stock Company "TELECOM", MOSCOW, RUSSIA

SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM USING VSAT'S AND POTOK SATELLITE-
TRANSPONDEN
V.A. Bakursky, G.J. Guskov, R.A. Setdikov, V.N. Chetverik
NPO "ELAS", Moscow, Russia

DUBNA-INTERCOSMOS INTERNATIONAL EXPERIMENTAL SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
CENTRE
V.L. Bykov, D.M. Federov, A.L. Sandomirsky, V.S. Rabinovich
State Radio Research and Development Institute, Moscow, Russia

THE COMMUNICATION SATELLITE "YAMAL": THE NEW TECHNOLOGICAL APPROACH
IN CREATING THE COMMUNICATION SATELLITES IN RUSSIA
Yu.S. Denisov, A.V.Shestakov, E.F. Zemskov
Joint Stock Company "Gazcom", Russia

THE NEW SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM FOR RUSSIA "YAMAL"
Victor A. Blinov, Nikolay N. Sevastyanov, Andrey V. Shestakov
Joint Stock Company "Gazcom", Russia

LOW AVAILABILITY SYSTEM DESIGN FOR SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
F. Barbaloscia, E. Russo
Fondazione Ugo Borgoni (FUB), Rome, Italy

INTERSATELLITE OPTICAL COMMUNICATIONS
I.V. Krukova, A.S. Tcherkasov, N.N. Tchukovsky Moscow
Radiocommunication Research Institute, Moscow State Bauman Technical
Universiti, Russia

AMRUSSCOM - DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS IN RUSSIA
R. Hunt, V. Yevdin
AmRusCom - American Corporation of Satellite Communications, USA and Russia

"CONDOR" - SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM WITH MOBILE OBJECTS
V.N. Bondarick, U.G. Burlakov, V.A. Kukhtevich, S.P. Lopatin
Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Centre, Moscow, Russia

THE ROLE OF SATELLITE COMMUNICATION IN NETWORK RELIABILITY IMPROVEMENT
Igor. G. Baklanov, Victor A. Netes Joint Stock Company "Gazcom",
Institute for Problems of Information Transmission, Russian Academy of
Sciences, Russia

ELECON-STIR MULTI-PURPOSES SATELLITE SYSTEM
V. Cheremisin, B. Koerber, P. Sivirin, W. Griethe, V. Zvonar
NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk-26, Russia

DATA TRANSMISSION SPACE SYSTEM FOR AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL IN RUSSIA
M. Reshetnew, V. Cheremisin, V. Karnaukhov, M. Tchmykh, S. Kratov, V.
Kozenko, V. Chebotarev, P.  Shaklein, V. Pushkarev NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk
State Technical University, Russia

UNITED NATIONS GLOBAL SATELLITE COMMUNICATION NETWORK
Viktor Kotelnikov
United Nations office for Outer Space Affairs, Vienna

ON NEW APPROACHES TO COMPLEX INTERACTIVE TV SYSTEM
M.I. Krivosheev, A.I. Kouchtouev, V.G. Fedunin
State Radio Research and Development Institute, Moscow, Russia

DIGITAL COMPRESSION OF TV IMAGES FOR THE TRANSMISSION THROUGH THE SATELLITE
CHANNELS
V.P. Dvorkovich, V.V. Nechepaev, G.N. Mokhin, A.V. Dvorkovich
State Radio Research and Development Institute, Moscow, Russia

DATE COMPRESSION IN THE DIGITAL TV.
B.A.Michailov, B.K.Istomin, A.I.Koyokin.
Research Institute of Microdevices, Moscow, Russia

COMBINED SIGNAL PROCESSING IN SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS
V.A. Grigorjev
A.F. Mozhaisky Military Engineering Space Academy, St. Petersburg, Russia

GLOBAL SATELLITE BACKBONE NETWORK FOR INTERCONNECTIONS BETWEEN HIGH SPEED
LANS, MANS
Sergey V. Zakurdaev
HINFONET Company, Moscow, Russia

INMARSAT-P. THE WORLD IN YOUR HAND
Peter Berlin
Inmarsat, London

COMMUNICATION SATELLITIE BUSES UNIIFIED - PERSPECTIVES AND CAPABILITIES
E.Ashurcov, E.Korchagin, V.Popov, V.Kravchenko
NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk-26, Russia

FAIL - SAFE GYROMOMENT ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEMS OF COMMUNICATION,
NAVIGATION, AND LAND-SURVEY SATELLITES
Mikhail F. Reshetnev, Valentin A. Rayevsky, Gennady P. Titov, V.M.
Matrosov, Ye.I. Somov NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk-26, Russia

PRECISION GYROMOMENT ATTITUDE CONTROL SYSTEMS OF RAPID MANOEUVRING
SPACECRAFTS FOR REMOTE SENSING AND LAND - SURVEY
Gennady P. Anshakov, Yuri G. Antonov, Valentin P. Makarov, V.M.
Matrosov, Ye.I. Somov Central Specialized Design Bureau (TsSKB)

NEW TECHNOLOGY OF THE AIRBORNE SYSTEM SATELLITE CONTROL
G.Ya. Guskov, G.A. Blinov
NPO "ELAS", NPS "SPURT", Research Institute of Microdevices, Moscow, Russia

ADVANCED MICROSTRIP NETWORKS FOR INTEGRATED MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS
A. Angelucci, P. Audagnotto, P. Corda, F. Piarulli, B. Piovano
CSELT, Torino, Italy

SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM ACTIVE PHASED ARRAYS (APA)
G.Ya. Gus'kov, Ye.N. Yegorov, G.V. Slitnev, V.Gr. Concharov
NPO "ELAS", NPS "SPURT", Research Institute of Microdevices, Moscow, Russia

AIRBORN RELAY COMPLEX OF THE 14/11 BAND FIXED SATELLITE SYSTEM
V.V. Likhtenvald, S.V. Mayorov
NPO "ISTOK", Moscow, Russia

SMALL SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS STATION
V.N. Dyachkov, O.A. Kolenikov, G.D. Starh
NPO "ELAS", Moscow, Russia

UNIFIED TRANSIVERS "OKTANT" IN 4/6 AND 11/14 GHZ RANGE FOR SMALL
COMMUNICATION - SATELLITE EARTH STATIONS AND DATA-SENDING STATIONS
I. Levitin, C. Rabinovich, I. Dutychev, A. Yakovlev  Research and
Production Corporation "Istok", Fryasino, Moscow Region, Russia

C-BAND POWER AMPLIFIER MIC
Alex Busurin, Igor M. Abolduyev
SRI "Pulsar", Moscow, Russia

KU-BAND POWER AMPLIFER MIC
T.E. Bryntseva, I.M. Abolduyev
SRI "Pulsar", Moscow, Russia

KA-BAND LOW NOISE AMPLIFIER
Vadim Minnebayev
SRI "Pulsar", Moscow, Russia

SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS WITH THE USE OF LONG DURATION SATELLITES
UNTENDED FOR OPERATION IN HIGHLY ELLIPTIC ORBIT
E.Ashurkov, V.Bartenev, E.Korchagin, V.Malyshev, V.Shilov, V.Evenov
NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk-26, Russia

VERSIONS OF LOW EARTH ORBIT SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS DESIGN
V.V. Sokolov, V.A. Pyltsov
Stock Company "Moscow Radiocommunication Research Institute", Russia

LOW EARTH ORBIT SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM COURIER 1
G.Guskov, Y.Rybalchenko, Y.Solomonov
NPO "ELAS", Moscow, Russia

"GLOBSAT" LOW-ORBIT COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
R.V. Alimov, V.N. Bondarik, U.G. Burlakov, V.A. Kukhtevich, O.N.
Shipulya, S.N. Yurin Khrunichev State Research and Production Space
Centre, Moscow, Russia

THE EFFICIENCY ENHANCEMENT OF THE SPACE LOW-ORBIT SYSTEM GONETS
V. Arbuzov, E. Korchagin, A. Deev, G. Phaleev
Research and Production Association "Applied Mechanics" (NPO PM)

ON-BOARD SIGNAL PROCESSING IN SPREAD-SPECTRUM LOW ORBIT BY
ACOUSTOELECTRONIC DEVICES
A.M.Anosov, A.V.Kuzichkin, S.E.Kondakov, P.G.Tereshchenko, M.I.Chumakov
CNIIMASh, Pushkin Military Radioelectronics College, St.-Petersburg, Russia
A.F.Mozhaisky Military Engineering-Space Academy, St.-Petersburg, Russia

UPDATED DISCUSSION OF MULTIPLE ACCESS TECHNIQUES AND SPECTRUM UTILIZATION
OF THE GLOBALSTAR MOBILE SATELLITE SYSTEM
Joel Schindall
GlobalStar Mobile Satellite System, USA

DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF THE MULTIPURPOSE SYSTEM OF THE LOW ORBITAL SMALL
SIZE OF SATELLITES
G. Malyshev, V. Kulkov, V. Lomzin, I. Maglinov Moscow State Aviation
Institute, Lavochkin Scientific and Production Association, Moscow,
Russia

MOBILE SATELLITE SYSTEM WITH LEO-HEO SWITCHED INTERLINK
M.A. Polyantsev
NPO "ELAS", Moscow, Russia

ARCHITECTURE OF A MODELLING PROGRAM COMPLEX FOR SATELLITE DATA NETWORK
WITH DYNAMICALLY VARIABLE TOPOLOGY INVESTIGATION
N.A.Vazhenin
Moscow State Aviation institute, Russia

CHARACTERISTIC INVESTIGATION OF AVAILABILITY OF SURFACE AD COSMIC
ABONENTS IN SATELLITE INFORMATION NETWORK. ON THE BASIS OF LOW-ORBIT
ARTIFICIAL EARTH SATELLITES.
N.A. Vazhenin, Yu.M. Galanternik, S.V. Lyarsky
Moscow State Aviation Institute, Russia

RESEARCH OF LIMIT PROBABILITY-TIME CHARACTERISTICS OF RELIABILITY OF SATELLITE
CONNECTION NETWORKS WITH DYNAMICALLY VARIABLE TOPOLOGY
N.A. Vazhenin, S.V. Lyarskiy
Moscow State Aviation institute, Russia

SYSTEM OF OFFICIAL DISTRIBUTION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION WITH USE OF SECOND
TRANSPONDER OF DIRECT TELEVISION BROADCAST SATELLITE
V. Kukhtin, E. Nizamutdinowa, V.Radaykin
NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk-26, Russia

THE PULS RADIO NETWORK
Marui Stutterheim
USA

ANALYSIS OF LOW ORBIT SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS ALTERNATE DESIGN
U.G. Burlakov, V.M. Bondarik, V.A. Kukhtevich, E.V. Makeyev
Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Centre, Moscow, Russia

MODERN SMALL SATELLITES PROJECTS
M.Yu. Ovchinnikov, A.I. Dyachenko
Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics, Russian Academy of Sciences

ACOUSTOOPTICS POSSIBILITIES FOR INCREASING OF OPERATION EFFICIENCY
OF LOW-EARTH ORBIT SATELLITE ON-BOARD ADAPTIVE ARRAYS
V.G.Lopatin
A.F.Mozhaisky Military Engineering-Space Academy, St.-Petersburg, Russia

PROJECT SIBNET
L.V.Chemkov, V.Mostovoj, M.J.Gunn, J.V.Kovalenko, G.S.Sharygin
Science-Technology Firm "Horizont", Krasnoyarsk, Russia
Datron Telecommunications International Inc., USA
Tomsk State Academy of Control Systems and Radioelectronics, Russia

INFORMATION SATELLITE SYSTEMS FOR THE FINANCIAL INDUSTRY ORGANIZATIONS
G.Ya. Guskov
NPO "ELAS", Moscow, Russia

INFORMSVIAZ: LARGE-SCALE INTEGRATED SERVICES COMMUNICATION NETWORK (ISCN).
ISCN OF A BANK BEING TAKEN AS AN EXAMPLE
A. Shvedov
"INFORMSVIAZ", Moscow, Russia

"BANKIR" SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
V. Koutoukov, D. Stolyar
Global Information Systems Inc., Moscow, Russia

SATELLITE TELECOMMUNICATION IN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY
N.N. Yevtikhiev, M.I. Mysuankov, G.M. Chernuavsky, A.F. Mevis
Moscow Institute of Radioengineering, Electronics and Automatic, Russia

SPACE SYSTEMS FOR THE EXPLORATION OF THE LAND AND OCEAN NATURAL RESOURCES
AND PROPOSALS FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT
Yu.V. Trifonov, A. S. Selivanov
Russian Scientific and Research Institute of Electromechanics, Moscow, Russia
Research Institute of Space Device Building, Moscow, Russia

LOCSS - SYSTEM FOR EARTH MONITORING WITH THE DIRECT ACCESS TO SPACE INFORMATION
G.A. Avanesov, E.B. Krasnopevtseva, I.V. Polyansky
Space Research Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

GLOBAL INFORMATION SYSTEM USING "STORM" WARNING SIGNALS
G.A. Avanesov, Y.M. Bolovintsev, Y.B. Zoubarev, M.I. Krivosheev, Y.D.
Shavdiya Space Research Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Radio
Research Institute, Moscow, Russia

"TSIKADA-M-UTTH" - MULTIPURPOSES SATELLITE SYSTEM
V. Cheremisin, V. Kosenko, V. Zvonar, V. Chebotarev
NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk-26, Russia

OVERVIEW AND DESIGN OF THE "GLONASS" SYSTEM
V.N. Kazantsev, M.F. Reshetnev, A.G. Kozlov, V.F. Cheremisin
NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk-26, Russia

SYSTEM OF SPACE OPTO-ELECTRONIC COMPLEXES AND THEIR GROUND-BASED SUPPORT
G.Ya. Gus'kov, G.A. Yefremov, V.I. Karasyov, V.M. Kovtunenko, A.I.
Koyokin, D.I. Kozlov, T.V.  Kondranin, V.V. Nekrasov, N.M. Sinodkin
Moscow Physical-Technical Institute, Russia, NPO "ELAS"

DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF THE ECOMONITORING, USING SMALL SATELLITES AND
GROUND STATION NETWORK
E.V. Dmitriev, V.M. Egorov, T.V. Kondranin, M.G. Mazur, V.D.
Starlychanov, A.I. Unack NPC "OPTEKC", Research Institute of
Microdevices, Moscow, Russia

IMPROVEMENT TRENDS OF THE SPACE OBSERVATION SYSTEMS
G.Ya. Guskov, A.I. Koyokin, V.T. Panasenko, N.M. Sinodkin
NPO "ELAS", Moscow, Russia

THE MONITORING SYSTEM BASED ON DATE SPACE BORN PHOTOES TERRITORY
Igor Egorov, Anatoly Korikov, Lydmila Volkotrub
Control Systems and Radioelectronics Academy, Tomsk, Russia

ON THE PROBLEM OF COORDINATION OF ARCHITECTURAL DECISIONS FOR SATELLITE
SYSTEMS FOR REMOTE SENSING OF EARTH AND AUTOMATED ECOLOGICAL MONITORING
WITH APPROPRIATE GEOPHYSICAL AND ECOLOGICAL MODELS
A. Kurkovsky
Institute of Radioengineering and Electronics, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Moscow, Russia

ALGORITHMS OF MEASURING THE ANGULAR COORDINATES OF OBJECTS WITH AN UKNOWN
BASELINE ON THE BASIS OF GLOBALSATELLITE NAVIGATION SYSTEMS

V.A. Karnaukhov, Yu.L. Fateyev, V.F. Cheremisin, M.K. Chmykh
Krasnoyarsk State Technical University, NPO PM, Krasnoyarsk, Russia

IMPROVEMENT OF THE NAVIGATIONAL POSITION DETERMINATION STABILITY THROUGH
THE NAVIGATION SYSTEM MEMORY
S.D. Sylvestrov, O.A. Alekseev, V.V. Betanov
Military Academy of F.Dzerginsky, Moscow, Russia

SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS LINKS' ENERGY CAPACITIES REQUIRED TO PROVIDE
INTERFERENCE IMMUNITY RECEIVING OF PHASE SHIFT KEYED SIGNALS IN CASE
OF NON-LINEAR TRANSPONDER
N. Kobin, A. Seryoghin, D. Matiukhin
Satellite Communication Engineering Centre, Moscow, Russia

DESIGN OF A RAPIDLY ACQUIRING AND NOISE IMMUNE PLL FOR COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS
M.G. Bakulin, A.M. Shloma
Moscow Technical University of Telecommunications and Informatics,
Mezhkombank, Moscow, Russia

TV SIGNALS EFFECTIVE CODING FOR THE SATELLITE VIDEOCONFERENCING SYSTEMS
N. Kharatishvili, O. Zumburidze, I. Tcheidze
Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi, Republik of Georgia

STABILITY OF SATELLITE COMMUNICATION NETWORKS WITH DEMAND ASSIGNMENT
MULTIPLE ACCESS
Michael Fishman
Center Control Systems of Academician A.L.Mints Radiotechnocal
Institute, Moscow, Russia

COMMUNICATION SATELLITES: ORBITAL INFORMATION EFFICIENCY
Arkady Abolits
VNII Geosystem, Moscow, Russia

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF OSMAN NURI UCAN (ONU) - RECEIVER FOR TRELLIS CODED
QAM SCHEMES IN PORTIAL RESPONSE CHANNELS
Osman Nuri Ucan
Istanbul Technical University, Turkey

FAST COMPUTER PREDICTION OF RADIATED FIELDS OF MODERN ANTENNAS FOR EARTH
AND AIR/SPACE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS AND RADARS
Dimitry M. Sazonov, Mikhail D. Sazonov
Moscow Power Engineering Institute, Moscow, Russia

ON ANTENN LEAD SYSTEM FOR THE MICROWAVE SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS
EARTH STATION
A.V. Khevroline
State Research Radio Institute, Moscow, Russia

OMNIDIRECTIONAL SATELLITE ANTENNA SUPPLYING REJECTION
IN DIRECTION NEEDED
D.D. Gabrielyan, S.E. Mischenko, V.V. Shatskiy, M.A. Polyancev
Rostov  Rocket  Higher Military College, Rostov-on-Don
Automatised Systems Research Center of Joint Stock Company "ELAS",
Zelenograd, Moscow Region

RADIO HOLOGRAPHIC ANTENNA FOR IONOSPHERIC RETRAYSECTION IN
BROADCASTING AND COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS
D.M. Sazonov, V.I. Sergeev
Moscow Power Engineering Institute, Russia

THE CONTROLLED FLAT-LAYERED MEDIUM AS A BASIS FOR NEW METHODS AND
AIRBORNE COMMUNICATION DEVICES DEVELOPMENT
A.A. Golovkov
"Signal" plant, Voronezh, Russia

SATELLITE PERSONAL COMMUNICATION SYSTEM "SPS-SPUTNIK"
Alexander Burlaka, Pavel Petrov, Victor Sudarev
State Rocket Centre "Academian V.P. Makeev, Design Bureau, Miass, Russia

MICROSPUTNIKS OF PACKET RADIO TO 4 KGS - THE WARRANTY OF DECREASE
OF COSTS IN 20 TIME
V.A. Batuhtin, S.V. Strekalovskaya, Moscow, Russia
Enterprise "SVL", Moscow, Russia

SATELLITE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM IN RADIO AMATEUR FREQUENCY BAND "RADIO-M"
R.V. Alimov, A.M. Anosov, V.N. Bondarik, A.N. Zaitsev, O.N. Shipulya
Khrunichev State Research and Production Space Centre, Moscow, Russia

The ICSC'94 proceedings (vol. I, 245 p.p., vol. II, 239 p.p.)
published in English can be ordered from:

         ICSTI
         Kuusinen str., 21-B
         125252, Moscow, Russia
         Dr. Juri Gornostaev
         Fax: [phone]
         Phone: [phone]
         E-mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 09 Nov 94 11:16:39 -0400
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Dynamic Negotiation and Caller-ID


> From: Ross E Mitchell <[e-mail]>

> The following article, which I co-authored, has just appeared in the
> November/December 1994 issue of MIT's Technology Review.
 --lots skipped --

> But in the system we suggest,
> phones with caller ID displays can also be set up to automatically
> refuse calls when the number has not been provided by the caller.

Gee. wonder if they saw my Procomm + Caller-ID .ASP (freeware in the
TELECOM achives) from two years ago. This is exactly what I was
talking about. Particularly nice for dial-up connections to computers

> Applying the principles of dynamic negotiation, senders of electronic
> mail would have the option to identify or not identify themselves.
> Recipients could reject as undeliverable any e-mail with an
> unidentified sender.

E-Mail does not work the same way: to send mail a dynamic negotiation
must take place (can be done in relays). The recipient service
*always* knows at least the last node that processed the mail. Further
a *feature* of E-Mail (at least SMTP) is that the return address can
be made other than the sending address. If I want to make the return
address [e-mail], current implementations will happily
accept it.

However, properly implimented systems always provide the return path -
the "Received: from" line(s) in SMTP and the "PATH" line(s) in NNTP.
This is not to say that an uneducated user cannot be fooled, just that
it is possible to set up a system that cannot be easily fooled.
Internet "Caller-ID" already exists and is being used by some
government agencies (facinating subject in itself).

It is interesting to note that MIT is catching up in theory to where
hobbyists were in practise two years ago 8*).


Warmly,

Padgett

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

Date: 09 Nov 1994 09:08:11 GMT
From: [e-mail] (JeanBernard Condat)
Organization: FranceNet
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Medical Multimedia: MEDIMM


                         MEDICAL MULTIMEDIA

        1st global forum on instantaneous medical communication

             Jerusalem (Israel) -- from 14 to 18 May 1995


This first global forum on medical multimedia, initiated and organised
by the International Association for Medical Communication, proposes
three essential events:

THE FESTIVAL

This is the first call for entries to our world-wide competition, for
the best media used in medical communication. Many different
categories are open to you: CD-Rom, photo CD, CDI, CD video, video,
videodiscs, software, simulation mankins, TV programs, telemedicine,
health networks, etc.  The closing date is March 15th. Please contact
us for more information and the rules of procedure.

THE CONGRESS

The geatest specialists in the world will talk about the following themes:
- telemedicine: teleradiology, telediagnosis, etc.
- teleinformation: instantaneous information networks (Internet, Jerusalem
1);
- medical identity cards containing chips with the person's medical record.
Legislation on the use and confidentiality of those informations. Possibility
to normalize the medical informations and to create an international medical
identify card.

THE EXHIBITION

and presentation of all the latest medical communications'  technology.
You will discover our stands and workshops on the most revolutionary products
and techniques of medical communication:
- ll latest hard- and software,
- all applications, like telephone technology, "telematique",
visioconferences,
videotransmission, cable- or satellite broadcasting.

We will be happy to welcome you and give you more information about this
extraordinary event at:

              A.I.C.S., 9 villa Wagram, 75008 Paris, France
                Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone]
             Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alex Jeannopoulos)
Subject: AT&T Personal Term 510/510a Help Needed
Date: 09 Nov 1994 15:11:24 -0400
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


I am looking for any sort of manual for the AT&T Info System Personal
Terminal 510. I would like to find out what sort of jack these use and
if there is some sort of adapter which can be used for home phone
lines. Any info on either of these phones would be great. Also if
anyone has these for sale I am interested.


Thanks.

Alex Jeannopoulos

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

Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1994 03:11:44 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: GeoPort Technology


Passed along FYI to the Digest -

Strong Support for GeoPort Technology Paves Way for Development of
Standard Link Between Computers and Telephones


CUPERTINO, CA--October 19, 1994--Apple Computer, Inc., together with
leading computer and telephony vendors, today announced the emergence
of GeoPort as their preferred cross-platform computer telephony
interconnect standard.  Vendors participating in the announcement
include: AOX, Inc., AT&T Corp., Crystal Semiconductor Corp., Cypress
Research Corp., IBM Corp., Motorola, Inc., SAT Groupe SAGEM, Siemens
PN, Siemens Rolm Communications, Inc., and Zilog, Inc.

     GeoPort, developed by Apple Computer, is a plug-and-play serial
interface which is backward compatible with the serial ports used in
most personal computers, but offers over 200 times the bandwidth.
Beyond just providing a physical connection, it also hides the
differences between differing computer platforms and communications
systems, while allowing any kind of data to pass between them.

     Apple first introduced GeoPort in August 1993.  Later that year,
it began working with the major telephony and computer vendors
including AT&T, IBM, and Siemens Rolm, to refine GeoPort to fully meet
the needs of both communities.  Today's announcement reflects the
results of that joint effort.

     "With GeoPort, we are working to eliminate the technical and
economic barriers which have constrained the development and adoption
of personal communication products," said Rick Shriner, vice president
of Apple's core technologies group.  "With the support of both the
telephony and computer industries, we believe we are developing a
powerful building block for global communications and collaboration."

     GeoPort offers a powerful solution for both the computer and
telephony markets.  Telephone and computer customers will be able to
communicate and collaborate more easily and effectively than ever
before.  They will be able to talk to each other, send faxes and
computer data to each other, see each other, and share common
information, without having to worry about what kind of telephone,
telephone line, or computer happens to be present at each point of the
connection.

     Apple Computer, Inc., a recognized pioneer and innovator in the
information industry, creates powerful solutions based on easy to use
personal computers, servers, peripherals, software, online services,
and personal digital assistants.  Headquartered in Cupertino,
California, Apple (NASDAQ: APPL) develops, manufactures, licenses and
markets products, technologies and services for the business,
education, consumer, scientific & engineering and government markets
in over 140 countries.

     Apple, the Apple logo and Macintosh are registered trademarks, and
GeoPort is a trademark of Apple Computer, Inc.

ATTACHMENT

Fact Sheet

GeoPort Technology

GeoPort , developed by Apple Computer, is a plug-and-play serial
interface which is backward compatible with the serial ports used in
most personal computers, but offers over 200 times the bandwidth.
The serial communications architecture of GeoPort is optimized for
computer-telephony integration:

  - It allows any telephone (or telephone line, up to T1/E1 rates)
    to be connected to any computer, in any country in
    the world.
  - It supports any set of Telephony APIs (application programmatic
    interfaces) such as AT&T/Novell's TSAPI, IBM's
    CallPath, Microsoft's TAPI, or Apple's Telephone Manager.
  - It allows any telephone to take full advantage of the services
    provided by the computer, and vice versa.
  - It is inexpensive to implement, and uses existing technology.
  - It supports any type of information: computer data, voice,
    fax, modem, voice, video.
  - It allows multiple simultaneous streams of informationQincluding
    real time information like voice and videoQto pass through a
    telephone connection in order to be processed by the computer.

These services will allow vendors and developers the opportunity to
offer such features as:

  - An integrated mail-box for voice mail, email, and facsimiles.
  - Fax and modem capability over a digital telephone connection,
    like that found in an ISDN line or in many PBX environments.
  - Document sharing or other simultaneous voice and data
    applications over conventional phone lines.
  - Video conferencing over a PBX or ISDN connection.
  - Telephone assistant services, like automated call screening,
    call forwarding, and call tracking.

Apple, the Apple logo and Macintosh are registered trademarks and
GeoPort is a trademark of Apple Computer, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Summit '94)
Subject: Summit '94: Sponsors & Exhibitors
Date: 10 Nov 1994 04:53:27 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Summit '94 Sponsors

Bridgeway Corporation
Bull
Chipcom Corporation
Computer Associates International
Computer Measurement Group
Desktop Management Task Force
Digital Equipment Corporation
Hewlett-Packard
IBM
Intel Corporation
Interex
LEGENT Corporation
NetLabs
Network Management Forum
Objective Systems Integrators
SunSoft

Summit '94 Exhibitors

Accugraph
Acronym
API International
Armon Networking
Auto-trol Technology
AXON Networks
Boole & Babbage
Bridgeway Corporation
Bull
Cabletron Systems
Chipcom Corporation
Cisco Systems
Computer Associates International
Digital Equipment Corporation
DeskTalk Systems
Epilogue
Evolving Systems
Frontier Software
Hewlett-Packard
IBM
Intel Corporation
ISICAD
LEGENT Corporation
NetLabs
Network Computing
Network General Corporation
Network Management Forum
Novell
Objective Systems Integrators
Remedy Corporation
SNMP Research
SSDS
SunSoft
Synoptics
Telamon
Wandel & Goltermann

Summit '94 Publication Sponsors

Best Practices Report
Communications Week
Data Communications Magazine
Info World
LAN Times
Open Systems Today
SQL Forum Journal

    The Enterprise Management Summit '94 will be held November 14-18
     at the Santa Clara Convention Center, Santa Clara, California.
                          For more information:
                          Phone:[phone] or
                              415-512-0801
                            Fax:[phone]
                       EMail:[e-mail] or
                          [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If any of our readers go to see this
event in person, *please* send a detailed message to the Digest about
it afterward. Admittedly, I've been plugging this a lot lately, but
to me it seems to be a rather fantastic idea: bring the vendors all
together, tell them in essence to can their press release nonsense
and show that they know what they are talking about. It should have
been done years ago.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kronos)
Subject: Re: I'm Back -- At Least Part Time
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 06:42:40 GMT


TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]> writes:

> when I tried 800-CALL-INFO they would not accept the hospital number
> for billing either.

WOW!  The things people go through just to test an 800 number!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Smart aleck! I did not fake that heart
attack just to get in there and test whether or not I could stick them
with a few directory assistance calls. I did it to get a chance to
check out the phone room in general. Also, I wanted to see what the
708-933 prefix was all about and its connection to 708-677. 677 comes
as no big surprise; we have had ORChard (672) and ORchard (673 thru 677)
as long as I can remember. 'Orchard' is a popular word here in Skokie;
lots of things use it in their name here such as the Old Orchard Shopping
Mall, the Old Orchard Theatre, etc. I think it has to do with a long
time ago when there were actually lots of apple orchards around here.
Apples, they say, are good for your heart, but that's no reason for me
not to quit for tonight and go upstairs and eat the rest of that lasagna
in the fridge left over from dinner.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #407
******************************

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05254;
          8 Dec 94 6:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10348; Thu, 10 Nov 94 01:57:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10341; Thu, 10 Nov 94 01:57:03 CST
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 01:57:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #408

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 94 01:57:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 408

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned* (Wes Leatherock)
    Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned* (Mike King)
    MCI's 1-800-CALL-GOD (Steve Kass)
    Re: Charging for 800 Calls (was Re: 1-800-CALL-INFO) (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned* (jwm)
    Re: 1-800-CALL-INFO (Eric Paulak)
    Re: Caller Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned* (Lauren Weinstein)
    Re: T-1 is Much Better Than Frame Relay (Matthew P. Downs)
    Re: What Does *67 do? (Matthew P. Downs)
    Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232 (Robert Mah)
    Re: Need Amp to Boost DTMF Strength (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Help With Ring Detector Circuit (John Lundgren)
    Re: NANP Nightmare (Bob Schwartz)

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 America
On Line. 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: Tue, 09 Nov 94 06:44:12 GMT
Subject: Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned*


 > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:

       ... [text deleted] ...

 > Unfortunatly, the established method of getting directory assistance
 > (by dialing areacode-555-1212) is monopolized by AT&T and the telcos
 > who properly suck up to them. No matter who you have as your
 > presubscribed long distance carrier, what happens when you dial
 > areacode-555-1212? Well, your call goes to AT&T and they charge you
 > 75 cents!  So MCI is charging 75 cents just like AT&T, for two
 > requests just like AT&T, but how are they supposed to get access?   I
 > guess they could go on 900 and do it, but the trouble with 900 is its
 > rotten reputation these days.  Maybe they could use 700 (since all
 > carriers get to use the entire 700 space as they wish).    PAT]

         Pat, I'm puzzled by your statement that directory assistance
calls all go by AT&T.  As a retired Southwestern Bell employee who
fielded many complaints when charging for toll directory assistance
began, I believe I became pretty familiar with calls to NPA-555-1212
and how they work.

         The directory assistance base is maintained by the LEC.  A
call to NPA-555-1212 is switched by any carrier just like any other
call to a seven-digit number, and routes at the terminating area code
to an LEC directory assistance operator.  The LEC charges the IXC a
fixed amount (I believe it used to be 45 or 50 cents, but I don't
recall for sure and it may have changed in the last two or three
years).  The IXC can charge their customers whatever they wish or have
tariffed, or can waive the charge if the customer then completes a
call to the same area code.

         I have a various times been PIC'd to AT&T, MCI and Sprint, as
well as carrying their credit cards.  I have also been a user of 10XXX
codes, for comparative purposes or just for the heck of it.  The
billing for NPA-555-1212 calls has always been from the carrier I was
using at the time, whether the PIC'd carrier or the 10XXX carrier or
the credit card carrier.

         In fact, I remember my last Sprint credit card bill had an
entry for a call from Tulsa (area code 918) to 405-555-1212,
immediately followed by a call to a number in Enid, Oklahoma (also in
the 405 area and, as a matter of fact, the number I had just gotten by
calling 405-555-1212.)  As I say, the call to 405-555-1212 showed on
my Sprint bill with a charge of ".00".

         I've never had an AT&T charge for a call to NPA-555-1212
unless AT&T was the carrier I was using at the time; in fact, I first
started using MCI experimentally because their charge for a call to
NPA-555-1212 was marginally less than AT&T's (5 cents cheaper, I
believe).


Wes Leatherock
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But *what company* actually serviced the
call?  What company responded to you?  Whose operators were talking to
you?  In other words, if there is a telephone sitting somewhere with the
number 555-1212 on the front of it, who is sitting there answering the
calls?  I believe it is AT&T in most or all cases. Have you forgotten
how in the early days of competition MCI used to advise its customers to
'use AC-555-1212 for directory because it is free, then after you get
the number place your call via MCI' ?   Have you forgotten how the main
reason AT&T quit giving free directory assistance -- a tradition for
many, many years since the beginning of the phone itself -- was because
all the come-latelys were getting AT&T to do the lookups for free while
they in turn got the revenue for the call itself?

Certainly, if you subscribe to MCI/Sprint/whoever you get billed by
whoever ... but that is because the prime source of the information, that
is, AT&T bills *them* just like it bills its own customers, and they in
turn pass along the charge. That's all that's happening. So I still
maintain that 555-1212 is still an AT&T monopoly: you can purchase the
information direct from them (by default if their customer) or you can
purchase the information *resold to you* by one of their competitors who
obtains it for you transparently when you dial 555-1212 via one of the
competitors. If some other carrier wants to run their own database -- not
just buy and immediatly resell AT&T to you, they have to use some other
number to do it on, since 555-1212 latches right into the AT&T centers.
Did you think that somehow MCI and the others intercept calls to 555-1212
and do their own thing with it? Not hardly ... so if MCI wants to
collect its own data from whatever sources and sell its own data -- not
just resell AT&T -- what telephone number should they use?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike King)
Subject: Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned*
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1994 00:52:27 GMT


In TELECOM Digest V14 #401, Pat wrote:

> Unfortunatly, the established method of getting directory assistance
> (by dialing areacode-555-1212) is monopolized by AT&T and the telcos
> who properly suck up to them. No matter who you have as your presubscribed
> long distance carrier, what happens when you dial areacode-555-1212?
> Well, your call goes to AT&T and they charge you 75 cents!  So MCI is

Um, Pat, I'm presubscribed to Sprint, and if I dial 1+NPA+555-1212, as
1long as the NPA is outside my LATA, the call is completed and billed
by Sprint.

It has worked that way for me ever since Equal Access, with service in
three different RBOCS.

At one time, AT&T would "forgive" up to two inter-LATA 555 calls a
month, as long as two or more inter-LATA calls were placed via AT&T.
I don't know if that's still true.  I remember that for a long time,
1+NPA+555 calls could be made for free from public (LEC) pay phones,
presumably because charged calls were also being completed from those
phones.  I never bothered to try from a COCOT.


Mike King    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Read my earlier reply. You dial 555-1212
and Sprint connects to an *AT&T directory assistance center somewhere*
and you get your information. AT&T bills Sprint, Sprint bills you. As
an experiment try dialing various AC-555-1212 and see how, as often as
not the call is picked up with 'AT&T' as part of the answer phrase,
regardless of which carrier you used to get there. Correct me if I am
wrong.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1994 00:09:55 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: MCI's 1-800-CALL-GOD


> From page 20 of my Bell Atlantic Morris County July 1994 -June 1995
telephone directory:

"800 Service"
There is no charge to you when you call
"800" telephone numbers
- - - - - - -
To call an "800" number, dial
1 + 800 + 7-digit number

Something is indeed wrong when "900" service providers must disclose
phone-bill charges in the call, but not "800" providers.


Steve Kass/ Drew U/ [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Charging for 800 Calls (was Re: 1-800-CALL-INFO)
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1994 05:44:34 GMT


Barry Margolin <[e-mail]> writes:

> Imagine a law office that provides an 800 number, to make it easier
> for clients to reach them from out of state.  If I use that number to
> call my lawyer, I wouldn't be surprised to be billed later for the
> time that we spent on the phone.

> The kicker is that I would also expect to be billed for the time if I
> called their normal number.  In fact, I would expect the bill to be
> the same in either case -- I'm paying for the lawyer's time, not the
> phone service.

But most law firms attempt to capture long-distance calls made on
behalf of a client and bill them to the client as case expenses
(distinct from legal fees). If you called the 800 number, the law firm
advanced those costs on your behalf and would likely bill you for
them, whereas if you called the regular number, YOU paid those charges
out of your own pocket.

So while the LEGAL FEES for either situation would be the same, the billable
COSTS would not be.


Andrew Laurence             Oakland, California USA
[e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1994 01:55:30 GMT
From: [e-mail] (jwm)
Subject: Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned*
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst


Our Moderator writes:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Would you also ban 1-800-CALL-ATT? As
> memory serves, you can place long distance calls via that number and
> one of the options is 'press (x) to have this call billed to the number
> you are calling from ...'

1-800-CALL-ATT offers collect, third-party, person-to-person, calling
card, and Visa/MasterCard billing.  I have used the number for years,
and I have never heard the prompt you describe.  EasyReach 700 offers
the bill-to-calling-number option, though.  Perhaps this is the prompt
you were thinking of.

> Would you ban all the long distance companies
> which use some 800 number as a way to reach their switch when other
> access is unavailable (such as 10xxx being blocked) under the same
> rationale, or is this National Pick On MCI Week?

I wouldn't ban such services, but I would restrict them from billing
calls to the calling number.  I have both 3rd party and collect
screening on my line, yet MCI (whose 1-800-COLLECT properly rejects
calls to my number) accepted a 1-800-CALL-INFO call without requesting
alternative billing arrangements.

> Unfortunatly, the established method of getting directory assistance
> (by dialing areacode-555-1212) is monopolized by AT&T and the telcos
> who properly suck up to them. No matter who you have as your presubscribed
> long distance carrier, what happens when you dial areacode-555-1212?
> Well, your call goes to AT&T and they charge you 75 cents!  So MCI is
> charging 75 cents just like AT&T, for two requests just like AT&T, but
> how are they supposed to get access?

These are the people who helped bring down the mighty Bell System.
Why couldn't they seek an extension of the equal access requirement
for interLATA DA?  It's simple: 1-NPA-555-1212 is routed to the
presubscribed carrier.  That carrier has facilities set up to handle
such calls, and the RBOCs are required to provide each IXC with
database access and operator services under the same agreement these
companies have with AT&T.  This would eliminate the scavenger hunt
methodology MCI seems to be using in number collection, thereby
improving the quality of service.  800 numbers could be maintained as
strictly free of bill-to-calling-number charges, and all carriers
would have the opportunity for an equal slice of the DA market.  (Or
at least a slice proportional to their presubscribed market share.)
I'm surprised that such an arrangement wasn't worked out in the early
80's.

No matter how you slice it, this "free call, charge for info" scheme
smacks of deception.  800-based calling services that accept calling
cards, credit cards, or require 3rd party or collect arrangements, and
800-based mail order lines require the caller to take a proactive step
in order to be billed.  If I give out a calling card number, or give
an operator voice authorization to bill to my line, or charge
merchandise, I *know* that I'm being charged, and there is relatively
little danger of my casually or mistakenly approving charges to my
account. 1-800-CALL-INFO and services of its kind make this kind of
billing very likely, and to some extent rely on public ignorance about
the intricacies of modern telephony.


Jeffrey W. McKeough    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 10 Nov 94 00:20:00 EDT
From: [e-mail] (Eric Paulak)
Subject: Re: 1-800-CALL-INFO


Due to some well thought-out lobbying on the part of both long
distance and local carriers, directory assistance services were given
an exemption to the regulations that govern 800 pay-per-call services.

So, even though 1-800-CALL-INFO is in all sense of the word an 800
pay-per-call service, it does not have to list its rates during the
call, it does not have to print its rates at a certain size in
ralationship to the rest of its ads, it does not require presubscription
and the person calling does not have to be the person under whose name
the phone is listed.

As a result, even though Nynex, Bell Atlantic, BellSouth and Ameritech
will not currently bill for 800 pay-per-call services, they will pass
the bills through for 1-800-CALL-INFO.

Pat, the attatched article is to be printed as my weekly column in Network
World magazine on Oct. 24th. Because of copyright, it must have the Network
World name and date published with it.

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

Rate & Tariff Monitor
1-800-CALL-INFO: Just Another Pay-Per-Call Number

                         by Eric Paulak

     1-800-COLLECT was a marketing coup for MCI. It took an overlooked
service -- collect calling -- that AT&T controlled and turned it on
its head, saving callers money and earning MCI a bundle at the same
time.

     But now the carrier has gone to far.

     In a new attempt to take over an AT&T-controlled fringe market --
long distance directory assistance -- MCI has launched
1-800-CALL-INFO.

     The national directory service does offer some benefits over
standard directory service -- it gives you two numbers for the price
of one -- but there's some question as to how accurate the service is,
plus it could ultimately cost businesses more. In addition, 1-800-CALL-INFO
gives all the appearances of an 800 pay-per-call number, which has
many users irate.

     The way 1-800-CALL-INFO works is that a caller dials the number
-- 1- 800-225-5463 -- and tells the operator a city and state or
country and the person's name. Callers are allowed to get two numbers
with each call for $.75, compared to $.75/number with standard
directory assistance. That charge is then billed back on your local
bill.

     In addition, after the operator gives you the numbers, you also
get the option of having your call placed over MCI's network and
billed at MCI's Residential Dial 1 rates or international Direct
Distance Dial rates.

     If you're an MCI residential customer, this is actually a good
deal for you. The calls count toward any savings plan you have, and
you get two directory assistance numbers for the price of one.

     If you're a business user -- whether with MCI or any other
carrier -- this service is nothing but bad news. You would get hit
with the $.75 charge no matter what DA service someone called. But
with the option to have the call placed at MCI's Residential Dial 1
rates, you'll end up with callers bypassing your cheaper businesses
rates.

     How much could it cost you? MCI's Residential Dial 1 rates are
$.2299 to $.3299/minute, depending on mileage. Whereas, MCI's most
expensive Vnet rates are $.203 to $.262/minute, also depending on
mileage. MCI says they eventually will make 1-800-CALL-INFO part of
its businesses services, but when specifically, they won't say.

     The lower business rates aren't the only thing you lose by
dialing 1- 800-CALL-INFO; you also lose the added volume towards your
volume discounts.  Miss a volume commitment, and you could end up
paying hefty penalties.

     And while you're paying the higher rates, you may not even be
getting the right phone numbers. When checking out the service, I
asked for numbers for two people -- one in Omaha and one in
Shepherdstown, W.V. -- both of whom moved to new locations about six
months ago. MCI's operators gave me their old numbers. Calls to the
NPA-555-1212 operator yielded the correct numbers.

     About a dozen subscribers to an Internet list-serve called the
Telecom Digest had the same problem.

     MCI has its own proprietary database of phone numbers that it
uses and admits that there may be a few errors. But as the service
matures, the number of errors will be reduced. In the meantime, if MCI
does give you a wrong number, you can get the $.75 credited back to
you.

    People shouldn't be surprised that MCI has come out with
1-800-CALL-INFO. After all, MCI does provide service to about
two-thirds of all the dial- a-porn services that are out there,
according to a list of 800 pay-per-call numbers CCMI has compiled.

     The only difference between this service and a sex line is that
as a directory assistance service, 1-800-CALL-INFO is exempt from
having to get prior approval before billing you. MCI also doesn't have
to tell you the cost of the call upfront.

     To avoid getting hit with these charges, you have two options;
you can block [phone] in your PBX; or you can have MCI screen
the call for you.  To have the calls screened, you have to call MCI at
[phone], or fax a list of phone numbers on company letterhead
you want screened to [phone].

     With the screening service, users would still be able to call
from your business, but they would have to bill it to a credit card or
a third party.

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

Date: Tue, 09 Nov 94 20:09:00 PST
From: [e-mail] (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: Re: Caller Charging 800 Numbers Should Be *Banned*


As Pat mentioned in a comment to a previous message, I feel that it is
not appropriate for charges to be applied to the caller's phone bill
(for any reason) as the result of an 800 call.  I don't care if the
callee says they are charging for the information and not the
call -- the bottom line is that you make the call, and an arbitrary
charge shows up on your bill.  You have no warning that it is a
charging call, and you have no reasonable way to block such calls.

Pat's right of course that (area code)+555-1212 was once a free call.
But there's a big difference between changing the status of a single
set of seven digits that (as far as most people are concerned) "lives"
all by itself, versus suddenly facing the prospect that any random 800
number -- an entire area code we've come to expect to be non-charging to
the caller -- might now (surprise) charge the caller!

I also agree with the suggestion that the most reasonable solution is
to move *all* 800 calls that have the potential of placing a charge on
the caller's phone bill to some other area code.  If a service is
offered via an 800 number, they can make other billing arrangements
with the caller.  But make the phone bill chargers and alternate
carrier access numbers move over to 700, or 500, or some other area
code -- the technology is now in place to allow plenty of new code
assignments, especially with the removal of the second digit 0/1 area
code restrictions.

Pat mentioned that such services could move over to 900, but then
suggested that 900 has a pretty bad reputation these days.  In fact, I
can't see any difference between charging the caller to an 800 number
and charging the caller to a 900 number -- except that in the case of
800 numbers there's no subscriber-based blocking, there are
non-caller-charging calls you still want to reach, there's no warning
of charges, and apparently no established mechanisms to dispute such
charges.  I would submit that if caller-charging 800 numbers continue
to be allowed and expand, and continue to become the obvious
900-blocking workaround that they are, it won't be long at all before
800 numbers cause the same concerns to callers that 900 numbers do
now.  That could be devastating to the conventional users of 800
numbers who just want a mechanism for their customers to use that
doesn't charge the caller.

The whole concept of caller-charging 800 numbers needs to be
reconsidered -- and the faster the better.


 --Lauren--


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My thanks to several other writers who
commented on this topic but have not been included here. And to the
several of you (also not included here) who mentioned that you subscribe
to carrier 'X' and get your DA calls billed by carrier 'X', all I can
say is ask your carrier who *they* purchase the information from which
they immediatly and transparently resell to you.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
Subject: Re: T-1 is Much Better Than Frame Relay
Date: 10 Nov 1994 00:31:29 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


[e-mail] (Jeff Buckingham) writes:

> We had an interesting experience at Call America triing to buy Frame
> Relay.  We needed to connect offices in Salinas, Fresno, Bakersfield,
> and Santa Barbara with our Main office in San Luis Obispo. We had
> planned to connect to frame relay at the T-1 level from San Luis
> Obispo. The other offices were going to be connected at the 56k level.
> The bids we got from AT&T, MCI, and Sprint were about $6700.00 per
> month.

> We then discovered that we can purchase T-1's to each office for about
> $2000.00 per month. This was very interesting because we were able to
> buy 24 times the bandwidth for 1/3 of the price.

> We are a long distance carrier and we do purchase T-1's for about 7-15
> cents per circuit mile (each T-1 has 24 circuit miles per mile of
> distance) so our situation may be different from some end users but I
> really think that the whole frame relay thing is vastly over hyped and
> many companies are being sold frame relay who do not really need it.

I was always under the impression that the advantages for Frame Relay
was realized when full T1 utilization was not needed.  Therefore, it
makes sense to me that it would cost more for what you described.  Or
alternatively, it was tarrifed that way in order to catch people that
don't understand and get full T1 frame relay set-up.  Of course,
justifying it to the PUC by saying we have to recover the cost of the
equipment.  8^) ...


Matt

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
Subject: Re: What Does *67 do?
Date: 09 Nov 1994 22:33:10 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


[e-mail] (Robert Patterson) writes:

> I live in the San Francisco Bay Area under the auspices of PacBell.
> They do not offer CallerID.  When I dial *67 (apparently the CallerID
> on/off signal) I get a couple of clicks and a dial tone.  The
> switching department at PacBell vehemently claims that nothing is
> happening.  Anyone with an idea?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What's happening is that the local
> switch is accepting your command to 'do not pass calling number ID
> to call recipient' just as it is supposed to do. And then, it proceeds
> not to give out that information ... which it wouldn't do anyway
> under the present circumstances there, but that is beside the point.
> They are using a version of software which allows for *67 and it
> is probably easier for them to leave it as is rather than disable
> the use of that command (which does nothing anyway). For instance,
> in some exchanges in Chicago which were not Caller-ID equipped, meaning
> calls from phones in that area showed up as 'out of area' on caller
> identification boxes elsewhere, *67 still worked as you describe. I
> guess they figured soon enough it would have a purpose, so they just
> left it alone. I imagine PacBell feels the same way. Why bother to
> change/eliminate it everywhere then possibly have to go and put it
> back in at a future time.    PAT]

I have had different meanings for *67, like auto redial last person
who called me, etc.  The numbers depend upon which local carrier you
have ...


Matt


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Umm ... I think *60 and *65 have some
meaning here for 'last number redial' and things like that. I no longer
subscribe to any of those things. Does anyone have a complete list of
the 'star codes' as they relate to all the new features?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Mah)
Subject: Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1994 10:52:07 -0500
Organization: One Step Beyond


Lance Ellinghaus <[e-mail]> wrote:

> A company called Primary Access has a product that will take a T1 (24
> VOICE channels) and interpret the DS0 channels as modem connections
> (v.32, v.42bis, etc..) and output standard RS232 to hook to a system.

> What other companies have something like this?  Comments on their
> products?  Contacts to get more information?

Well, their domain name is PRIACC.COM, but they only seem to have
e-mail connectivity at the moment (no WWW, FTP, etc.).

If you get any pricing info on this product/service, I would be
interested as a normal channel bank costs mucho money.


Cheers,

Robert S. Mah           Software Development          +1.212.947.6507
One Step Beyond        and Network Consulting          [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Need Amp to Boost DTMF Strength
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1994 17:14:15 GMT


Les Reeves ([e-mail]) wrote:

> WATS resellers used the R-TEC (Reliance Comm/Tec) VFR5050 2-Wire to
> 2-Wire repeater for boosting signals.  The repeater is easy to set up,
> and unconditionally stable.  It automatically disables itself when
> data carriers of any sort are detected.

I use one of these on an OPX line between a Panasonic PBX and an
off-premises station.  I don't particularly like it, however.  It is
half-duplex, like a speakerphone.  You can't interrupt a long-talking
far-end speaker, and you can't hear the far end at all if there is a
significant background noise level at the near end.

But, can anybody suggest a better solution?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Help With Ring Detector Circuit
Date: 09 Nov 1994 21:22:58 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Tyson Norris ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am trying to build some sort of ring dectection circuit for
> an answering machine. Basically I just need the lines to be connected to
> the machine when the voltage goes above 90 (ring) and disconnected when
> the voltage drops to 8 (calling party hangs up). I know I'm going to have
> to use some sort of relays etc. but have little experience and would
> appreciate any pointers anyone would offer.

I've used NE-2H neon bulbs for a ring detector.  They're available at
Radio Snack.  I put one in series with a 22K resistor across the
incoming line.  Polarity isn't important.  The bulb is put next to a
photocell inside a small bottle cap or other dark opaque container,
and some black silicone seal to hold it in place and keep out the
light.  The leads of the photocell are run to the plus voltage and the
base of a transistor, with enough current capacity to drive a relay.
Put a .1 uF capacitor across the photocell to keei transients from
activating the relay.  Depending on the current, you might need two
transistors connected in Darlington fashion.  Again, the polarity of
the photocell isn't important.


    John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
    Rancho Santiago Community College District
    17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
[e-mail]\[e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: NANP Nightmare
From: [e-mail] (Bob Schwartz)
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 94 16:02:33 PDT
Organization: Bill Correctors, Inc., Marin County, California


[e-mail] (Daniel E. Ganek) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail].
> com (Van Hefner) writes:

>> Boston Business Misses Phone Calls Due to Bungled Exchange
>> Oct. 8 -- Lori Moretti lives to hear the phone ring. But since she
>> recently moved her public relations firm to its new Boston locale near
>> Fort Point Channel, the lines have been unusually quiet.

> [ Story about a company losing business because of a new phobe exchange]

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: NYNEX cannot really be blamed because
>> the proprietors of some private phone systems at large companies,
>> universities, etc are klutzes. People wanted a telephone network where
>> everyone did thier own thing, so that's what they got now over ten
>> years ago. I used to work for a large department store downtown on a
>> part time basis trying to straighten out the mess that predecessors
>> had made of the Rolm PBX there. It was a mess!  There were lots of

> Question: Why do private systems require such programming at all?
> If I dial an unused exchange NYNEX tells me. Why don't private systems
> just put the call thru and let the CO handle it??

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They rarely 'require' such programming and
> can in fact be configured to just let everything past unchecked. The reason
> this is not often done is because the owner of the private system has no
> convenient method of collecting the charges from his users, so rather than
> lose large amounts of money from users who would otherwise get a free ride
> on his phone system, all sorts of obstacles are programmed into the switch
> to make 'unauthorized' calls difficult or impossible to complete. Where
> the problem comes in is that telco can't (usually) be counted on to refuse
> to complete calls with toll charges attached. Usually whatever protection
> the PBX has against fraud and misuse has to come as a result of the owner
> installing it. Deciding which outgoing calls are going to result in
> simply reaching a telco intercept and which are going to result in big $$
> billed to the owner is difficult; thus the owner has to take on the
> burden of sorting it all out.   PAT]

Pat,

If I am a LARGE user, the type that tends to have a PBX in the first
place, then I need this information on new prefixes and area codes for
my ARS (Automatic Route Selection) or FRS (foreign route selection, or
LCR (least cost routing) tables in order to take advantage of FEX
circuits, tie lines, feature group connections, intra company off
premises routing via centrex lines or a myriad of other factors that
have little or nothing to do with fraud or collecting from users. It
has everything to do with keeping costs down. Financial Telecommunications
Management, our specialty.


Regards,

Bob Schwartz                                       [e-mail]
Bill Correctors, Inc.   [phone]   Marin County, California

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #408
******************************

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09388;
          11 Nov 94 0:26 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03550; Thu, 10 Nov 94 19:29:39 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03543; Thu, 10 Nov 94 19:29:36 CST
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 19:29:36 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #409

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 94 19:28:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 409

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    ACM SIGCOMM'95 Call For Papers (Srinivasan Keshav)
    Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned* (Wes Leatherock)
    Who Provides DA? (John R. Levine)
    Local Telcos Provide DA to Carriers (Tom Smith)
    Forgiving Directory Assistance Charges (Andrew A. Poe)
    Star Codes On Most Telco Systems (Dale Dulberger)

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 America
On Line. 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] (srinivasan keshav)
Subject: ACM SIGCOMM'95 Call For Papers
Organization: Info. Sci. Div., AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 21:29:59 GMT


                       Call  for  Papers
                  ACM  SIGCOMM'95  CONFERENCE

   Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols
                  for Computer Communication

                 Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA

                August 30 to September 1, 1995
          (Tutorials and Workshop, August 28 and 29)

   An  international forum on computer communication network
         applications and technologies, architectures,
                  protocols, and algorithms.

SIGCOMM'95 seeks papers about significant contributions to the broad
field of computer and data communication networks.  Authors are
invited to submit full papers concerned with both theory and practice.
Papers specifically focused on "higher- layer" issues of network
infrastructure, management, and distributed application services are
particularly encouraged.  The areas of interest include, but are not
limited to:

*    Distributed application infrastructure paradigms;

*    Distributed common application services, middleware
     protocols;

*    Resource sharing, quality of service, multi-media
     networks;

*    Heterogeneous interworking, large scale networks;

*    Network management;

*    Important experimental results from operational networks;

*    High-speed networks, routing and addressing;

*    Wireless networking, support for mobile hosts;

*    Analysis and design of computer network architectures and
     algorithms; and

*    Protocol specification, verification, and analysis.

SIGCOMM'95 is a single-track, highly selective conference where
successful submissions typically report results firmly substantiated
by experiment, implementation, simulation, or mathematical analysis.

The SIGCOMM'95 committee is planning both an excellent technical
program and related activities. In addition to the presentation of
papers and results, SIGCOMM'95 will offer tutorials and workshops by
noted instructors on the two days preceding the actual conference.  We
also plan an evening session where speculative results and outrageous
opinions can be presented and discussed.

Papers must be less than 20 double-spaced pages long (formatted for
printing in the Proceedings, papers may not be longer than 12 pages),
have an abstract of 100-150 words, and be original material that has
not been previously published nor is currently under review by another
conference or journal.

Important Dates:
          Paper submissions:            30 January 1995
          Tutorial/workshop proposals:  30 January 1995
          Notification of acceptance:   17 April 1995
          Camera ready papers due:      22 May 1995

All submitted papers will be judged based on their quality and
relevance through double-blind reviewing where the identities of the
authors are withheld from the reviewers.  Authors names should not
appear on the paper or in the postscript file for electronic
submissions.  A cover letter is required that identifies the paper
title and lists the name, affiliation, telephone/fax numbers, and
e-mail address of all authors.  Authors of accepted papers need to
sign an ACM copyright release form. The Proceedings of the conference
will be published as a special issue of ACM SIGCOMM Computer
Communication Review.  The program committee may also select a few
papers for possible publication in the IEEE/ACM Transactions on
Networking.

Paper submissions should be sent to:
David Clark/Karen Sollins, Program Chairs at address below OR
electronic submissions to:  [e-mail]

Five copies are required for paper submissions. Electronic submissions
(preferred) should be uuencoded, compressed postscript.  Authors
should separately e-mail the title, author names and abstract of their
paper to the program chairs and identify any special equipment that
will be required during its presentation. Due to the high number of
anticipated submissions, authors are encouraged to strictly adhere to
the submission date.

SIGCOMM'95 will begin with two days of tutorials/workshops, each of
which is intended to cover a single topic in detail.  Proposals are
solicited from individuals willing to give tutorials, which may be
either a half day (4 hours) or a full day in length and cover topics
at an introductory or advanced level. Tutorial and workshop
submissions should be made to the Tutorial Chair noted below and
include an extended abstract and outline (2-4 pages), and an
indication of length, objectives, and intended audience.

Student Paper Award: Papers submitted by students will enter a
student-paper award contest.  Among the accepted papers, a maximum of
four outstanding papers will be awarded full conference registration
and a travel grant of $500 US dollars.  To be eligible the student
must be the sole author of the paper, or the first author and primary
contributor.  A cover letter must identify the paper as a candidate
for this competition.

General Chair:
Stuart Wecker
Symmetrix, Inc.
One Cranberry Hill
Lexington, MA 02173 U.S.A.
Ph: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

Program Co-Chairs:
David Clark and Karen Sollins
M.I.T. Laboratory for Computer Science
545 Technology Square
Cambridge, MA 02139 U.S.A.
David Clark: [phone]
Karen Sollins: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

Treasurer:
Julio Escobar, BBN
Ph: [phone]
[e-mail]

Publicity Chair:
S. Keshav, Bell Labs
Ph: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

Tutorial Chair:
William Hawe, DEC
Ph: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

Registration Chair:
Liann DiMare, Mitre Corp.
Ph: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

Publications Chair:
Abhaya Asthana, Bell Labs
Ph: [phone]
E-mail: [e-mail]

Program Committee:
Ian Akyildiz             Georgia Inst of Tech, USA
Ernst Biersack           Institut EURECOM, France
Jean-Chrysostome Bolot   INRIA, France
Lillian Cassel           Villanova Univ, USA
Lyman Chapin             BBN, USA
Jon Crowcroft            Univ College London, UK
Peter Danzig             USC, USA
Bruce Davie              Bellcore, USA
Stephen Deering          Xerox, USA
Gary Delp                IBM, USA
Deborah Estrin           USC, USA
Sally Floyd              LBL, USA
Paul Francis             NTT, Japan
Inder Gopal              IBM, USA
David Greaves            U of Cambridge, UK
Hemant Kanakia           AT&T, USA
Jim Kurose               U of Massachusetts, USA
Lawrence Landweber       U of Wisconsin, USA
Will Leland              Bellcore, USA
Larry Masinter           Xerox, USA
Derek McAuley            U of Cambridge, UK
David Mills              U of Delaware, USA
Jeffrey Mogul            DEC, USA
Gerald Neufeld           U of British Columbia, Can
Craig Partridge          BBN, USA
Joseph Pasquale          U of Cal, San Diego, USA
Krzystztof Pawlikowski   U of Canterbury, New Zealand
Larry Peterson           U of Arizona, USA
Stephen Pink             SICS, Sweden
Bernhard Plattner        ETH, Zurich, Switzerland
Michael Schwartz         U of Colorado, USA
Scott Shenker            Xerox, USA
Ellen Siegel             Xerox, USA
Jonathan Smith           U of Penn, USA
Martha Steenstrup        BBN, USA
James Sterbenz           GTE, USA
Jonathan Turner          Washington U, St. Louis, USA
Greg Watson              Hewlett Packard, USA
Lixia Zhang              Xerox, USA

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 15:54:42
Subject: Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should be *Banned*


 ... [much text deleted about billing for XXX-555-1212 calls] ...

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But *what company* actually serviced
> the call?  What company responded to you?  Whose operators were
> talking to you?  In other words, if there is a telephone sitting
> somewhere with the number 555-1212 on the front of it, who is
> sitting there answering the calls?  I believe it is AT&T in most or
> all cases.

 ... [more text deleted] ...

         Pat, I never heard of an AT&T Directory Assistance operator.
Toll operators, yes, but not Directory Assistance.  Even in the days
when the Bell System was part of AT&T, all Directory Assistance
operators, at least in Southwestern Bell, were Southwestern Bell
operators (except for independent company exchanges, which had and
have their own DA operators in some cases).

          There isn't a "telephone" with 555-1212 -- there are a row
(or entire floors or more) of operator positions served by some form
of Automatic Call Distributor.  Nowadays they sit at terminals and
press keys with designations like "business" or "residence" or other
specialized designations, and type perhaps the first four letters of
the name desired.  Other keys scroll, etc., and perform other
specialized functions.  There are indicators -- they used to be light
signals but may be indications on the screen now -- as to the class of
call, where it is a local DA call or an incoming call from the network
or whatever.

          Where would AT&T get a database to handle 555-1212 calls?
The directory assistance database is generated as part of the service
order activity when an access line is installed, moved or
disconnected.  This has always been done only by the RBOC.  In the
days when this database was on paper, this was on loose leaf pages in
the same format as the public directory.  During the night a printer
typeset and printed the "daily addenda", also in loose leaf format,
with the service order activity for the previous day, and delivered it
to the DA office early in the morning in sufficient quantity for all
positions.  (One copy of the service order was physically delivered to
the printer, and the printer had to be able to read and understand all
the entries on the order which related to directory activity ... not a
simple thing where indents and double indents and changes in main
listings and so forth were involved.  The contract with the printer
called for a pretty close relationship, and was for a considerable
term to make it worthwhile for the printer to make all these
arrangements, train his people, and arrange to get the daily addenda
to each DA office.)  The listings were set physically on Linotype or
Intertype lead slugs, which after use in the daily addenda were moved
to the galleys from which the reprint would be printed, and later the
public directory was printed from the same slugs.  In the days before
computer manipulation could be done, this was by far the fastest and
most convenient arrangement for moving and placing the listings in the
proper order.  Directory printing is a huge operation, and in those
days the printer maintained all the listings on lead slugs.

         As I recall, the daily addenda was cumulative, i.e., all the
changes were worked into the previous day's work so that the only
references which needed to be consulted were the main listings and the
daily addenda.

         At intervals (I believe for Oklahoma City it was every six
weeks) all the changes were worked into the main galleys and the
entire directory was reprinted in the looseleaf format for the DA
operators.  The interval was determined by how soon the daily addenda
became too cumbersome to use as a separate item.

         (Incidentally, considerable security surrounded the printing
and transport of the daily addenda, and the reprints for that matter,
since there are many firms eager for all the current new connects,
etc., and there were cases where copies were sold by a dishonest
person for amounts in the thousands of dollars.)

         Now, of course, the database is created electronically as
part of the service order system, but there is no way for AT&T to get
their hands on this, since service orders are created and completed by
the RBOC.

         AT&T has no more right to access this database than anyone
else, and all the IXCs have always had to get DA service from the
RBOC.  Neither AT&T, nor any of the other IXCs, have any way to get
this information except from the RBOCs, since all the activity is
created by the RBOCs.

     Jeffrey W. McKeough <[e-mail]> also addresses
the mechanics in his posting that you included in the same issue:

 ... [text deleted] ...

> These are the people who helped bring down the mighty Bell System.
> Why couldn't they seek an extension of the equal access requirement
> for interLATA DA?  It's simple: 1-NPA-555-1212 is routed to the
> presubscribed carrier.  That carrier has facilities set up to
> handle such calls, and the RBOCs are required to provide each IXC
> with database access and operator services under the same agreement
> these companies have with AT&T.

     And to answer another part of Pat's comments:

> Have you forgotten how in the early days of competition MCI used to
> advise its customers to 'use AC-555-1212 for directory because it
> is free, then after you get the number place your call via MCI' ?
> Have you forgotten how the main reason AT&T quit giving free
> directory assistance -- a tradition for many, many years since the
> beginning of the phone itself -- was because all the come-latelys
> were getting AT&T to do the lookups for free while they in turn got
> the revenue for the call itself?

     I have to disagree with you again that directory
assistance to anywhere but the local exchange was always free.  In
the days when calls were placed with a toll operator, whether she
(very rarely he in those days) would advance the call by plugging
into a jack on the switchboard or dialing on a trunk, there was
basically no customer access to distant directory assistance
records (called "Information" then, rather than directory
assistance).  You gave the information you had to the toll
operator, who then went about reaching an Information operator at
the distant place and asked for the number, which she then entered
on the ticket and proceeded to place the call.  The only way to get
a distant number was to place a call to the number listed that way.

         With the advent of DDD, the customer needed to have a way to
reach distant DA, and also it was cheaper in that less operator time
was involved.  At first there was apprehension that customers would
abuse this service, and in fact some did, but in general it was still
felt to be less expensive as well as promoting the use of DDD.

         I don't remember MCI saying to use AT&T to call distant
directory assistance.  Has that been since equal access and the
breakup of the Bell System?  Of course, when MCI was a minor entity
which had to be dialed using a local or toll access code, I'm not sure
if a customer could have dialed a distant DA office over MCI.  But
with the breakup, and equal access, all customers had to have a way to
reach the DA records, which necessarily have to be maintained by the
RBOCs since they have the only access to the information from which
the database is compiled.

         As I noted earlier, some independent companies still provide
their own DA service.  This meant that an additional feature had to be
added to DA offices when DA records were centralized by the RBOC for
an entire area code -- the ability for the DA operator to extend the
call if the request is for a place whose DA records are maintained by
the independent company.  If you ask the 555-1212 operator for a
listing in such a place, she/he will say "just a moment," or similar
wording, and extend the call to the DA office in the independent
exchange.  That's one reason the DA operator asks "What city, please?"

         Many independent companies, especially the smaller ones,
contract with the RBOC (or in some cases a large independent) to
handle their DA records and calls, but as noted some of the large
independents do still maintain their own DA operations.


Wes Leatherock     [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your mention of the independent telcos
which still maintain their own information database -- and I think
there must be dozens of them in the Carolinas; I seldom ever called DA
over there without gettting the forwarding routine you mentioned.  One
of my favorite memories of this was several years ago when I called
555-1212; the answering operator had to pass me along to the
little telco somewhere -- which still had a manual switchboard!! --
and when the operator (at that telco) answered I recall the Bell
operator saying to her 'operator, this call is for information only;
do not ring, do not connect the party'. Apparently some people had
figured out that you could go through Bell's front-end DA in that
state and get connected with some hick operator in some hick town
somewhere ostensibly for directory assistance and trick her into
extending you by making her think it was 'paid'.

When there was still a reasonable mix of manual and dial exchanges
around the USA I think the rule was if the customer called 555-1212
and asked for information off of a manual exchange, the DA operator
was supposed to decline it and refer the caller back to his own long
distance operator to get it handled intra-operator through 'inward'.
Strictly speaking, a town was not part of the area code in which it
was located until it was equipped for dialing, but the operators
seemed to do it both ways. PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 14:54 EST
From: [e-mail] (John R Levine)
Subject: Who Provides DA?
Organization: I.E.C.C., Cambridge, Mass.


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But *what company* actually serviced the
> call?

I believe that you'll find that it's the RBOC that provides directory
assistance, i.e. if you call 212-555-1212 you'll be talking to a NYNEX
operator.  It's anyone's guess if or how the operator will identify
him or herself, since it's easy and common to have custom greetings
depending on what trunk a call comes in on.

My impression is that back in olden days MCI et al. didn't provide DA
due to technical peculiarities of connecting to DA centers.  (For
example, if you call 802-555-1212 late at night for Vermont numbers,
you'll be talking to an operator in Boston, since NYNEX only keeps one
DA bureau open at night for all of their ex-NET territory.)


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail]
Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies"

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 16:56:51 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Tom Smith)
Subject: Local Telcos Provide DA to Carriers
Organization: AT&T Consumer Laboratory


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But *what company* actually serviced the
> call?  What company responded to you?  Whose operators were talking to
> you?  In other words, if there is a telephone sitting somewhere with the
> number 555-1212 on the front of it, who is sitting there answering the
> calls?  I believe it is AT&T in most or all cases. Have you forgotten
          ^ ^^^^^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^
PAT:

I think you have outdated info.  It is my understanding that you are
speaking with representatives of the local LEC.  IXCs contract with
the LECs to provide DA services ... so if you call 1-501-555-1212 from
Illinois, your IXC will bill you, but a Southwestern Bell employee
will service your call.  No matter whether you call over AT&T, Sprint,
or MCI.

It hasn't always been this way, but this is my current understanding.

Speaking for myself, not for my company...


Tom Smith    [e-mail]

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

From: Andrew A. Poe <[e-mail]>
Subject: Forgiving Directory Assistance Charges
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 15:01:05 EST
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


On Wed, 10 Nov 1994, Mike King wrote:

> At one time, AT&T would "forgive" up to two inter-LATA 555 calls a
> month, as long as two or more inter-LATA calls were placed via AT&T.
> I don't know if that's still true.  I remember that for a long time,
> 1+NPA+555 calls could be made for free from public (LEC) pay phones,
> presumably because charged calls were also being completed from those
> phones.  I never bothered to try from a COCOT.

AT&T forgave two of my inter-LATA 555 calls this last month.  I called
to inquire if the $.75 cent charge was for actual information, or if
the $.75 was just for the connection to Directory Assistance.  My
concern was that two of my inter-LATA Directory Assistance charges did
not give me a phone number.  One of those two was a "I can't find an
entry for this person."  and the other was a request for Rodriguez in
San Juan.  Although I knew the address of the Rodriguez I wanted, the
very large number of Rodriguez's in the San Juan area (San Juan is in
Puerto Rico, NPA 809) prompted her to deny my request for Information.

Anyway, what I was told was that the charge for Directory Assistance
is just for calling them, regardless of whether you actually received
Information.  (In my first case, one could argue that I did receive
Information, Information that they have no listing for her.  But since
I know the address was right, I could have used either a phone number,
the knowledge that she had a phone but was unlisted, or the knowledge
that there was no entry for her, period, and this distinction was
never given.  In the second case, I received Information that there
were a large number of Rodriguez's in San Juan.  But I already knew
that.  In either case, I did receive Information, but not the
Information I requested.) But, she said, she would credit my account
with $1.50 anyway.  Why, I asked?  I'm not disputing the bill, just
questioning it.  She said I might as well dispute it, since AT&T will
"forgive" up to $5.00 on any phone bill without looking into it.  So,
being an honest man, I took the $1.50 and did not dispute an
additional $3.50.


Andrew A. Poe 522 HILL ST ANN ARBOR MI
48104-3223 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA [phone]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Dulberger)
Subject: Star Codes On Most Telco Systems
Date: 11 Nov 1994 00:03:08 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee


A few messages back there was a post asking about current * codes like
*67 and *69 etc. Here's a list I've had for a while that tells most of
them.  I wouldn't be surprised if it's outdated in some areas, but I
know that around here (414) it's still pretty accurate.

           *57 - call tracing request (some systems use this for call back)
           *60 - call blocking activated
           *61 - priority ring activated
           *63 - select call forwarding activated
           *66 - repeat dialing activated
           *67 - call number ID blocking (must be dialed before each call)
           *69 - call return activated
           *70 - disable call waiting
           *71 - three-way calling according to usage
           *72 - enable call forwarding
           *73 - disable call forwarding
           *74 - modify speed calling directory entry (for 8 # service)
           *75 - modify speed calling directory entry (for 30 # service)
           *76 - call pickup
           *79 - ring again
           *80 - call blocking disabled
           *81 - priority ring disabled
           *83 - select call forwarding activated
           *86 - repeat dialing disabled
           *89 - call return disabled

Hope this is useful to someone!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is useful, and thank you for sending
it in.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #409
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09935;
          11 Nov 94 1:38 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04644; Thu, 10 Nov 94 20:30:12 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04635; Thu, 10 Nov 94 20:30:07 CST
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 20:30:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #410

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 94 20:30:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 410

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telephone Risks (comp.risks via Clive D.W. Feather)
    Public Access Points Virtual Conference (Greg Monti)
    900 Billing, When Does it Start? (Andy Spitzer)
    Nitsuko NVM 2000 Problems (Ian Cochrane)
    Inquiry on Bellcore (Victorio O. Ochave)
    Any Way to Use Call Waiting to Avoid Second Phone Line? (M. K. Smith)
    Town Considers Taxing Cell Phones (Greg Monti)
    Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More!! (Brian Gilner)

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 America
On Line. 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: Telephone Risks
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 12:05:59 GMT
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>


The following just appeared in comp.risks. You might like to run it in
the Digest.

==== BEGIN EXTRACT from RISKS Digest edition 16.54 ====

Date: Mon, 7 Nov 1994 01:48:00 -0800 (PST)
From: [e-mail] (Javilk)
Subject: Tele-Phoney

                   Troubles with Tele-Phoney Systems

     Getting a wrong-number call in the middle of the night from
another human can be irritating.  We may hope that future telephone
numbers incorporate a check digit to reduce these errors, but I doubt
they will.

     But let us first look at our "Telephone Neighborhood".  Do you have
any idea who or what exists in the 62 or so valid telephone numbers only
a slip of the digit away from yours?  (Area codes brings it up to about
80, but they are less often dialed.  Another problem.)  Apparently I
have several interesting entities in my telephone neighborhood. And with
most calls being dialed by embedded microprocessors and computers these
days...

     What prompts this observation?  Funny you should ask that...

     On Friday, after the close of business for the weekend, (as in,
when else?!) I began receiving a strange series of persistent wrong
number calls from one gentleman in my area code.  As I answered, I
would hear the "musique de telephon" of another ten-digit number being
dialed.  Although apologetic, the caller insisted he was trying to
reach several very different numbers in two adjacent area codes.  Soon
others joined him in reaching out and touching me with a number of
different touchy toney loony tunes, complaining that I was not the
party of their choice; then retrying the process with more diligence,
and sometimes more stridence.  But no matter the area code or number
they dialed, they all rang my phone.

     Some investigation on my part revealed they all originated from
the same place, an apartment complex in a nearby city with a new PBX
(Private Branch Exchange,) telephone system. To save the dwellers
money, (or to line their coffers some more,) management had contracted
with a private (discount) telephone and cable company called "Western
Telephone and Television" (WTT) for a PBX with a feature called "least
cost call routing."  The physical PBX is a 6 x 4 x 2.5-foot box
containing twin 680x0 processors for redundancy, each with its own
hard drive, and each running a proprietary operating system called
CORTELCO.  The box can handle up to 500 telephone lines, although only
approximately 300 lines were hooked up at that particular site.

     Under normal circumstances, this PBX is programmed to quietly
intercept the dialed number, dial a five-digit access code (a 10-xxx
number) on one of several outgoing lines, and when the access number
goes off hook (answers), echo the number that the customer dialed;
whereupon the long distance service provider takes over.  However at
this particular location, a five-digit access code was not available,
and so a full seven-digit access code had to be used.  In other words,
the system simply forwarded all calls to another ordinary-looking
phone number.  Unfortunately, the technician inadvertently entered
_my_ phone number while correcting a previously(!)  erroneous number.

     Hence, all long distance calls placed from that apartment complex
rang through to my number starting at 6pm Friday evening.

     This prompts some interesting observations:

     1. No caller ID is transmitted with the call,
     2. There is no handshaking between PBX and the service provider.
     3. Audio is immediately enabled upon completion of number dialed.

Speculations:

     1. All accounting probably resides in the PBX
     2. Most billing info and programming is done via modem.
     3. Anyone with the seven digit access code...
            ...has unlimited free telephone service.
Kind of makes you wonder what the fraud rate is in this industry, and how
much is added to the average telephone bill to offset it. (No, I did not ask
what number the computers were trying to call or I'd be their prime suspect!)

     Of course, once awakened, Murphy did not stop there.  WTT's
emergency pager number had been _Disconnected_. Nor could Pacific Bell
Information find any local phone number for WTT.  When I finally got
the correct number from the apartment manager and called WTT, their
automated attendant / voice mail system kept telling me to dial 0 for
their operator (receptionist), then complained this and other
automatically suggested extension numbers, were not valid.  Whereupon
the default error message, of course, again instructed me to dial 0
for the operator.  (This kind of looping appears rather common in
corporate automated attendant systems.)  Eventually some error count
was exceeded and at least _this_ computer had the sense to hang up.

     The RISK of not checking your telephony systems for message
loops, old numbers, etc. is looking like a corporation of idiots.  Not
to mention a telephone company not having a publicly listed telephone
number!  [I think we now might understand WHY!  PGN]

     (My favorite ploy in the case of such loops and lockouts, is to
look for a Smith or Jones in their audio telephone directory, and
inform him that his company is losing thousands of dollars in sales
because the telephone system will not let callers speak to a human
being; then ask he pass my number on to an appropriate party.  Few
ever bother.  They must think it's not their job to help their company
be profitable.)

     Finally, The local Bell Systems affiliate repair service (good
old 611) told me that the RISK of harassing innocent telephone
subscribers, as they agreed WTT's automated equipment was clearly
doing, was having telephone service to their equipment, and thus the
entire apartment complex, disconnected.  (Probably by Monday...)

     But of course, Murphy being who he is, Repair could do nothing
right now. And in retrospect, they really could not do much.  Repair
directed me to several different Pacific Bell departments, each with
its own 800 number, but all of which had an identical automated voice
issuing identical instructions.  The RISK of using identical messages
(computer voice screens?) is having customers think they are reaching
the SAME number.  For all I know, I may have been!  Eventually, the
chain of "if you have... then call 1-800-..." messages, which are
heard after one finds one's situation is not on the menu, reached a
recorded message informing me to call the local police to handle the
situation.

     Is the RISK of having electronic equipment becoming deranged,
with no obvious "OFF" switch, having it SHOT by law enforcement
officials?  Something equipment designers really ought to think about!

     After numerous complaint calls to the apartment manager, WTT, and
Pacific Bell by apartment residents, Pacific Bell, the apartment
manager, and myself, a WTT technician entered another set of access
codes into the system.  The calls ceased shortly before noon,
Saturday.  I received a long and very apologetic call from the
technician.  We ended up discussing the operational details of the
PBX.  The technician also checked the voice-mail looping problem and
reports they will have to completely reconfigure their company
office's automated attendant system to avoid the "dial operator" loop
problem.

               The RISKS of Busy Telephone Neighborhoods

     The people at the Misdialing Gardens Apartments were more polite
than those involved when Coca Cola published my number as their
in-warranty emergency repair number three years back.  Now I say that
I can fix almost anything (and often do), but those people insisted I
fix their Coca Cola machines _Right_NOW_For_FREE since soda was
usually spewing forth onto the carpet, etc.  Complaints to Coca Cola
Corp.'s headquarters met with Persistent Insistence that my number was
Indeed _The_Correct_Number_ for their in-warranty repair service.
They kept looking it up in their corporate directory and their
computers, and telling me it "The computer says that _IS_ The Correct
Number, so stop bothering us!"  (I couldn't seem to get a VP's
secretary to understand the true nature of the problem.  And of
course, she would NOT pass me on up the line because _I_ was
_Obviously_Wrong_.)  After a few go-arounds like that with Coca Cola's
Headquarters, I just gave up and chanced my number to an unlisted
number without a forwarding reference.  It only cost me several
hundred dollars to change stationary and notify all my clients...

     ... Some of whom had recently changed their fax numbers...  And
since I usually set up a computer to send these overnight...  Well, I
guess I just had all those "favors" returned this past week end!

                      The ADVANTAGE of Call Return

     I still get calls at all hours, but not as often; the present
phoney phone callers all hang up when they hear a human answer, making
one think of burglars trying to see who is home, or the odd former
acquaintance, ex-spouse, or ex-employee who might have traded a few
marbles for some lead pellets.  When I ordered call return to
investigate this problem, the Pacific Bell representative told me to
call these phoney callers back and say "I am working with" (not for)
"the telephone company to determine why people call this number."  The
responses revealed that my current number in the slipped digit
neighborhood of a touch-tone-based Automatic Bank Information system.
If I politely return those phoney phone calls, I can keep the number
of calls down to two or three a month as opposed to the original three
or four a week.  (Not to mention retain my peace of mind!) I guess
people do learn.

     Don't call me, I won't call you!  Please!

     Several individuals have commented that someone less ethical
might have set up one of those $95.99 voice mail cards to ask for the
caller's account and PIN numbers, then apologize for the rest of the
computers being unavailable.  In effect, a telephonic analog of a
terminal with a phony login screen.

==== END EXTRACT ====


Clive D.W. Feather     | Santa Cruz Operation
[e-mail]          | Croxley Centre
Phone: [phone] | Hatters Lane, Watford
Fax:   [phone] | WD1 8YN, United Kingdom

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

Date: Fri, 4 Nov 1994 14:50:14 EST
From: Greg Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Public Access Points Virtual Conference


The following press release was sent out by the Corporation for Public
Broadcasting and the U.S. Department of Commerce:


                 THE NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND
                 INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION (NTIA)
                               and the

                      UNIVERSAL SERVICE WORKING
                      GROUP OF THE INFORMATION
                      INFRASTRUCTURE TASK FORCE
                               (IITF)

                             announce a

                VIRTUAL PUBLIC CONFERENCE ON "UNIVERSAL
                    SERVICE AND OPEN ACCESS TO THE
                     TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORK"

                        November 14-18, 1994

Background

        In a landmark effort to broaden participation in the
development of the nation's telecommunication policies and demonstrate
the power of networking technology, the National Telecommunications
and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Universal Service
Working Group of the Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF) will
host an electronic, Virtual Conference the week of November 14-18,
1994.

        The Virtual Conference will culminate a year-long effort by
the Administration to gather information and opinions about the issue
of universal service and open access as it relates to
telecommunications and information resources.  Building upon previous
field hearings conducted by NTIA and the Universal Service Working
Group on this subject, the Conference will allow public input to be
expanded beyond geographic constraints.

        The Conference also is part of the Clinton Administration's
initiative to promote the development of a National Information
Infrastructure (NII).  The Administration's document entitled the
National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action, released on
September 15, 1993, describes the benefits of networking technology
and the potential for using the NII to create an electronic commons.
The report includes the Administration's goals of extending universal
service to the telecommunications network and using the NII to conduct
government business.

        To demonstrate these concepts, this conference is being
conducted entirely through electronic networks -- using the Internet,
dial-up bulletin board access, public information service providers,
and commercial service providers.  Although most attendees will use
their own computers, NTIA and the Universal Service Working Group are
providing nationwide access by encouraging public institutions to make
their computer facilities available to the public during the week of
the conference.

        Information collected during this conference and all of the
previous field hearings is being incorporated into the
Administration's on-going policy deliberations and may result in a
report to Congress and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

How the Conference Will Be Conducted

        During the week of November 14-18, 1994, NTIA will create a
series of electronic mail discussion groups.  Each topic will have an
Internet mailing list and USENET newsgroup devoted specifically to
discussion of each relatively narrow area.  Each topic will be hosted
by an expert in the field, who will begin each day's discussion.
Attendees will be able to participate in two ways: by replying to the
host in a short response that will be included in the formal
proceedings of the conference, and by engaging in unmoderated
discussion on the mailing list and newsgroup.  This two-tiered system
will promote an active discussion by not moderating or summarizing
what anyone has to contribute, while still creating a shorter precis
of the overall debate.  Topics will include:

     -- Redefining Universal Service and Open Access: What is the
minimum "basket" of basic services or capabilities that all Americans
should be able to obtain today?  Which services or capabilities, if
any, should be available to all Americans on an optional basis?  What
is the proper relationship between universal service and open access?

     -- Affordability and Availability: Who lacks basic
telecommunications service, and why?  For more advanced services,
should training be available to all who wish it?  Who should pay for
such training?  How can rural concerns and inner city concerns be
balanced by a modern concept of universal service?  How can government
balance the need to provide universal service with the need to allow a
competitive environment for the telecommunications industry?

     -- Intellectual Property: Does the traditional legal framework
for intellectual property work with digital technology?  What are the
respective roles of the government and the private sector in
determining how creators are reimbursed?  Does the current legal
framework of intellectual property help or hinder the goal of open
access to the telecommunications network?

     -- Privacy: What potential is there for the telecommunications
network to compromise personal privacy?  To what extent will
perceptions of reduced privacy hinder open access to the
telecommunications network?

     -- Interoperability: How important is the concept of
interoperability to the goals of universal service and open access?
What is the respective role of the market and the government in
determining standards and protocols for interoperability?  What
lessons can we learn from past efforts at standards setting, both
domestically and internationally?

     -- Universal Service and Open Access for Individuals with
Disabilities: What is the current state of access and service for the
disabled?  How can telecommunications help the disabled participate
more fully in society?  What design concepts for the disabled are
transferable to all users to improve overall network functionality?

        Additional information about the Virtual Conference, including
instructions on how to join a topic, may be found on the Conference
Gopher: gopher-virtconf.ntia.doc.gov.  This information can also be
e-mailed directly to you; send a message to [e-mail]
and you will receive an automatic reply.

        Participants are encouraged to review the NTIA/Universal
Service Working Group's relevant documents and post comments and
suggestions.  These documents include: NII Field Hearings on Universal
Service and Open Access: America Speaks Out; and Notice of Inquiry
(NOI) on Universal Service and Open Access Issues (written comments in
response to this NOI are being received by NTIA and should be filed on
or before December 14, 1994, to receive full consideration).  These
documents already are available through NTIA's IITF Gopher Server at
iitf.doc.gov, dial in to [phone], and NTIA's Bulletin Board
Service at [phone], ntiabbs.ntia.doc.gov (telnet, gopher or
world- wide web).

Call for "Public Access Points"

        The Administration recognizes that not all citizens have
access to, or experience using, computers and the Internet.
Therefore, libraries and universities, as well as state and local
governments, are encouraged to make their facilities available to the
public.  Providing these public gateways will demonstrate the power of
networking and allow access to those who might not otherwise be able
to participate.

        If your institution is interested in participating as a
"public access point," please see the attached registration form.


For Further Information

        For technical assistance, please contact Charles Franz at
[phone] ([e-mail]).  For general information, please
contact Roanne Robinson at [phone] ([e-mail]).
Fax inquiries should be directed to [phone].

*****************************************************************
Registration Form for "Public Access Points"

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
and the Universal Service Working Group on the Information
Infrastructure Task Force (IITF) are hosting an electronic Virtual
Conference on the topics of universal service and open access to the
telecommunications network.  The Conference will be accessible by the
public via Internet mailing lists and network newsgroups.

To broaden the reach of the Conference, the Administration is
encouraging public institutions to provide the general public a
generic e-mail or newsgroup account to access the Conference Internet
mailing lists.  This will allow citizens to read and respond to
on-going discussions on various topics.

Site Responsibilities

While every attempt will be made to make the general public aware of
this conference, "public access points" (sites) will be responsible
for all local publicity, as well as technical and logistical support.
Sites are encouraged to display the conference announcement and make
copies available to the public.  Sites may wish to develop an
additional announcement stating their intent to serve as a public
access point, hours of operation and a local contact person, who can
instruct local citizens on how to participate.  Sites are encouraged
to download the relevant documents outlined in the announcement and
make hard copies available for the public to review prior to the
conference.

In addition, since sites will be providing NTIA with anonymous e- mail
accounts, sites may wish to encourage individual conference
participants to provide their name, organization, and address at the
end of their comments.

Site Registration

Please complete the registration form and e-mail the form to
[e-mail] by November 4, 1994.  Registration will allow
us to contact you with updated conference information.

*****************************************************************
"PUBLIC ACCESS POINTS" REGISTRATION FORM

Contact Name:

Organization:

Address:

City:

State, Zip:

Phone & Fax:

E-mail Address:


                         ----------

I'm just the messenger:

Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    [phone]
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      [phone]
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 9 Nov 94 17:12:58 EST
From: [e-mail] (Andy Spitzer)
Subject: 900 Billing; When Does it Start?


Oh Telecom Gurus,

Please settle an argument we are having here, about when Billing for a
900 call starts.

We are talking about 900 delivered over T1, with ANI and DNIS
information.  The particular LD provider is Sprint.

The usual call progress is as follows:

 From 900  Seize      ANI+DNIS DTMF digits                            Hangup
 To   900        Wink                        RING----RING  Pickup "Hello!"
          t0    t1                       t2               t3           t4

An alternate call might progress as follows
 From 900  Seize      ANI+DNIS DTMF digits                            Hangup
 To   900        Wink                        BUSY--BUSY--BUSY--BUSY--BUSY
          t0    t1                       t2                            t4

At time t0, the line is Seized, indicating a new call.
At time t1, the PBX winks to alert the CO to spill ANI & DNIS information.
At time t2, the digits are complete, and the PBX knows where to route the call.
At time t3, an agent picks up the phone
At time t4, the caller hangs up.

Some of us think that the duration of the call is timed from t3 to t4,
as it would be on a regular 800 call.  In other words, billing doesn't
start until you return answer supervision (Pickup the phone).  If you
don't Pickup (due to busy), nothing is billed.

Some of us think that the duration of the call is timed from t1 to t4,
in other words the clock starts the moment you Wink.  If this is true,
then if the call wasn't answered, or was played a busy signal by the
PBX, then the call would still "count".

The question, who is right?  Is it possible that Sprint bills from the
wink?  If so, is this "normal" in the 900 biz?


Andy Spitzer      The Telephone Connection         301-417-0700
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ian Cochrane)
Subject: Nitsuko NVM 2000 Problems
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 13:56:39 GMT


I'm having a problem with the Nitsuko NVM 2000 auto attendant/voice
mail.  Callers get lost in the unit because, I presume, the unit
doesn't recognize the digits they dial. People calling from cellular
phones, residential phones and other PBX phones have had this happen.
They get into the auto attendant and after being prompted, they dial
the three digit extension they want. After several minutes, the auto
attendant repeats its request to dial an extension. Our vendor has
tried a few solutions, none of which have worked. They have now become
very unresponsive to our requests for assistance with this problem.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.


Ian Cochrane      [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 17:50:49 +0800
From: Victorio O. Ochave <[e-mail]>
Subject: Inquiry on Bellcore


I need information on how to order technical documents from BELLCORE;
can anyone provide me with email address, fax number, contact person
information? TNX in advance.

Victorio A. Ochave, Jr.
Communications Engineering Division
Advanced Science and Technology Institute (ASTI)
Department of Science and Technology (DOST)
4/F NEC Bldg., University of the Philippines
Diliman, Quezon City, PHILIPPINES 1101

voice: 632 995071-9 loc.5106
fax: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]
          [e-mail]
X.400: G=victorio; S=ochave; P=itu; A=arcom; C=ch


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: From time to time I run messages here
about Bellcore and the documents it has available, but there always
seem to be new readers who do not go back to read the old messages.
Perhaps someone will respond directly to this correspondent for me.
Perhaps we need a message publicizing Bellcore once again here also.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (M. K. Smith)
Subject: Any Way to Use Call Waiting to Avoid Second Phone Line?
Date: 9 Nov 1994 20:33:30 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


I was just wondering if there is any software available that can
recognize a call waiting signal and prevent the current modem
connection from being dropped?  I am trying to avoid a second phone
line (~15/month); however, I need to know when people are trying to
reach me by phone.  I know voice mail through the local phone company
is available (~$7/month), but call waiting is much cheaper
(~2-3/month).

Any ideas or suggestions would be greatly appreciated!


Thanks,

Mark


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On most modems now-a-days you can set
one of the S-Registers high enough to do what you are seeking; i.e. the
call waiting signal will cause you to get a lot of garbage on the screen
but the modem will physically hang in there and stay connected. There
now arises a couple of problems: Can you live with the garbage as a
result?  I guess if you are just working on text files the garbage does
not matter too much, but I can't imagine you would want to taint some
binaries you were downloading (as one example) with some nonsense buried
deep in the file the modem passed along. If you are down/uploading some
customer account information, can you live with the errors caused by
a call-waiting signal hitting in the middle of it?

The second problem as I see it is this: Okay, now you have been given
notice of a call waiting. Do you hang up and take the call, not knowing
who it is, and whether you even want your online session interuppted as
a result?  Do you simply flash, putting the modem connection on hold
while you see who is on the other side of the call-waiting?  A lot of
good that will do!  You might as well have hung up since when the distant
modem fails to hear you any longer it is gonna say bye-bye anyway and
disconnect for loss of carrier *if it did not disconnect in the half-
second or so when the connection was split while your central office
passed you the call waiting tone anyway*. Or do you install this 'software'
you are asking about (or set the appropriate S-Register high enough) on
both ends of the line so you can keep the other end up also during the
interim? I know if I were a sysadmin I sure would not let you get near
my modem settings; after all, suppose the connection was dropped for
any number of reasons and my modem stayed off hook the rest of the
night, not having enough wits to hang up the line on account of your
adjustments so *your session could stay intact*.

For all the things it is *possible* to do to prevent disconnection
(such as adjusting that one S-Register -- I forget which one -- to
255 or some such high value), NOTHING takes the place of having a
*dedicated* modem line which stands alone. No matter what you tell
people about the hours in which your modem will answer and the hours
in which you will answer personally, there will always be calls from
modems to your phone at inappropriate times. There will always be
interuptions and people who do not understand what is going on. You
are always going to get hassled and annoyed by disruptions, etc.
Call waiting on a phone line and modems do not mix. Get a second phone
line as cheap as possible. That's the only way to go.    PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 17:09:21 EST
From: Greg Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Town Considers Taxing Cell Phones


A story in the November 7, 1994, editions of the {Washington Times},
page A1, says that the Town of Vienna, Virginia, is considering
putting a tax of $3 per month on all cellular phone accounts with
Vienna billing addresses.  Vienna is a town of about 10,000 residents
in Fairfax County, Virginia, about 12 miles west of Washington, DC.

The Virginia General Assembly passed a law earlier this year allowing
jursidictions within the state to levy cell phone taxes up to $3 per
month.  Two other Virginia cities, Charlottesville and Lynchburg,
already tax cell phone accounts.

Counties and municipalities see taxing cell phones as a way to avoid
taxpayer complaints over increased property taxes.  Vienna already
taxes *landline* phone customers $3 per month.  The town wanted to be
"fair" and tax all phone users alike.

The article notes that there are 19 million cell phones in the US,
growing at a rate of 17,000 a day.  If all such phones were taxed at
the $3 a month rate, $684,000,000 would be raised per year by taxing
authorities.  I estimate that Vienna's share of that would be about
$25,000 per year.

The article notes that California cities of Inglewood and Culver City
also tax cellular phones.  Cellular companies put up with the taxes,
which they pass through from subscribers, because they are not high.


Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    [phone]
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      [phone]
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Gilner)
Subject: Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More!
Date: 10 Nov 1994 05:16:41 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Tulane Univ., New Orleans, LA


For you telecommunication and fax freaks:

I got this cool device that turns a stand alone fax machine into a
full-page scanner. I saw the ad in the November issue of Windows
magazine, and it costs $69.95. I use it with WinFax Pro to perform OCR
on my scanned documents. Check it out! The number is 1-800-367-1427.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know if this was sent to me
in a sneaky way to be an advertisement for the product described or
if the correspondent is merely a satisfied customer. Anyway, I pass
it along for whoever wants to investigate further.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #410
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10437;
          11 Nov 94 2:39 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05862; Thu, 10 Nov 94 21:42:22 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05854; Thu, 10 Nov 94 21:42:18 CST
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 21:42:18 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #411

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 94 21:42:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 411

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Airwaves Journal Moderator in Car Crash! (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    FCC Q & A on Broadband PCS Auctions (Bob Keller)
    FBI Director May Pursue Outlawing Non-snoopable Crypto! (Bill Sohl)
    How is Japan's Phone System Different Than USA? (Larry Lee)
    Re: T-1 is Much Better Than Frame Relay (Douglas Hartung)
    Various News Tidbits (Dave Leibold)

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 America
On Line. 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]
Subject: Airwaves Journal Moderator in Car Crash!
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 20:00:00 CST


It was just about a week ago that Bill Pfieffer took over this journal
on an emergency basis to tell you of my hospitilization, and now it
is my unfortunate turn to tell you of a crisis which has visited him
in the past 24 hours.

Bill resides with his mother in Springfield, Missouri. On Wednesday
night, November 9 in the late evening, he and his mother were riding
in their car on a narrow two-lane highway just outside of Springfield.
As they rounded a curve in the darkness, they were met head-on by a
motorist in the other direction. Bill swerved to miss the other car
and did miss a collision only to instead drive off the road and into
a very deep ditch on the embankment as he applied his brakes.

Their car completely turned over a couple times, and came to a halt
*upside down with Bill and his mother trapped inside*. The front window
was totally smashed and they both were cut up by the flying glass. Bill's
mother is 80 years old and sustained several broken bones and perhaps
some internal injuries. She is in the hospital. Bill got banged up pretty
bad but after examination and treatment by emergency room personnel he
was permitted to go home, with no broken bones but apparently a few
sprained and torn muscles. He had a sliver of glass in his eye which the
emergency room people took care of. He is resting at home.

Bill was able to get out of the car first and after getting his mother
out to relative safety he then got a passing motorist to go for help
at a nearby farmhouse. Calling 911 there brings the sheriff and the
Volunteer Fire Rescue Squad to the location. Bill and his mother were
then rushed by ambulance to the hospital.

I feel just terrible about this. Bill and I have been friends for nearly
twenty years and he has had his share of problems in the past. Like my
family and myself, Bill and his mom are evacuees from Chicago. Their
neighborhood, like where we lived for many years had become so *awful* --
there is really no other word for it -- that they sold their house and
moved as far away as they could. They've been in Springfield, Missouri
now for several months -- a decent, pleasant and safe community -- and
although times have been tough for him he has made it pretty well ... now
this!

Some of you are probably subscribers to his AIRWAVES Journal or read his
efforts on Usenet in rec.radio.broadcasting. May we take a moment to
wish him and his mother the best as they recover. Write him at
[e-mail] to send your thoughts, and please let others know who
might not have heard about this.  Copy this to appropriate newsgroups.
Godspeed, Bill.


PAT

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 13:37:54 EST
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC Q & A on Broadband PCS Auctions


October 20, 1994

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS CONCERNING BROADBAND PCS AUCTIONS

In late August, 1994, the Commission conducted a series of seminars to
familiarize the public with the rules that will apply to the upcoming
auctions of licenses to provide Personal Communications Services in
the 2 GHz band (broadband PCS).  Attendees were invited to submit
written questions to the Commission, which many did.  In addition,
over the last several weeks the Commission has received numerous
informal inquiries concerning our auction rules for broadband PCS.  In
this Public Notice, the Commission hopes to provide guidance to
prospective bidders on broadband PCS licenses.  Some issues regarding
the Commission's broadband PCS auction rules are addressed in the
recently released reconsideration order (see Fourth Memorandum Opinion
and Order in PP Docket No. 93-253, FCC 94-264 (released October 19,
1994)) while others are still subject to reconsideration. These issues
are not treated in this Public Notice.

Some of the inquiries we received have posed similar questions in
slightly different ways that reflect the questioner's particular
circumstances. Rather than provide specific guidance to some but not
all questioners, the Commission has recast the questions in general
language that incorporates the most commonly asked questions.
Questions and answers are grouped in the following categories: general
questions, questions pertaining to the auction process, and questions
pertaining to designated entity applicants.


General Questions

Q: How will applicants be notified if there is a problem with their
Form 175 short-form applications?

A: Shortly after the deadline for submission of Form 175 applications,
the Commission will issue a Public Notice informing applicants of
their status.  That Public Notice will identify applications that are
accepted, those that contain minor defects that may be resubmitted,
and those that are rejected.  It is each applicant's responsibility to
review that Public Notice to determine the status of its Form 175
application. The Commission will not individually notify applicants of
defects that may be corrected through resubmission.

Q:   Can an individual participate in the auction?

A: In the broadband PCS auction for licenses in frequency blocks A and
B, which is scheduled to begin on December 5, 1994, individuals may
participate freely as applicants or as investors in applicants.  The
same will be true of our third broadband PCS auction -- for licenses
in frequency blocks D and E. However, in the second auction, for
licenses in frequency blocks C and F, only individuals who meet the
eligibility requirements set forth in our Rules may participate.

Q: What is the FCC doing to ensure that businesses acquiring licenses
have the capital necessary to provide service and that they do not
fail?

A: The FCC does not provide any guarantees of success in the
marketplace to winning bidders.  Applicants are required to certify as
part of their Form 175 short-form applications that they are
financially qualified.  The FCC does not require that applicants make
a showing of their financial qualifications; however we take all
certifications very seriously, and penalties for a false certification
could include loss of any auction payments made, loss of other
licenses held by the applicant, disqualification from future auctions,
and possible criminal prosecution.

Q: Where can I obtain information and maps regarding what area is
within each BTA and MTA?

A: On September 22, 1994, the FCC issued a Public Notice listing of
all of the counties contained in each BTA and all of the BTAs
contained in each MTA.  This Public Notice (Report No.  CW-94-02) is
accessible on the Internet through anonymous [e-mail], and copies
of the Public Notice can be obtained through the FCC's copy
contractor, International Transcription Service, by calling (202)
857-3800.  The information contained in the Public Notice is based on
material copyrighted by Rand McNally and Company.  Maps of BTAs and
MTAs can be obtained from the Personal Communications Industry
Association (PCIA) under a licensing agreement PCIA has entered with
Rand McNally & Company.

Q: How will bidders be able to submit bids on broadband PCS licenses?

A: On-site bidding will take place at The Postal Square Building, 2
Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., Washington, D.C.  (adjacent to Union
Station). Bidders will also be able to submit bids through bid
assistants via telephone, with bid confirmation transmitted via
facsimile.  The Commission is considering whether to enable bidders
also to participate in the auction through remote computer access via
a value added network.  In a future Public Notice, the Commission will
inform prospective bidders of the procedures if the latter option is
to be made available.

Q: What happens to a PCS license after the 10-year license term?  Will
the licensee have to be subjected to another auction?

A: The legislation authorizing the FCC to conduct auctions
specifically limits this authority to "initial" licenses, so renewal
applications will not be subject to auction. The Commission has not
yet set forth standards for renewal of PCS licenses.  In the cellular
services, however, licensees who have operated cellular systems in the
public interest, and who have met all applicable performance
requirements, are entitled to a renewal expectancy at the expiration
of their initial license term.

Q: What does it mean when the FCC says that no one can have more than
40 MHz of PCS spectrum in one area?

A: This restriction, contained in Section 24.229(c) of the
Commission's Rules, provides that no entity may be licensed to provide
PCS to any particular geographic area over more than 40 MHz of
spectrum.  In addition, no person or entity is permitted to hold an
attributable interest in PCS licensees that, when considered together,
are licensed to provide PCS on more than 40 MHz of spectrum.  This
rule was promulgated to further the development of a competitive
post-auction PCS market structure by ensuring that no entity could, in
effect, "corner the market" on PCS spectrum.

Q: Will the FCC grant all PCS licenses at the same time or will
licenses be issued in the order in which they are auctioned?

A: The FCC currently does not plan to delay the grant of any PCS
license so as to coincide with the grant of any other PCS license.  To
do so would contravene our stated policy designed to foster the rapid
initiation of new competitive services to the public.  The time that
will be required to review an auction winner's long-form application
for a license will vary depending on the complexity of the information
submitted, the resources available to the Commission for processing,
whether any petitions to deny have been filed against the application,
and the complexity of the issues raised in any such petitions.

Q: If an auction winner defaults on its payment obligation, what would
be the procedure for someone else to acquire that license?

A: If an auction winner to whom a license has been granted defaults,
the license will automatically be cancelled.  The license will then
revert to the Commission, and the Commission will re-auction the
license in a later auction event.  The public would be informed
through public notices if licenses are to be re-auctioned.

Q: Many of the likely applications of PCS technology involve direct
interconnection with local exchange equipment and switches.  Does this
create an advantage for the local exchange carriers who are bidding on
PCS licenses in the wireline service areas? What is the FCC doing to
address the interconnection issue?

A: If a LEC also owns a cellular system in its wireline service area,
it is ineligible to own more than 10 MHz of PCS spectrum in that area.
Thus, as a PCS operator, it would not be in a position to benefit from
its LEC status vis-a-vis a competing 30 MHz PCS operator.  The FCC has
instituted a proceeding in which we are asking whether interconnection
rates should continue to be set by agreement or by tariff.  The
Commission will use its authority under Title II of the Communications
Act to monitor what is happening to make sure that non-RBOC licensees
will not be discriminated against and we will be vigilant in our
efforts to prevent abuses from arising.


Questions Pertaining to the Auction Process

Q:   Why did the FCC choose such a complex auction process?

A: The simultaneous multiple round auction design the FCC is using for
PCS auctions has a couple of important advantages over the simpler,
sequential auction design.  First, the simultaneous multiple round
design conveys to bidders the most information about the true value of
licenses during the course of the auction, thereby improving bidders'
confidence and enabling them to minimize the "winner's curse" (i.e.,
the tendency to overbid).  In addition, in a sequential auction, the
results of later auctions will likely tell a bidder too late that it
should have bid (or not bid) on an earlier-auctioned license.  By
offering all substantially identical or complementary licenses at the
same time, bidders will be better able to effectuate their aggregation
strategies.  This will tend to result in the creation of more
efficient service that will bring greater competition, better service
and lower prices to consumers.

Q: The activity rules force bidders to bid in each round.  Why should
this be required?

A: If there were no requirement that bidders place bids in each round
of the auction, bidders would naturally tend to hold back, waiting to
see what others bid.  If a substantial number of bidders adopt this
strategy, the Auction might proceed exceedingly slowly, or it might
close prematurely.  Activity rules are necessary to ensure that
auctions progress at a reasonable pace and that useful information
about the value of licenses is conveyed to bidders throughout the
auction.

Q: How will the FCC determine what licenses I may bid on in the
auction?

A: Bidders will be allowed to place bids only on licenses for which
they applied on their FCC Form 175 application, but the precise amount
of bidding eligibility (i.e., the amount of bids, in terms of
MHz-pops, that a bidder may place in any round) will be determined by
the amount of upfront payment submitted by the bidder prior to the
auction.  The FCC will translate the dollar amount of the upfront
payment into a MHz-pop figure, and the computer system will not allow
a bidder to enter a set of bids if the total number of MHz-pops
represented by the licenses on which bids are placed exceeds the
number of MHz-pops to which its upfront payment translates.  If the
bidder's eligibility drops during the course of the auction (due to
bidding below the required activity level), the revised eligibility
will be applied by the computer system. Therefore, in order to avoid
having its eligibility reduced, a bidder must pay attention to the
number of MHz-pops associated with each license on which it places
bids, and ensure that its bidding in each round of the auction exceeds
its required activity.

Q: Could you explain the activity rules in terms a layman can
understand?

A: As explained above, each bidder's upfront payment will determine
its "required activity level."  The term "required activity level"
refers to the number of MHz-pops on which a bidder must be "active"
(i.e., submit a valid bid or hold the high bid from the previous
round) to avoid having its eligibility reduced in future rounds.  In
stage I of the auction, each bidder must be active on of the MHz-pops
on which it is eligible to bid.  In stage II of the auction, each
bidder must be active on of the MHz-pops on which it is eligible to
bid.  In stage III, each bidder must be active on all of the MHz-pops
on which it is eligible to bid.  Unless an activity rule waiver is
applied, the following eligibility reduction will occur if a bidder's
activity falls below the required activity level in a round:

   Auction Stage I:  Loss of 3 MHz-pops in eligibility for
             each MHz-pop below required level

  Auction Stage II:  Loss of 1.5 MHz-pops in eligibility for
             each MHz-pop below required level

 Auction Stage III:  Loss of 1 MHz-pop in eligibility for each
             MHz-pop below required level

The Commission has retained the discretion to reduce the required
Stage III activity level by Public Notice in advance of each auction,
but in no event will a bidder's required activity level in Stage III
be less than 95 percent of the MHz-pops on which it is eligible to
bid.

Q: How do activity rule waivers work?  Can an activity rule waiver be
submitted by the bidder, or is it only entered automatically by the
FCC if a bidder does not bid or if its bids fall below its required
activity level?

A: When a bidder's activity in a round falls below its required
activity level, a waiver will automatically be applied if the bidder
has a waiver available.  In this event, however, a bidder will be
offered the option of overriding the automatic waiver mechanism,
enabling it to intentionally reduce its eligibility and save the
waiver for later use.  Bidders also will be able to submit an activity
rule waiver "proactively".  A bidder may wish to do so if it is unable
or does not desire to bid in a particular round of the auction and
wishes to ensure that the auction will not close in that round.
(Submission of a proactive waiver keeps the auction open even if no
other valid bids are submitted, but application of an automatic waiver
will not.)

Q: Is a bidder who withdraws a high bid in a round considered to be
"active" on that license in the next round?

A: Yes.  Withdrawal of a high bid does not negate the fact that the
bid was made and that it was the high bid.  Bidders should keep in
mind, however, that they may be required to pay a penalty if they
withdraw a high bid.

Q:   How will bidders know when a round is over?

A: The FCC will announce at the beginning of each round when the bid
submission period will end.  After the round results from the bid
submission period are posted, we will announce the bid withdrawal
period.  This information will be available both at the auction site
and over any value added network created for remote bidding.  A
countdown clock also will be provided to inform bidders as to the time
remaining in each period.

Q:   How will auction results be made public?

A: Results from each round of the auction will made available 1) at
the auction site, 2) on the Internet, and 3) to bidders over the FCC
BIDDER ONLINE value added network, if the FCC decides to offer the
option of remote electronic bidding.  Prospective bidders interested
in the remote electronic bidding option must register with Business
Information Network by November 15, 1994 by calling [phone].
Charges of $200 for the Set-up Kit and software and $23 per hour of
online access will apply. Results posted on the Internet can be
accessed at the following Internet address: anonymous [e-mail]


Questions Pertaining to Designated Entity Applicants

Q: What provisions are available for small businesses, rural telephone
companies and businesses owned by minorities and/or women (the
"designated entities") in the auction for MTA licenses on frequency
blocks A and B?

A: The FCC did not adopt special payment provisions to benefit
designated entities in the bidding itself in this first auction.
Thus, the bidding credits and installment payment plans that will be
available in the auction for licenses on frequency blocks C and F (the
"Entrepreneurs' Blocks) are not available in the auction that begins
on December 5, 1994.  The Commission's tax certificate policy,
however, will apply to sales of block A and B licenses and to
investments in certain applicants for these licenses.  In addition,
the FCC's partitioning policy with respect to rural telephone
companies will apply to the MTA license auction.  Rural telephone
companies will be able to be licensed for partitioned broadband PCS
service areas in one of two ways: 1) they may form consortia to bid on
MTA licenses, with the license to be partitioned among the consortia
members in the post-auction licensing process; or 2) through private
post-licensing negotiation with an MTA licensee, they may obtain
licenses for partitioned areas that are reasonably related to their
wireline service areas.  A proceeding is currently pending to
determine whether the partitioning policy should be extended to
businesses owned by minorities and/or women. See Further Notice of
Proposed Rule Making in PP Docket No. 93-253, FCC 94-198 (released
August 2, 1994).

Q: What are tax certificates and how do they benefit designated
entities?

A: Under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, the Commission may
upon request grant tax certificates.  A tax certificate enables the
grantee to defer recognition of gain For tax purposes on the sale of
an investment in a communications property.  With respect to
designated entities bidding on PCS licenses, the tax certificate
policy could work in two ways.  First, an investor in a minority- or
women-owned PCS licensee would be able to defer the payment of capital
gains tax upon the sale of its investment, if it satisfies certain
conditions regarding reinvestment of the gain.  Second, a non-
designated entity PCS licensee would be entitled to deferral of gain
if it transfers its license to a business owned by minorities and/or
women, again subject to reinvestment conditions.  The tax certificate
policy is intended to serve both to attract investment capital to
entities that have historically faced discrimination in gaining access
to capital, and to encourage sales to minority- and women-owned firms.

Q: How can a designated entity licensee avoid having to pay penalties
if its owner dies during the holding period, causing the licensee to
lose its designated entity status?

A: In the event of the death of a designated entity owner, the
licensee could make a request with the Commission for a waiver of the
holding rule requirements and the unjust enrichment provisions
applicable to installment payments and bidding credits.

Q: If a license obtained with a bidding credit is transferred more
than 10 years from the date of the initial license grant, would the
bidding credit have to be refunded?

A:   No.

Q: Has the FCC prepared a Designated Entities FCC Auction Guidebook?
If so, how can I obtain a copy?

A: The FCC has not prepared such a document.  Law firms or trade
associations such as the Personal Communications Industry Association
(PCIA) may have developed such guidebooks.

Q: Are there any "designated" financial institutions that will
provide/offer funding to designated entities?  Are there qualified
brokers and/or consultants who are reputable, who can assist with the
process?

A: The FCC is not in a position to recommend specific potential
sources of financing to prospective bidders.  However, our Office of
Communications Business Opportunities (formerly the Office of Small
Business Activities) is available to provide assistance to individuals
or groups seeking to enter the PCS industry. OCBO's telephone number
is [phone].

Q:   Are advance payments also discounted like the actual bid?

A: The upfront payment for all entities bidding in the entrepreneurs'
blocks is $0.015 per MHz pop.  That is a 25 percent discount from the
$0.02 per MHz pop required in the other auctions.  In addition, the
down payment for small businesses and minority and women-owned
businesses will be calculated based on the bid price after the bidding
credit is subtracted.  So, if a small minority-owned firm bid $1
million, its total payment would be $750,000 after subtraction of the
25 percent bidding credit.  The 10 percent down payment would be
$75,000, one-half payable five business days after close of the
auction and the other half due five business days after grant of the
license.

Q: Does a university (a non-profit institution) which applies for an
"Entrepreneurs' Block" license it intends to use in training students
in the development and use of PCS technology qualify as a designated
entity?

A: If the university meets our gross revenue and total assets tests it
may qualify as an entrepreneur or as a small business.  The Commission
has adopted no PCS rules specifically benefitting universities or
entities that wish to acquire licenses for training purposes.

Q: Does the FCC have any guidelines regarding the incorporation date
or length of time a minority- or women-owned business must have been
in existence in order to bid in an auction?

A: There are no requirements regarding the length of time a designated
entity business must have been in existence before the auction.  All
affiliates of a new business will be counted toward applicable
financial caps, however.

Q: Can a designated entity use a limited partnership or a limited
liability company or any other lawful structure, so long as control
mechanisms are equivalent and within FCC guidelines?

A: Yes.  In fact, in the Fifth Report and Order the Commission has
specified various guidelines for limited partnership applicants.

Q:   Can a major telecommunications company provide debt in any
amount to a designated entity?

A: Debt is not attributable unless it appears to be equity disguised
as debt.  Factors such as the interest rate and length of the
repayment period would have to be considered.

Q: Can a major telecommunications company enter into agreements with a
number of designated entity applicants around the country for bidding
purposes, so long as each designated entity remains in control?

A: The rules applicable to investment in designated entities would
apply to each such investment, and assuming that none of the
designated entity applicants had applied for licenses in any of the
same markets, the rules do not restrict such arrangements.

Q: Can designated entities bid at the A and B band PCS auction? If so,
do they receive any special benefits?

A: Designated entities are free to bid in any auction.  The only
benefit available in the non-entrepreneurs blocks, however, is the tax
certificate program for businesses owned by minorities and women.

Q: Is there minimum capitalization needed for a designated entity?

A: No, although designated entities must be prepared to pay half of
the 10 percent down payment five business days after the auction
closes.

- FCC -

Robert J. Keller, P.C. (Federal Telecommunications Law)
<[e-mail]> Tel: [phone] Fax: [phone]
4200 Wisconsin Ave NW #106-261 Washington DC 20016-2146
finger me for info on F.C.C. Daily Digests and Releases

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Sohl)
Subject: FBI Director May Pursue Putlawing Non-snoopable Crypto!
Date: 10 Nov 1994 03:50:52 GMT
Organization: Planet Access Networks - Stanhope, NJ


Of interest to comp.dcom.telecom readers is this post from the radio
newsgroups.

Richard Crisp ([e-mail]) wrote:

We all knew it was coming, here it is:

Washington, DC -- If private encryption schemes interfere with
the FBI's ability to wiretap, they could be outlawed, according
to recent comments made by the agency's Director Louis Freeh.

Freeh told attendees here at the recent conference on Global
Cryptography that if the Administration's Escrowed Encryption
System, otherwise known as the Clipper Chip, failed to gain
acceptance, giving way to private encryption technologies, he would
have no choice but to press Congress to pass legislation that
provided law enforcement access to *all* encrypted
communications.

If, after having pushed Digital Telephony through Congress (which
hadn't yet happened when Freeh spoke at this conference), all the
Bureau ended up with during wiretaps were the scratchy hiss of
digital one's and zeros being hurled back and forth, Freeh made it
clear that he would seek a congressional mandate to solve the
problem.

In other words:  Roll your own coded communications;  go to jail.

Freeh's comments, made during a question and answer session at the
conference, are the first public statements made by an
Administration official hinting at a future governmental policy
that could result in the banning of non-governmental, unbreakable
encryption methods.

Freeh's remarks were first reported on the WELL by MacWorld writer and
author Steven Levy.  The FBI confirmed those statements to Dispatch.

The Administration, however, continues to state that it has no
plans to outlaw or place any restrictions on private encryption
methods.

A White House official said there are "absolutely no plans" on the
table to regulate domestic encryption "at the present time." He
wouldn't comment, however, as to whether the Administration would
back an FBI attempt for such legislation.  "Freeh doesn't seem to
need a lot of White House support," to get things done, the
official said.

FBI sources said any moves to approach Congress about regulating
private encryption are "so far out there" time wise, that the
subject "doesn't merit much ink," as one FBI source put it. "We've
got to make sure the telcos rig up their current networks according
to the new [digital wiretap] law before we go worrying about
private encryption stuff," he said.

An FBI spokesman confirmed Freeh's position that the Bureau would
aggressively seek to maintain what the spokesman called "law and
order objectives."  If that meant getting laws passed so that the
Bureau's "authorized wiretap activities" couldn't be thwarted by
"criminal elements using non-governmental" encryption schemes,
"then that's what he [Freeh] would do," the spokesman said.

When the Administration went public with its Clipper Chip policy,
it stressed that the program would be mandatory.  Many civil
liberties groups wondered out loud how long it would be before
private encryption was banned altogether.  The White House, anxious
for the public to buy into its one-trick pony the Clipper Chip,
said that wouldn't happen.

But the Administration hedged its bet.

Buried in the background briefing papers of the original Clipper
announcement, is a statement that the White House doesn't
consider the public's right to use private encryption methods are
protected anywhere in the Constitution.

: Richard Crisp                 Cupertino, Ca.                [e-mail]
: [phone] wk                                         [phone] fax
:              For PGP Public Key, type finger [e-mail]


Bill Sohl  K2UNK      ([e-mail])
Budd Lake, New Jersey

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

From: [e-mail] (Larry Lee)
Subject: How is Japan's Phone System Different Than USA?
Date: 10 Nov 1994 15:24:18 -0700
Organization: Twin Sun Inc, El Segundo, CA, USA


How does the Japanese phone network differ from the phone system in
the US?  I have successfully used Zoom modems and Intel modems (both
V32bis) with a minimal amount of trouble. However the ZyXel modems
refused to recognize a ring until they were configured for Japan.

ZyXel refuses to discuss the differences between Japan and the US or
the configuration feature of their modem that relates to the country
specific feature.

If anyone know and can explain what the differences are, or can point
me to an authoritative reference that describes these differences I
would be grateful.


Larry

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 13:12:00 -0400
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: T-1 is Much Better Than Frame Relay


 From Mr. Jeff Buckingham, Call America, discussing Frame Relay vs.
Private Line:

> I really think that the whole frame relay thing is vastly over hyped and
> many companies are being sold frame relay who do not really need it.

Mr. Jeff Buckingham of Call America should not be surprised that
private lines may be a more cost effective solution than Frame Relay
service in some instances.  He describes a frame relay network
configuration with four remote sites with 56kbps access ports , and
permanent virtual circuits established back to a central HQ which has
a T-1 access port.  A few comments:

 -  There are three pricing components for Frame Relay service; (1) local
    access, (2) frame relay access port charges, and (2) permanent virtual
    circuits.  Note that Frame Relay pricing is not distance sensitive (except
    for the local loop; i.e. from the customer premises to the service
    provider point of presence).  Private line pricing is composed of (1) local
    access, and (2) per mile IXC circuit charges.

-  When comparing Frame Relay to Private Line, the relevant comparison is
   therefore between (1) the IXC circuit charges and (2) Frame Relay port and
   PVC charges.  Since the Call Net locations are within fairly close proximity
   (all central California), it is not surprising that Frame relay is more
   expensive.

-  Mr. Buckingham's network description points out some common misconceptions
   in the marketplace.  If only four 56kbs access ports are pointed towards the
   HQ location, there is no reason to pay for more that a 4x56kbps access port
   at the HQ location  (Even if all four remote sites burst up to the port
   speed at exactly the same time, all packets should get through).  Just as
   many customers are not familiar with when Frame Relay should be used, it
   should not be surprising that many industry representatives are not
   completely up to speed with this relatively new technology.

A few points as to when Frame Relay may be an appropriate solution:

-  Many to Many connectivity is required.
-  Three or more locations require connectivity.
-  Traffic is "bursty" in nature rather than a continuous stream.  Otherwise,
   private line service may be more appropriate.
-  Traffic bursts occur frequently throughout the day.  Otherwise, Switched 56
   service may be more appropriate.
-  When delay sensitivity is a factor.  If traffic is not highly time
   sensitive, dial up via 14.4bps modem can be more cost effective.
-  There is no requirement for protocol conversion, logical addressing, or
   network-based error correction.  Otherwise, X.25 may be more appropriate.
-  Locations are geographically dispersed.


Douglas Hartung             |  [e-mail]
Strategic Business Analysis | [phone] x492
Sprint Business             | [phone]  fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 10 Nov 94 00:03:10 -0500
Subject: Various News Tidbits
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway


[from Bell News, 24 Oct 94; these news and views are from Bell Canada]

On the competitive front

*** Sprint to invest $100 million in a Canadian network

Sprint Canada plans to invest $100-million in a telecommunications
network that will effectively position it as a major carrier, rather
than a reseller, in Canada.

First phase of its plan is a 600-km fiber optic network linking
Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto, to be completed in 1995. Another major
installation is planned for western Canada by 1997.

The third largest telco in the U.S., Sprint entered Canada in 1993
when it bought a 25 per cent stake in Call-Net Enterprises, one of
the first Canadian resellers.

*** TelRoute connects to U.S. by microwave

TelRoute Communications Inc. joined the ranks of Canadian
facilities-based long distance carriers with the completion of a
digital microwave long distance network between Toronto and Buffalo,
New York.

What sets TelRoute apart from its competitors, including Bell and
Unitel, is that it has created its link to the U.S. with digital
microwave technology rather than fiber optic technology.

TelRoute has followed Bell's lead in partnering with U.S. long
distance carrier, MCI Communications Corp. of Washington. MCI will
carry TelRoute's traffic to its U.S. destinations.

*** MCI aims to go "local"

MCI Communications Corp. of Washington, our long distance carrier
partner in the U.S., has its sights set on offering local telephone
service.

MCI Metro, a subsidiary of the nation-wide facilities-based LD
carrier, has filed requests with state regulators in Washington,
Maryland, Illinois, Michigan and Pennsylvania, to provide residential
and business services.

*** AT&T "hung-up" about impending alliance

Just after its $11.5 billion acquisition of McCaw Cellular, AT&T
Corp. badmouthed another mega-deal that is awaiting regulatory
approval.

Target of its criticism is the foreign alliance planned by LD
carrier, Sprint Corp. The state-owned telephone monopolies of France
and Germany intent to pay $4 billion for a 20 per cent stake in
Sprint, therby giving them access to the U.S. LD market.

*** Nortel wins major Israeli contract

Within days of announcing that it had won final approval to build a
$100 million digital cellular phone system for the government-owned
telephone administration of Taiwan, Northern Telecom announced a
similar contract with CellCom Israel Ltd. of Israel.

Northern will install a turnkey digital network based on the
company's time division multiple access (TDMA) technology. The
network will comprise three DMS-MTX SuperNode digital cellular
switching systems, each of which can accomodate 50,000 to 200,000
subscribers, depending on the numbers of services each customer
requires.

Northern, which expects its wireless division to generate close to
$1-billion in revenues this year, reveals that the wireless market is
now growing at a rate of 30 to 40 per cent annually.

*** Governments to fight cross-border telemarketing fraud

The governments of Canada and the U.S. have agreed to find ways of
working together to fight the increasing incidence of cross-border
telemarketing deception and fraud.

The decision comes on the heels of a joint session which included
Canada's Bureau of Competition Policy, a delegation from the U.S.
Federal Trade Commission, and representatives of several Canadian
legal agencies.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #411
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11842;
          11 Nov 94 3:09 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07237; Thu, 10 Nov 94 22:55:03 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07230; Thu, 10 Nov 94 22:55:01 CST
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 22:55:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #412

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 10 Nov 94 22:55:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 412

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Phone Company Telemarketing (John Murray)
    EDI Security (Seth B. Rothenberg)
    Old Card Dialer Cards (Bill Garfield)
    List of Exchange Households-Pops Wanted ([e-mail])
    OC-XX Standards (Christopher Wolf)
    Which LD Company Has BEST Sign-up Bonuses? ([e-mail])
    Custom Ringing Detection (John Keith)
    Canadian Radio Television and Telecommunications Commission (Gary Fung)
    The Blackbox Company and Its Catalog (Jeffrey Bronchick)
    Re: Need Amp to Boost DTMF Strength ([e-mail])
    Frac T1, sw 56k, or Some Scalable Internet Access (Bruce K. Hubbert)
    BCH Algorithm Wanted (John Unekis)
    FTS-2000 Database "A" and "B" (Prakash Thatte)
    Meckler VR'94 Expo, NYC, Nov 28-Dec 2, 1994 - Overview (Robert Jacobson)
    Enterprise Management Summit '94 - New Product Announcements (emiinc@mci)

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 America
On Line. 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 Murray)
Subject: Phone Company Telemarketing
Date: 11 Nov 1994 00:29:27 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor


Several months ago, I posted to this group asking for information
about cases of legal action against telemarketers, specifically
concerning the selling of telephone services by that means. No-one
actually reported any legal cases; however, I did receive several
messages of support and requests for more details. In response to
those who asked -- and for everyone's benefit -- here's a summary of
events.

* I received three telemarketing calls over a six-month period from
  representatives of a telecommunications company (of which I was
  already a customer). In each case, they initially claimed to be
  clarifying some detail about my residential service before going
  into a routine sales pitch. Each time, they were told not to call again.

* Using information from CSC (address below), I submitted an affidavit
  to my local small claims court requesting damages for each of the
  latter two calls, since the company had failed to obey the do-not-
  call requests. (Legislation permits claims of up to $500 for each
  case, when no wilful violation was intended, otherwise more.)

* After some negotiation with the corporate lawyers, I dismissed the
  case and received monetary compensation in return. The agreement we
  signed limits my ability to discuss the particular details of this
  case; however, I am at liberty to address the general nature of such
  cases in an educational context.

There's a discussion document on the Web covering this topic in more
detail; it's URL is http://www.engin.umich.edu/~jxm/tlmkting1.html

I probably won't be able to address any queries about this case, but
information on how to go about restricting persistent telemarketers is
available from the Center for Study of Commercialism (CSC) at 1875
Connecticut Av NW, Suite 300, Washington DC 20009. Send $3 for the
"Stop The Calls" kit, or phone them at 1-202-332-9110.


John Murray, HCILab, University of Michigan


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: An organization here in the Chicago area
called 'Private Citizen' employs tactics similar to yours to stop the
receipt of unwanted telemarketing calls, and they also seem to be very
successful.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Seth B Rothenberg)
Subject: EDI Security
Date: 10 Nov 1994 13:28:46 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


My current project is to expand the concept of our in-house "message
router" so that sources and targets need not be on the internet.  I am
to write an Application Programming Interface (API) that will dial out
and forward messages over a modem link, just the way other APIs use
write() and read() to send messages and get acknowledgements via TCP.
That part should not be hard.  The part that concerns me is security.
The goal is that my API should be able to accept incoming calls.  If
we do that, how do we handle security?  Do we just use a system of
"userids" and "passwords" that is table-driven, and we count on our
database security so unauthorizd people don't find out "passwords"?

One proposal (mine:-) was to make the incoming calls come though
regular user dial-ups.  They use a special login id and password,
which they run my API.  This proposal has been shot down so far,
though I like it.  (Sort of based on the idea of uucp, though our
protocol is probably HL7 and the host is likely to be a VAX/VMS.)

If we don't use System Security, what kind of login/password-passing
scheme do we use?  Is there any kind of standard?  We really can't
make many assumptions about the client.


Thanks,

Seth

PS.  Is there such a thing as an ANI modem?  That would be a form of
security.

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

Subject: Old card dialer cards
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 21:08:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


I have one of the (apparently rare) Western Elect 2660A card dialer
telephones (circa early '70s).  It appears to be in perfect working
order, tho I have no "new" cards for it.  There is a collection of
already punched cards with it, but of course the numbers are no good
to me and naturally the punched cards are not re-punchable.

Are new cards still available from Ma Bell?  I asked at an AT&T Phone
Center Store and drew a blank expression from the sales clerk ...
"You've a WHAT?" was the response.

Also does anyone know if there was ever a multi-line keyset (1A2)
version of the card dialer phone?


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

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 23:17:17 PDT
From: Jennings <[e-mail]>
Subject: List of Exchange Households-Pops Wanted


Does anyone know of a source (a database) of Exchange area boundaries
and/or household - population data for those exchanges ... like a
listing of the exchanges by City, Exchange, population, household.  I
know there will obviously be several exchanges per city, but a simple
listing of this information would be very helpful ... is there a
Government source?




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

From: [e-mail] (Wolf)
Subject: OC-XX Standards
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 23:33:47 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I was wondering if anyone here at the TELECOM Digest could explain or
point me towards literature explaining the meaning of the OC-#
specifications used in ATM and SONET.  I've checked places such as
http://www.ipps.lsa.umich.edu/telecom-info.html and
gopher://cell-relay.indiana.edu/11/docs and have not found references.
I have also utilized the electronic document abstract searches
available at the University library, and have been unable to find more
than a mention of the terms.


Christopher Wolf, consumer of time, occupier of space.

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

From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Subject: Which LD Company Has BEST Sign-up Bonuses?
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 02:36:55 -0500


Which long distance has the best sign-up bonuses -- ie. free generous
month of usage at the outset or a few months into the usage?

Would appreciate any feedback.  Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Keith)
Subject: Custom Ringing Detection
Date: 10 Nov 1994 11:56:06 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site


I am looking for devices that can do custom ringing detrection and
route the call to an appropriate device. Particularly useful would be
the new breed of voice/fax cards for PCs that would have this
capability. Can somepone point me in the right direction?


John Keith      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary Fung)
Subject: Canadian Radio Television and Telecommunications Commission
Date: 10 Nov 1994 11:50:36 -0400
Organization: InterLog Internet Services [phone] [e-mail]


Greetings,

Does anyone know if there is any online link or electronic feed to
Canadian tariffs filings by the Telcos to the CRTC?

Please email me at [e-mail]


Thanks,

Gary  8^)

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey bronchick)
Subject: The Blackbox Company and its Catalog
Date: 11 Nov 1994 03:53:42 GMT
Organization: Netcom


I am interested in any feedback from people familiar with the Blackbox
catalog:

Good, bad, indifferent, service? Pricing? Why them versus others,
Merisel, etc?


Thanks,

jb


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have never had to order much from them
but when I did I found them to be very reliable, prompt and courteous.
Once I ordered a 64 K buffer from them to go on my old printer. It arrived
but without the proper connector. With a day they sent me the correct
item at no additional cost by special delivery.  I liked that.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Need Amp to Boost DTMF Strength
Organization: bpd.harris.com
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 13:25:28 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
Levenson) writes:

> I use one of these on an OPX line between a Panasonic PBX and an
> off-premises station.  I don't particularly like it, however.  It is
> half-duplex, like a speakerphone.  You can't interrupt a long-talking
> far-end speaker, and you can't hear the far end at all if there is a
> significant background noise level at the near end.

> But, can anybody suggest a better solution?

If the signal level is not within spec, get your carrier to correct
the problem.

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

From: Bruce K. Hubbert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Frac T1, sw 56k, or Some Scalable Internet Access
Date: 9 Nov 1994 19:05:18 GMT
Organization: I-3 Telecom


I am looking for access to the internet at any of the above speeds or
greater but have found that most providers' rates are outrageous.  I
did find a group in San Francisco called the "Little Garden" that offers
great rates; the only problem is that they are in SF and I am in NY.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Please respond by E-Mail to [e-mail]


Thanks,

Bruce K. Hubbert
I-3 Telecom              [e-mail]
"ISDN Made Easy"         [e-mail]
150 5th ave, ste 407     [e-mail]
New York, NY 10011       [e-mail]
VOX 212/228-7900         [e-mail]
FAX [phone]         [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John_Unekis)
Subject: BCH Algorithm Wanted
Organization: U.S. Geological Survey
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 15:58:04 GMT


I am working on a ground receiving system for the Landsat 7 satellite,
and as part of the development we have to handle the CCSDS protocol
from the satellite which uses a BCH error detection.correction code to
protect data packets. Does anyone have a source for a BCH algorithm
that is in the public domain? I have already tried Archie/Veronica.


Thanks, Bunches.

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

From: [e-mail] (Prime perf)
Subject: FTS-2000 Database "A" and "B"
Date: 8 Nov 1994 20:45:17 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


1. Is such a database available in the public domain?
2. How does one become a subscriber?

Thanks in advance for your assistance.


Prakash Thatte   Prime Performance Technologies, Inc.   703-318-0800

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Jacobson)
Subject: Meckler VR'94 Expo, NYC, Nov 28-Dec 2, 1994 - Overview
Date: 10 Nov 1994 22:41:22 GMT
Organization: University of Washington
Reply-To: [e-mail]


           MECKLERMEDIA'S NEW YORK VR'94 EXPO
                NOVEMBER 28-DECEMBER 2, 1994

              CONFERENCE OVERVIEW

     Tracks include: 1) Consumer Markets, 2) VR in Museum Settings; 3)
Legal Issues; 4) Televirtuality and Networking; 5) VR in the Art and
Cultural Communities; 6) Technology Update; 7) Design Projects; 8)
Design Products; 9) Industrial Design in Europe; 10: Out-of-Home
Entertainment Market Discussion; 11) Out-of-Home Entertainment
Products and Experiences; 12) Component Technologies; 13) Virtual
Characters; 14) Emerging Markets.

     Mecklermedia's New York Virtual Reality Expo was launched last
year, becoming the East Coast's premiere conference and exhibition for
the virtual reality industry.  This year's conference program builds
on the success of the inaugural event and is designed to express the
current state of the VR market as well as to project the potential
applications both near- and long-term.

     Recent market estimates from 4th Wave, Inc. indicate that 1998
sales of products or services directly related to virtual reality will
be five times the 1994 total and will reach $370 million (not
including government spending).  Until very recently, location-based
entertainment (LBE) was the acknowledged marketplace leader in terms
of sales for the virtual reality industry.  Also, VR was a community
of developers selling to developers.

     Now, however, developments in the fields of consumer
entertainment, design, medicine, and networking (televirtuality) offer
substantial new markets for development and investments.  As the major
Virtual Reality industry trade show for the East Coast, this
conference program will address the full spectrum of VR markets and
applications.


              Conference Program Overview

PreConference Tutorials, November 29

    A special workshop tutorial day opens the conference on
November 29 with.  A day-long Introduction ("VR 101") is scheduled for
those who are attending a Virtual Reality Conference for the first
time.  Introductory sessions are also included for those who are
setting up a VR laboratory or who are in the process of choosing
HeadMounted Display Technology.  Specialized software workshops from
leading vendors are also available during this day.


General Conference Program, November 30 and December 1

    The general conference program encompasses the leading market
areas of the Virtual Reality Industry: disabilities, medicine, design,
networking, consumer entertainment, out-of-home entertainment,
museums.  Session speakers are the leading thinkers and developers in
their respective fields.  Analysts from various market arenas are also
scheduled throughout the program to provide business perspectives on
the product development cycle.

    Dr.  Joel Orr will present the Keynote speech Thursday,
December 1.  Renowned and respected in the CAD field and founder of
the Virtual Worlds Society, Orr offers special insight into the use of
virtual worlds within the design professions.


Virtual Reality Video Festival, November 30

    Mecklermedia's East Coast "Virtual Reality Video" festival
will be the highlight of Wednesday evening.  Videos from selected
virtual reality projects from around the world will be shown
theater-style.


Venture Capital Forum, December 1

    The day-long Venture Capital Forum is designed to provide a
setting in which Virtual Reality businesses can introduce themselves
to members of the financial community who are interested in the
investment potentials of the VR industry.  Venture capitalists and
financiers will hear presentations from a number of VR organizations
seeking sources of working capital.


Post-Conference Tutorial, December 2

    A one-day Post Conference tutorial offers Beginning and
Advanced software workshops for two major software packages.  Also,
for the first time, a special one-day "VR Startups and
Entrepreneurship" workshop is scheduled.


                           WHO SHOULD ATTEND

    o   Businesses   and  organizations   currently developing  or
researching Virtual Reality products.

    o Organizations that are  planning the development  or Virtual
Reality products or services.

    o   Representatives  of   the   investment  community who  are
interested in high growth,   high-technology for both early and   late
stage deals.

    o Professionals who are interested in applying Virtual Reality
to their specific disciplines: handicapped, medicine, networking,
consumer and out-of-home entertainment, architecture, design,
training, museums.


                          Registration Fees

Full Conference:
Wednesday, November 30 & Thursday December 1:   $645

One Day Only:
Wednesday, November 30
or Thursday, December 1                         $365



              FOR MORE INFORMATION...


For the full conference brochure, contact Mecklermedia by email at:

        [e-mail]

or mail at Mecklermedia; 20 Ketchum Street, Westport, CT 06880 or by
telephone at 1-800-MECKLER (listen for registration information).

Fax, phone, or mail for additional information or for registration:

Phone:  1-800-Meckler or 203-226-6967
Fax:    [phone]
Email:  [e-mail]

Mecklermedia Inc.
20 Ketchum Street
Westport, CT 06880

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

From: [e-mail] (Summit '94)
Subject: Enterprise Management Summit '94 - New Product Announcements
Date: 11 Nov 1994 01:09:59 GMT
Organization: Netcom


                    Enterprise Management Summit '94
                      Santa Clara Convention Center
                             November 14-18
                           Phone:[phone]
                              415.512.0801
                            Fax:[phone]
                        EMail:[e-mail]
                          [e-mail]

                 ---------------------------------------
                        New Product Announcements
                 ---------------------------------------

Digital Equipment Corporation

At Summit '94, Digital will be demonstrating the first integrated
system and network management platform for Windows NT.  POLYCENTER
AssetWORKS, in conjunction with Microsoft's Systems Management Server,
combines UNIX robustness with Windows NT ease-of-use to provide
configuration management for the vast majority of open client/server
systems. POLYCENTER Manager on NetView brings the power of industry
leadership UNIX management capabilities to Windows NT on Alpha AXP and
Intel platforms.  Together, POLYCENTER AssetWORKS and POLYCENTER
Manager on NetView provide powerful functionality for both system and
network management.

Intel Will Preview LANDesk Manager V2.0

LANDesk Manager V2.0 will fully support the DMTF DMI standard as well
as feature new task management orientation. DMI will allow information
from PC sub-systems to be gathered through a standard interface (a
standard System MIF) thereby providing the basic building blocks for
asset management.

Hewlett-Packard

Hewlett-Packard will demo the first DMI enabled Vectra at Summit '94
which can manage all 33 standard groups plus 6 HP extended groups with
over 250 attributes. The DMI enabled Vectras will also be used to demo
Intel's LANDesk and OpenView running together. HP's DMI MIF Browser
will also be on display.

Bridgeway Corporation Will Unveil EventIX Version 2.0 Features

EventIX is a network management solution that bridges the gap between
legacy systems and SNMP systems. Network managers can now support
non-SNMP devices from SNMP management systems. EventIX provides a set
of tools and applications for event processing (recognition,
filtering, and correlation) and task automation. Enhancements in
EventIX version 2.0 include * Bubble Interface - A GUI for developing,
debugging, and implementing EventIX applications

* Support for SNMPv2.
* Improved NetView Interface - Allows data from the SNMP manager to be sent to
     multiple IBM hosts simultaneously.
* Sybase Database Management - Intelligent agent for managing Sybase databases

Network Computing, Inc. Will Announce the LANAlert Console

LAN Alert Console will integrate the LANAlert NetWare management
system with Hewlett- Packard OpenView/UX. LANAlert uses intelligent
agents running as NLMs on NetWare file servers to periodically
interrogate up to 200 essential NetWare file server events and over
135 NetWare workstation inventory and performance events. Returned
values are compared to 3 customer-configurable thresholds with 5
associated priority levels and alerts are generated when thresholds
are crossed.

LEGENT Corporation Will Unveil Paradigm/XP

LEGENT will be demonstrating newly released Paradigm/XP, a
comprehensive problem management application designed to automate the
help or service desk and simplify the management of networks and
distributed systems. LEGENT will also be demonstrating their upcoming
new technology which allows mainframes and UNIX machines to share
problem management information.

DeskTalk Systems, Inc.

DeskTalk will announce TRENDsnmp 3.0 at Summit '94. TRENDsnmp is the
world's first true client/server, scalable SNMP application for
enterprise network management.  MIBwalker is the primary data
collection tool for TRENDsnmp. The main MIBwalker screen displays the
actual tree structure of loaded MIB together with object description
and definition fields. TRENDbuild lets the user create meaningful
graphs and table reports without using SQL. TRENDsnmp's tabular report
format displays rows and columns of information selected from the data
repository or calculated from stored values. TRENDsnmp graph reports
provide time based plots of information selected from the data
repository or calculated from stored values.

ISICAD

At Summit '94, ISICAD will demonstrate its new InfoManager software,
an object-oriented database application builder which allows
simultaneous update access and reporting from multiple relational
databases. InfoManager functions as a point-and-click application
builder which allows the network manager and technician to get the
data they need, from wherever it is stored, ad easily structure it
into a useful format. InfoManager is a true "drag and drop"
environment that transparently handles all interaction with relational
databases. It lets the user access multiple databases simultaneously,
allowing the user to obtain the information that is required for the
task at hand, without having to worry about which database it is
stored in or where it is located on the network. InfoManager will
complement other database repository strategies, such as those being
suggested by Hewlett-Packard and the Management Integration
Consortium.

Network Management Forum (NMF)

At Summit '94, the Network Management Forum will be providing details
on its newest working team -- SMART (Service Management Automation &
Re-engineering Team).  SMART is comprised of users looking to cut
costs, streamline operations and improve the quality and delivery of
networked information services. The objective of SMART is to
understand, prioritize, and meet all of the most pressing automation
needs of these network operators for which industry agreements are
required.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #412
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14043;
          14 Nov 94 17:10 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09870; Mon, 14 Nov 94 09:31:22 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09862; Mon, 14 Nov 94 09:31:19 CST
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 09:31:19 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #413

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 14 Nov 94 09:31:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 413

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 900 Billing; When Does it Start? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: 900 Billing; When Does it Start? (Dave Levenson)
    SS7 vs. CCIS (Alan Bishoff)
    Re: Need Amp to Boost DTMF Strength (Pat Trimble)
    DSU/CSU For T1 (Marc Collins)
    Re: T1 ->  24 x v.32 -> RS232 (Jody Kravitz)
    Telecommunications Terminology Quiz (Computer Software Solutions)
    Re: Town Considers Taxing Cell Phones (Jeff Hibbard)
    Re: Town Considers Taxing Cell Phones (Carl Jones)
    Re: OC-XX Standards (Gordon Croft)
    Re: How is Japan's Phone System Different Than USA? (Jerry Skene)
    Additional Star Codes Used (Keith Knipschild)
    Re: Additional Start Codes Used (Bruce Brothers)
    Goodbye 'scope (Joe Harrison)
    Gopher - Literally!! Not What You Are Thinking, Though (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 America
On Line. 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, 14 Nov 1994 11:55:47 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 900 Billing; When Does it Start?
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


Andy Spitzer <[e-mail]>, writes:

> Please settle an argument we are having here, about when Billing for a
> 900 call starts.

> Some of us think that the duration of the call is timed from t3 [call
> pickup] to t4 [call hangup], as it would be on a regular 800 call.  In
> other words, billing doesn't start until you return answer supervision
> (Pickup the phone).  If you don't Pickup (due to busy), nothing is billed.

> Some of us think that the duration of the call is timed from t1 [wink
> start] to t4, in other words the clock starts the moment you Wink.  If
> this is true, then if the call wasn't answered, or was played a busy
> signal by the PBX, then the call would still "count".

Your message fails to indicate exactly *who* is being charged in this
case, whether you are referring to the 900 provider being charged (for
call carrying) or the 900 caller being charged.

If I remember correctly, the caller isn't supposed to be charged for a
call to a 900 number for at least long enough to tell them the price
of the call and give them the opportunity to hang up; this means that
at least the first ten seconds should be noncharged to the caller.
(The called party will still have to pay for whatever termination
charges are imposed.)

Second, 900 numbers are generally supposed to be outgoing only since
they usually are announcements, as I understand there is no incoming
voice path unless you (the IP provider) pay a very high rate for
specific incoming trunks and pay $3 for each incoming call that is
answered "live".  Now with other companies they may be doing things
differently, but this was the way it worked before.

I would suspect that since the carrier has to pay for the charge from the
person dialing from the local telephone company, and the charge for
termination at the distant end, that they will probably charge from wink
to disconnect.  (If your incoming lines are directly terminated at the
carrier's POP for your area, then they don't pay the termination charge
to the local phone company and probably can reduce your rate slightly.)


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]
Reports on Security Problems: To Subscribe write [e-mail]
Voted "Largest Polluter of the (IETF) list" by Randy Bush <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: 900 Billing; When Does it Start?
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 1994 01:51:25 GMT


Andy Spitzer ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Please settle an argument we are having here, about when Billing for a
> 900 call starts.

The clock starts when/if the called party returns off-hook supervision,
not at the start of ANI/DNIS spill.  The clock stops when either party
goes on-hook.  Note, however, that before the called party begins to
provide information (e.g. connects a live agent) they are usually
required to voice a disclaimer message, identifying the service
provider, stating the price of the call (or the method for computing
the price: e.g. "this call costs $1.75 per minute") and advising the
caller that they may avoid the charge by disconnecting NOW.  If the
total time is less than 24 seconds, the calling party is not billed,
but the called party is.

On our audiotex package, if a DNIS code is administered to be a
premium-billed number (such as 976, 900, or 212-540), the system will
play its disclaimer message and avoid giving out useful information
until the caller has stayed on the line long enough to be paying for
the call.  If the ANI spill indicates the the caller is blacklisted
(has previously called the same service and later refused to pay)
then answer supervision is never returned, and the caller given
ring-no-answer treatment.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Bishoff)
Subject: SS7 vs. CCIS
Date: 14 Nov 1994 02:43:16 GMT
Organization: IAC
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Does anyone know the difference between SS7 and CCIS?  What info do
they pass?  What speed are they?  What format is the data?

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

From: [e-mail] (Pat Trimble)
Subject: Re: Need Amp to Boost DTMF Strength
Date: 13 Nov 1994 19:38:31 GMT
Organization: Netcom


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

> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
> Levenson) writes:

>> I use one of these on an OPX line between a Panasonic PBX and an
>> off-premises station.  I don't particularly like it, however.  It is
>> half-duplex, like a speakerphone.  You can't interrupt a long-talking
>> far-end speaker, and you can't hear the far end at all if there is a
>> significant background noise level at the near end.

>> But, can anybody suggest a better solution?

> If the signal level is not within spec, get your carrier to correct
> the problem.

Voice lines are not half-duplex; it sounds like there could be a level
problem. You need some test equipment: HP 3551 is a good one. Find
where your level adjustments are. If it's on T-1 carrier between the
PBX and the station, there will be level adjustments in the channel
cards. I'd recommend you put 2.0 db of loss in both the transmit and
receive sections of both the FXO (PBX side) and the FXS (Station side)
channel cards. Check the impedance setting on the FXS card, I'd
recommend 900 Ohms. If there is a BOC (Build-out Capacitance)
adjustment on the FXS card, try taking all capacitance out if the
station is within 100 feet of the channel bank. Let me know if this
helps or not.


Pat

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

From: Marc Collins <[e-mail]>
Subject: DSU/CSU For T1
Date: 13 Nov 1994 17:46:01 -0500
Organization: Medical Computer Systems


I'm installing a T1 line and I ordered a 56k DSU/CSU for the line.
I'm now concerned, can I use this DSU/CSU with this line or do I need
to order a higher speed unit.  I'm having the line installed this
comming Thursday and would appreciate any comments or suggestions!

Thanks so much!!

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

Date: Sat, 12 Nov 94 17:57:42 PST
From: [e-mail] (Jody Kravitz)
Subject: Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232


[e-mail] (Robert Mah) writes:

> Lance Ellinghaus <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> A company called Primary Access has a product that will take a T1 (24
>> VOICE channels) and interpret the DS0 channels as modem connections
>> (v.32, v.42bis, etc..) and output standard RS232 to hook to a system.

>> What other companies have something like this?  Comments on their
>> products?  Contacts to get more information?

> Well, their domain name is PRIACC.COM, but they only seem to have
> e-mail connectivity at the moment (no WWW, FTP, etc.).

> If you get any pricing info on this product/service, I would be
> interested as a normal channel bank costs mucho money.

Mail addresed to "[e-mail]" will get you an automated response on
their product line.  In addition, the mail is read later by a human so
that an appropriate follow-up will occur if the mail indicates that it
is appropriate.


Jody

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

From: [e-mail] (Computer Software Solutions)
Subject: Telecommunications Terminology Quiz
Date: 14 Nov 1994 06:45:04 GMT
Organization: Computer Software Solutions


Can anyone out there help me define the following terms?

I need help getting 100% in my next exam!

1) Explain syncronizing switching equipment to carrier T1 lines.

2) What "reference timing" and "loop timing" is and the differences
   between the two?

3) "Tip" vs "Ring" on a T1 span?

4) What is a "primary rate span"?

5) What is a "PCM highway"?

6) What is a "Backplane"?

7) What are "E1" lines?

8) What are "CEPT facilities"?

9) Explain the difference between "D" and "B" type channels.

10) Explain asyncronous transmissions using only two active pins in an
    RS232?


Thanks in advance,

Rob

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Hibbard)
Subject: Re: Town Considers Taxing Cell Phones
Date: 14 Nov 1994 12:48:33 GMT
Organization: Bradley University


Greg Monti <[e-mail]> writes:

> A story in the November 7, 1994, editions of the {Washington Times},
> page A1, says that the Town of Vienna, Virginia, is considering
> putting a tax of $3 per month on all cellular phone accounts with
> Vienna billing addresses.
         ^^^^^^^
That's nice of them, compared to what I'm used to.  The city of Peoria
IL taxes all phone service at 2% (soon to be 3%).  I don't live in
Peoria; my billing address is not in Peoria; and most usage of my
cellular phone involves cell sites outside the city of Peoria.  Still,
since my cellular company has its office (and presumably switch) in
Peoria, I pay these taxes to Peoria.

Granted, it's only $2-$3 per month, but it annoys me.  Not being a
Peoria resident, I cannot vote against the clowns who passed this (and
who have publically announced their intent to raise it).  Isn't
"taxation without representation" one of the things our forefathers
rebelled against in 1776?  How can the city get away with this?

I have noticed that the City of Peoria tax is not applied to roaming
charges, and to toll charges for out-of-state calls, so the city must
recognize some limit to their taxing power.

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Jones)
Subject: Re: Town Considers Taxing Cell Phones
Date: 13 Nov 1994 19:25:15 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.


Greg Monti ([e-mail]) wrote:

> The article notes that California cities of Inglewood and Culver City
> also tax cellular phones.  Cellular companies put up with the taxes,
> which they pass through from subscribers, because they are not high.

Taxes on cellular phone bills easily reach in the double digit
percentages so these new taxes are not going to be very welcome on
cellular bills.  For example, a cell bill from Seattle includes 3%
Federal, 8.2% State and 6.383% Municipal taxes.  Cell bills can also
have E911, TDD and other charges on them so adding a $3.00 a month
surcharge, combined with the other taxes, suddenly doesn't seem so
small.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Croft)
Subject: Re: OC-XX Standards
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 10:36:22 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada


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

> I was wondering if anyone here at the TELECOM Digest could explain or
> point me towards literature explaining the meaning of the OC-#
> specifications used in ATM and SONET.  I've checked places such as
> http://www.ipps.lsa.umich.edu/telecom-info.html and
> gopher://cell-relay.indiana.edu/11/docs and have not found references.
> I have also utilized the electronic document abstract searches
> available at the University library, and have been unable to find more
> than a mention of the terms.

Well I can't, off the top of my head, give you an in depth answer but
maybe this will get you started ... OC stands for Optical Carrier and
the numbers behind that represent the different speeds of the systems.
I.E. OC1 is approx. 45 meg. bits per second (DS-3) and OC 48 is 48
times 45 meg.


Hope this helps,

Gord

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

From: Jerry Skene <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How is Japan's Phone System Different Than USA?
Date: 13 Nov 1994 18:56:34 GMT
Organization: Digital Gateway Systems


> How does the Japanese phone network differ from the phone system in
> the US?

One difference is the impedance of the phone line. The Japanese system
has a higher characteristic impedance, about 900 ohms, compared to the
US's 600 ohms.

It is also much more restictive on echo return loss.

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: America's Suggestion Box - BBS [phone]
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 00:54:43
Subject: Additional Star Codes Used


Star Codes on most Telco Systems:

Here are some more STAR Codes that are used in my area of NYNEX 516
Areacode:


*20 -> *49  === Speed Calling 30 Dialing

*98 =========== Voice Dialing Delayed Beep (for FAX or Modems)

*99 =========== Voice Dialing Instructions

*82 =========== UNKNOWN (it does something though)

*65 =========== Computer says "Your call cannot be completed"

*85 =========== Computer says "Your call cannot be completed"

All others that were not on the list give me a FAST Buzzy Signal.


Enjoy,

[e-mail]

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

From: Bruce Brothers <[e-mail]>
Date: 14 Nov 94 13:38:50 GMT
Subject: Re: Additional Star Codes Used


I would also add the following (for NYNEX in Massachusetts, anyway):

*99 - voice dialing maintenance menu


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, that's a new one on me. I've
never heard of it before.   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 00:34:47 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Goodbye 'scope


For years now I've been calling [phone] to get a recorded
horoscope (well actually until about 5 years ago it used to be
936-5353). Today I tried it and got a recording saying that the number
is now 900- ....

Since I'm calling from outside the US I can't dial 900 so I guess
that's it for the horoscopes from now on.

Well Mr. Service Provider if you're reading this I don't know whether
to flame you for getting greedy and cutting me off, or maybe I should
say "thanks for all those years of regular rates".  I guess it's the
latter.

The particularly gloomy thing about this is that I called the Mercury
international operator to enquire if I could be connected to this new
number (although I guessed not, at those rates) and she said "strange,
I don't have +1-900 on my screen". She allowed me to listen in while
she called AT&T Inward; the foreign operator was so abrupt and didn't
even try to explain "hey you can't call that internationally". I felt
rather ashamed I'd asked her to try it in fact. I always had this
romantic idea of international operators worldwide all treating each
other right. That's the new and better world I guess.


Joe       ICL Ltd. Bracknell Berkshire RG12 8SN  UK ([phone])
              * [e-mail] *
         * S=Harrison/I=J/OU1=bra0112/O=icl/P=icl/A=gold 400/C=GB *


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Years and years ago, operators were a lot
more courteous to each other. Operators in other countries still seem at
times to be a lot more courteous and informed than those in the USA. It
is sometimes quite painful to place an international call requiring
assistance from a USA operator (such as directory assistance somewhere)
and listen to the USA operator not only mispronounce the place name but
then refuse to accept instruction or correction from the caller in an
effort to assist the foreign operator in locating the number or extending
the call.

Regards 976/900, actually I am surprised you've been able to get through
to anything-976-anything in the USA for quite awhile now. It does not
surprise me that you cannot reach 900 numbers (like 800, they are for
internal use only in the USA), but we here have been restricted from
calling 976 when outside our own area code for about three or four years.

It used to be quite a scam here to avoid local 976 premium charges by
calling instead a similar service in some other area code and getting
billed for toll charges only. The deal was that local telcos had a method
in place for billing on 976, but when the call came from elsewhere via
a long distance carrier we only paid the toll, which often times was as
little as 11-13 cents per minute during overnight hours. So if you wanted
to hook up for hot chat via the long distance telephone at 2:00 AM your
options were to call local-976 and pay three or four dollars to get on
someone's conference bridge and meet someone, or call across the country
and get on that bridge for 12 cents per minute instead! Guess which option
most users chose. After all, the end result was the same: you met the
person you wished to chat with on the bridge and then one or the other
of you called direct long distance to the other one to talk about whatever
it was you wanted to talk about. The bridge was just the common meeting
place.

One well-known conference bridge for many years was out of San Fransisco
on 415-976-4297. A disclaimer message played out at the start of each
connection, "You've called the San Fransisco Hot Conference Line. In
just a few seconds, you'll be connected to lively adult conversations in
progress; its just two dollars for three minutes! Enjoy!"  Then you were
tossed over to the bridge. The trouble was, from the bridgetender's point
of view, the only people paying the two dollars were callers in the
415/408 area codes *who were not smart enough to dial the same service
in Chicago or New York instead, and pay 12 cents for their connection also*!
Some nights the San Fransisco line was full of guys from all over the
world looking to hookup. All were paying straight toll -- non-commissionable
to the bridgetender -- without a single California guy anywhere to be
found. If a 415/408 user did try to call in, he was returned busy signal
with all trunks engaged by out-of-towners.

The bridgetenders finally got telcos interested in their dilemma of everyone
on the bridge for free, and telcos responded by blocking 976 from outside
their area code. Back in the days when MCI access codes were king, some
cheapskates did not even pay the 12 cents if you get my drift, and it was
a rude awakening early one morning when calls began getting intercepted
with the announcement "MCI does not complete calls to 976 at this time."
Then within several months most of the local telcos had followed suit,
with calls to any 976 other than your own getting headed off at the switch
and bounced right back to you. I was not aware that international calls
were still being allowed.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: Gopher - Literally!! But Not What You Were Thinking Though
Date: 14 Nov 1994 02:16:29 -0500


x-posted, but it's humorous... /[e-mail]

In <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Yves Blondeel) writes:

Hello,

I spotted the following press release on AT&Ts WWW site
http://www.att.com

Yves Blondeel
yves [e-mail]
         ______________________________________________

Statement on protest over using gophers in cable research
KEYWORDS: pocket_gopher, gopher, cable, PETA, protest

Donna Cunningham - AT&T Bell Laboratories
802-482-3748 (office)
802-482-2933 (home)
[e-mail]

Jeanne Snell - AT&T PR, Denver
303-290-5652 (office)
303-779-0873 (home)
[e-mail]

FOR RELEASE FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1994

STATEMENT ON PROTEST OVER USING GOPHERS IN CABLE RESEARCH

DENVER -- The activist group called People for the Ethical Treatment
of Animals (PETA) issued a news release Thursday, announcing a protest
demonstration scheduled for Friday to dramatize their opposition to
the use of pocket gophers to test telecommunications cable.

The group opposes testing conducted by the Denver Wildlife Research
Center for AT&T and other companies that involve the use of
wild-caught pocket gophers.

AT&T issued the following statement in response to the planned
protest:

     AT&T is a leading supplier of cable to the
     telecommunications industry--to its own business units and
     to other long-distance and local telecommunications
     companies.  We are obliged by our customers to build cable
     systems according to industry standards set forth in
     specifications described by Bellcore in technical reference
     TRNW000020.

     Regarding gopher/cable research, TRNW000020 says, "The
     gopher resistance of a buried cable design is verified in
     the seven-day gopher test developed at the U.S. Fish and
     Wildlife Service."  It then describes the test in detail.
     Bellcore is the research consortium that provides technical
     suport to most U.S. local telecommunications companies.

     Along with 58 other telecommunications companies, power
     companies and duct manufacturers, AT&T has funded
     gopher/cable research conducted by the Denver Wildlife
     Research Center, part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
     This research has been conducted for AT&T, on and off, over
     the past 25 years.

     We learned today that the Wildlife Research Center had
     discontinued this research at the end of September.  No
     gopher/cable research was being conducted for AT&T at that
     time.  We understand the Center's official announcement that
     it had ceased doing this research was made Oct. 1 in a
     notice to the Commerce Business Journal.

     The Center had conducted its tests in an environment
     set up to replicate the gophers' burrow environment,
     according to protocols scrutinized by the Institutional
     Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) and subject to
     inspections by the Regulatory Enforcement and Animal Care
     arm of the Department of Agriculture.

     Mechanical testing devices have limited usefulness
     because resistance to rodent gnawing cannot be simulated by
     mechanical tests of hardness or biting pressure; behavior
     parameters, which cannot be identified with mechanical
     tests, are also important in determining cable resistance.
     A flexible plastic web tubing, for example, may deter
     gophers not because of mechanical strength but because of a
     behavioral reluctance of pocket gophers to chew on the
     webbing.  AT&T cares about the environment and all living
     things in it.

                ________________________________

     [e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #413
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14476;
          14 Nov 94 17:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10508; Mon, 14 Nov 94 09:49:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10482; Mon, 14 Nov 94 09:49:03 CST
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 09:49:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #414

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 14 Nov 94 09:49:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 414

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Federal Job Posting: ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Mike Dolak)
    Federal Job Posting: Information Systems Analyst (Mike Dolak)
    Computer <--> Modem <--> Modem <--> TNC (Jeff Okleberry)
    How to Make "Wireless IEEE802.3" Connections Between PC's (Ewald Beekman)
    Re: Inquiry on Bellcore (William H. Sohl)

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 America
On Line. 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] (Mike Dolak)
Subject: Federal Job Posting: ADP/Telecommunications Analyst
Date: 14 Nov 1994 12:43:05 GMT
Organization: Digex Net


  The U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) seeks experienced
  professionals in the following areas:

    -- ADP/Telecommunications Analyst: provide expertise
       on design, development, and operation of computer
       and telecommunications technologies.

    -- Information Systems Analyst: Assess the planning
       development and operation of information systems.

    -- Business Process Reengineering Analyst: Assess
       business planning, process analysis, and supporting
       technologies.

  Requirements: Undergraduate/graduate degree in computer science,
  mathematics, electrical engineering, industrial engineering, or
  operations research and directly related professional experience.
  Positions may be located in : Washington, DC, Atlanta, Boston,
  Denver, Kansas City, or Los Angeles.

  GAO offers a comprehensive compensation and benefits package.

  Listing of available positions (ADP/Telecommunications Analyst--
  OR-AIMD-95-ADP-001, OR-AIMD-95-ADP-002, and OR-AIMD-95-ADP-003--
  follows.

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

United States General Accounting Office

GAO Career opportunities
Announcement Number: OR-AIMD-95-ADP-001

ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Computer Science)
ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Mathematics)
ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Electrical Engineering)

Opens: September 19, 1994 Closes: November 18, 1994
More than one position may be filled. Selections may be made at any
time.

Location:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Accounting and Information Management Division
Positions may be located in: Washington, DC; Atlanta, GA; Boston,
MA;
Denver, CO; Kansas City, KS; Los Angeles, CA

Salary:

Base Salary: $40,383 to $52,532. Salary is increased by the percentage
shown for the locations below:

Washington - 4.23%    Denver- 4.54%
Atlanta- 3.86%        Kansas City - 3.3()%
Boston - 5.47%        Los Angeles - 5.69%

Description of Work:

At the staff level, ADP/Telecommunications analysts support GAO's
mission by providing technical expertise associated with the
organization, design, development, acquisition, operation,
maintenance, and management of computer and telecommunications
technologies. Incumbents address a broad range of applications that
may include data processing for business and scientific applications
which typically use commercial, general purpose computers in a wide
variety of sizes, configurations, and complexities, including stand-
alone and networked computers and telecommunications systems. Also
included are tactical and weapons systems applications which typically
use general or special purpose computer adapted for military uses.

Qualifications:

you must have a bachelor's or graduate degree in computer science,
mathematics, or electrical engineering and one year of professional
experience equivalent to the GS-11 level that demonstrates the ability
to analyze aspects of computer and telecommunications systems.
appointments will be subject to a favorable background investigation.
Some positions require a "Top Secret" security clearance.

To apply submit:

SF-171, Application for Federal Employment, or resume. A separate
and complete application package must be submitted for each location
for which you wish to be considered. If you do not designate a location
preference, you will only receive consideration for Washington, DC.
Narrative Statements addressing the ranking factors.
SF-15, Application for 10-Point Veterans Preference, and proof (if
applicable). GAO Form 74, Applicant Questionnaire (optional).

Send completed forms to:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Attention: OR-AIMD-95-ADP-001
441 G Street, NW, Room 6105
Washington, DC 20548

Your application package must be received by the close of business on
the closing date of this announcement. Please do not include material
that is not requested a~ part of the application package because these
items cannot be forwarded to the selecting official or returned to you.

Other Information:

GAO offers a full range of federal employment benefits, including paid
sick and vacation leave, health and life insurance, the Thrift Savings
Plan, and flexible work hours. Also available in the GAO headquarters
building are on-site child care and an employee fitness center. The
office environment is smoke-free, although designated smoking areas
are available. Moving expenses are generally not paid. For additional
information, call 202-512-5657.

Announcement Number: OR-AIMD-95-ADP-001

Ranking Factors for ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Computer
Science/Mathematics/Engineering):

These ranking factors constitute a competitive examination which will
determine whether you are referred for selection. You must submit
narrative statements addressing the complexity, nature, and extent of
your experience related to each of the following factors:

1. Knowledge and experience in planning, designing, operating,
developing, and evaluating major computer or telecommunications
projects.

2. In depth knowledge of current computer and telecommunications
technologies and applications.

3. Experience in conducting in-depth analyses of selected aspects of
computer and telecommunications systems, such as security risk
assessments, network and data management analyses, and computer
performance evaluations.

GAO is an Equal Opportunity Employer.  U.S. Citizenship is required.

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

United States General Accounting Office

GAO Career Opportunities

Announcement Number: OR-AIMD-95-ADP-002

ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Computer Science)
ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Mathematics)
ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Electrical Engineering)

Opens: September 19, 1994 Closes: November 18, 1994 More than one
position may be filled. Selections may be made at any time.

Location:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Accounting and Information Management Division
Positions may be located in: Washington, DC; Atlanta, GA; Boston, MA;
Denver, CO; Kansas City, KS; Los Angeles, CA

Salary:

Base Salary: $48,032 to $73,679. Salary is increased by the percentage
shown for the locations below:

Washington - 4.23%     Denver - 4.54%
Atlanta - 3.86%     Kansas City - 3.3()%
Boston - 5.47%         Los Angeles - 5.69%

Description of Work:

At the senior level, ADP/Telecommunications analysts support GAO's
mission by providing technical expertise associated with the
organization, design, development. acquisition, operation,
maintenance, and management of computer and telecommunications
technologies. Incumbents address a broad range of applications that
may include data processing for business and scientific applications
which typically use commercial, general purpose computers in a wide
variety of sizes. Configurations, and complexities, including
stand-alone and networked computers a telecommunications systems. Also
included are tactical and weapons systems applications which typically
use general or special purpose computer adapted for military uses.

Qualifications:

You must have a bachelor's or graduate degree in computer science,
mathematics, or electrical engineering and one year of professional
experience equivalent to the GS-12 level that demonstrates the ability
to analyze aspects of computer art telecommunications systems.
Appointments will be subject to a favorable background investigation.
Some positions require a "Top Secret" security clearance.

To apply submit:

SF-171, Application for Federal Employment, or resume. A separate and
complete application package must be submitted for each location for
which you wish to be considered. If you do not designate a location
preference, you will only receive consideration for Washington, DC.
Narrative Statements addressing the ranking factors.
SF-15, Application for 10-Point Veterans Preference, and proof (if
applicable). GAO Form 74, Applicant Questionnaire (optional).

Send completed forms to:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Attention: OR-AIMD-95-ADP-002
441 G Street, NW, Room 6105
Washington, DC 20548

Your application package must be received by the close of business
on the closing date of this announcement. Please do not include
material that is not requested as part of the application package
because these items cannot be forwarded to the selecting official
or returned to you.

Other Information:

GAO offers a full range of federal employment benefits, including paid
sick and vacation leave, health and life insurance, the Thrift Savings
Plan, and flexible work hours.  Also available in the GAO headquarters
building are on-site child care and an employee fitness center.  The
office environment is smoke-free, although designated smoking areas
are available.  Moving expenses are generally not paid.  For
additional information, call 202-512-5657.

Announcement Number: OR-AIMD-95-ADP-002

Ranking Factors for ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Computer
Science/Mathematics/Engineering):

These ranking factors constitute a competitive examination which will
determine whether you are referred for selection. You must submit
narrative statements addressing the complexity, nature, and extent of
your experience related to each of the following factors:

1. Knowledge and experience in planning, designing, operating,
developing, and evaluating major computer or telecommunications
projects.

2. In depth knowledge of current computer and telecommunications
technologies and applications.

3. Experience in conducting in-depth analyses of selected aspects of
computer and telecommunications systems, such as security risk
assessments, network and data management analyses, and computer
performance evaluations.

GAO is an equal opportunity employer.  U.S. Citizenship is required.

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

United States General Accounting Office

GAO Career Opportunities

Announcement Number: OR-AIMD-95-ADP-003

ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Computer Science)
ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Mathematics)
ADP/Telecommunications Analyst (Electrical Engineering)

Opens: October 17, 1994 Closes: December 9, 1994 More than one
position may be filled. Selections may be made at any time.

Location:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Accounting and Information Management Division
Washington, DC

Salary: $66,704 to $86,589 (plus 4.23% locality pay)

Description of Work:

At the management level, ADP/Telecommunications analysts support
GAO's mission by providing technical expertise associated with the
organization, design, development, acquisition, operation,
maintenance, and management of computer and telecommunications
technologies. Incumbents address a broad range of applications that
may include data processing for business and scientific applications
which typically use commercial, general purpose computers in a wide
variety of sizes, configurations, and complexities, including stand-
alone and networked computers and telecommunications systems. Also
included are tactical and weapons systems applications which typically
use general or special purpose computer adapted for military uses.

Qualifications:

You must have a bachelor's or graduate degree in computer science,
mathematics, or electrical engineering and one year of professional
experience equivalent to the GS-14 level that demonstrates the ability
to analyze aspects of computer and telecommunications systems.
Appointments will be subject to a favorable background investigation.

To apply submit:

SF-171, Application for Federal Employment, or resume.
Narrative Statements addressing the ranking factors.
SF-15, Application for 10-Point Veterans Preference, and proof (if
applicable).  GAO Form 74, Applicant Questionnaire (optional).

Send completed forms to:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Attention: OR-AIMD-95-ADP-003
441 G Street, NW, Room 6105
Washington, DC 20548

Your application package must be received by the close of business on
the closing date of this announcement. Please do not include material
that is not requested as part of the application package because these
items cannot be forwarded to the selecting official or returned to you.

Other Information:

This position may be a supervisory position and the selectee may be
required to serve a one-year supervisory trial period.  GAO offers a full
range of federal employment benefits, including paid sick and vacation
leave, health and life insurance, the Thrift Savings Plan, and flexible
work hours.  Also available in the GAO headquarters building are on-
site child care and an employee fitness center.  The office environment
is smoke-free, although designated smoking areas are available.
Moving expenses are generally not paid. For additional information,
call 202-512-5657.

Ranking Factors:

These ranking factors and the information you provide in your
application constitute a competitive examination which will determine
whether you are referred for selection. You must submit narrative
statements addressing the complexity, nature, and extent of your
experience, education, and training related to each of the following
factors:

1. Knowledge and experience in planning, designing, operating,
developing, and evaluating major computer or telecommunications
projects.

2. In-depth knowledge of current computer and telecommunications
technologies and applications.

3. Experience in conducting in-depth analyses of selected aspects of
computer and telecommunications systems, such as security risk
assessments, network and data management analyses, and computer
performance evaluations.

Some positions require a "Top Secret" security clearance. GAO is an
equal opportunity employer. U.S Citizenship is required.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Dolak)
Subject: Federal Job Posting: Information Systems Analyst
Date: 14 Nov 1994 12:43:51 GMT
Organization: Digex Net


  The U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) seeks experienced
  professionals in the following areas:

    -- ADP/Telecommunications Analyst: provide expertise
       on design, development, and operation of computer
       and telecommunications technologies.

    -- Information Systems Analyst: Assess the planning
       development and operation of information systems.

    -- Business Process Reengineering Analyst: Assess
       business planning, process analysis, and supporting
       technologies.

  Requirements: Undergraduate/graduate degree in computer science,
  mathematics, electrical engineering, industrial engineering, or
  operations research and directly related professional experience.
  Positions may be located in : Washington, DC, Atlanta, Boston,
  Denver, Kansas City, or Los Angeles.

  GAO offers a comprehensive compensation and benefits package.

  Listing of available positions (Information Systems Analyst--
  OR-AIMD-95-ISA-001, OR-AIMD-95-ISA-002, and OR-AIMD-95-ISA-003--
  follows.

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

United States General Accounting Office

GAO Career Opportunities
Announcement Number: OR-AIMD-95-ISA-001

Information Systems Analyst (Computer Science)
Information Systems Analyst (Mathematics)

Opens: September 19, 1994 Closes: November 18, 1994 More than
one position may be filled. Selections may be made at any time.

Location:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Accounting and Information Management Division
Positions may be located in: Washington, DC; Atlanta, GA; Boston,
MA; Denver, CO; Kansas City, KS; Los Angeles, CA

Salary:

Base salary: $40,383 to $52,532. Salary is increased by the percentage
shown for the locations below:

  Washington - 4.23%        Denver- 4.54%
  Atlanta- 3.86%        Kansas City - 3.30%
  Boston - 5.47%        Los Angeles - 5.69%

Description of Work:

At the staff level, information systems analysts support GAO's mission
by performing a wide range of analytical and evaluative work
associated with the planning, design, development, installation,
operation, and maintenance of information systems supporting agency
programs and management activities.

Qualifications:

You must have a bachelor's or graduate degree in computer science or
mathematics and one year of professional experience equivalent to the
GS- 11 level that demonstrates the ability to evaluate the planning,
design, development, and operation of automated information systems.
Appointments will be subject to a favorable background investigation.
Some positions require a "Top Secret" security clearance.

To apply submit:

SF-171, Application for Federal Employment, or resume. A separate
and complete application package must be submitted for each location
for which you wish to e considered. If you do not designate a location
preference, you will only receive consideration for Washington, DC.
Narrative Statements addressing the ranking factors. SF-15,
Application for 10-Point Veterans Preference, and proof (if
applicable).  GAO Form 74, Applicant Questionnaire (optional).

Send completed forms to:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Attention: OR-AIMD-95-ISA-001
441 G Street, NW, Room 6105
Washington, DC 20548

Your application package must be received by close of business on the
closing date of this announcement. Please do not include material that
is not requested as part of the application package because theses items
cannot be forwarded to the selecting official or returned to you.

Other Information:

GAO offers a full range of federal employment benefits, including paid
sick and vacation leave, health and life insurance, the Thrift Savings
Plan, and flexible work hours.  Also available in the GAO
headquarters building are on-site child-care and an employee fitness
center.  The office environment is smoke-free, although designated
smoking areas are available. Moving expenses are generally not paid.
For additional information, call 202-512-5657.

Announcement Number: OR-AIMD-95-ISA-001

Ranking Factors for Information Systems Analyst (Computer
Science/Mathematics):

These ranking factors constitute a competitive examination which will
determine whether you are referred for selection. You must submit
narrative statements addressing the complexity, nature, and extent of
your background related to each of the following factors:

1. Experience in evaluating or participating in the planning, design,
development, and/or operation of major automated information
systems supporting federal, state, local, or private industry programs.

2. Experience in evaluating or participating in the development and
application of the policies, procedures, practices, and controls for
information resources management functions and activities such as
software risk assessments, information systems security, information
systems design and development approaches.

3. Experience in the development or evaluation of strategic business,
IRM, and information technology plans (e.g., ISP's) and information
management, organizational, and decision making processes against
current leading practices.

GAO is an Equal Opportunity Employer. U.S. Citizenship is required.

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

United States General Accounting Office

Career Opportunities
Announcement Number OR-AIMD-95-ISA-002

Information Systems Analyst (Computer Science)
Information Systems Analyst (Mathematics)

Opens: September 19, 1994 Closes: November 18, 1994 More than
one position may be filled. Selections may be made at any time.

Location:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Accounting and Information Management Division
Positions may be located in: Washington, DC; Atlanta, GA; Boston,
MA; Denver, CO; Kansas City, KS; Los Angeles, CA

Salary:

Base salary: $48,032 to $73,679. Salary is increased by the percentage
shown for the locations below:

     Washington - 4.23%      Denver - 4.54%
     Atlanta - 3.86%           Kansas City - 3.30%
     Boston - 5.47%            Los Angeles - 5.69%

Description of Work:

At the senior level, information systems analysts support GAO's
mission by performing a wide range of analytical and evaluative work
associated with the planning, design, development, installation,
operation, and maintenance of information systems supporting agency
programs and management activities.

Qualifications:

You must have a bachelor's or graduate degree in computer science
or mathematics and one year of professional experience equivalent to
the GS-12 level that demonstrates the ability to evaluate the planning,
design, development, and operation of automated information systems.

Appointments will be subject to a favorable background
investigation. Some positions require a "Top Secret" security
clearance.

To apply submit:

SF-171, Application for Federal Employment or resume. A separate
and complete application package must be submitted for each location
for which you wish to be considered. If you do not designate a location
preference, you will only receive consideration for Washington, DC.
Narrative Statements addressing the ranking factors. SF-15, Application
for 10 Point Veterans Preference, and proof (if applicable).
GAO Form 74, Applicant Questionnaire (optional).

Send completed forms to:

U.S. General Accounting Office
Attention: OR-AIMD-95-ISA-002
441 G Street, NW, Room 6105
Washington, DC 20548

Your application package must be received by the close of business on
the closing date of this announcement. Please do not include material
that is not requested as part of the application package because these
items cannot be forwarded to the selecting official or returned to you.

Other Information:

GAO offers a full range of federal employment benefits, including
paid sick and vacation leave, health and life insurance, the Thrift
Savings Plan, and flexible work hours. Also available in the GAO
headquarters building are on-site child care and an employee fitness
center. The office environment is smoke-free, although designated
smoking areas are available. Moving expenses are generally not paid.
For additional information, call 202-512-5657.

Announcement Number: OR-AIMD-95-ISA-002

Ranking Factors for Information Systems Analyst (Computer
Science/Mathematics):

These ranking factors constitute a competitive examination which will
determine whether you are referred for selection. You must submit
narrative statements addressing the complexity, nature, and extent of
your experience related to each of the following factors:

1. Experience in managing, evaluating or participating in the
planning, design, development, and/or operation of major automated
information systems supporting federal, state, local, or private industry
programs.

2. Experience in managing, evaluating or participating in the
development and application of the policies, procedures, practices, and
controls for information resources management functions and
activities such as software risk assessments, information systems
security, information systems design and development approaches.

3. Experience in managing and evaluating strategic business and
information technology plans, and information management,
organizational, and decision making processes against current leading
practices.

GAO is an Equal Opportunity Employer.  U.S. Citizenship is required.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeff Okleberry)
Subject: Computer <--> Modem <--> Modem <--> TNC
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 13:24:14 GMT


I have a couple questions about using modems to commuicate between
computers that I hope somebody on the net can help me with.

Here is my problem. I have a ham radio TNC which runs on a RS-232 port
(Figure 1).

 ____________                                                 _______
|            |                     RS-232                    |       |
|  Computer  |-----------------------------------------------|  TNC  |
|____________|                                               |_______|

                                 Figure 1

I have a new computer which does not have any free modem ports, but
does have an internal modem.  I have an extra stand alone modem and I
was wondering if it is possible to use the modems so I can commuicate
with my TNC (Figure 2).

 ____________            _____               _____            _______
|            |  RS-232  |     |  Telephone  |     |  RS-232  |       |
|  Computer  |----------|Modem|-------------|Modem|----------|  TNC  |
|____________|          |_____|             |_____|          |_______|

                                  Figure 2

My second question is it possible to do the same thing in Figure 2
with two computers?  A follow-on question is can I use my house's
internal telephone wiring or do I need to run a direct link between
the two modems?


Thank you,

Jeff Okleberry     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ewald Beekman)
Subject: How to Make "Wireless IEEE802.3" Connections Between PC's
Organization: TNO Physics and Electronics Laboratory
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 08:48:22 GMT


We want to have "wireless IEEE 802.3" communication between three
PC's, with minimum adjustment of the IEEE 802.3 equipment.

We have three shortrange radio transceivers with a data transfer
capacity of 10 MBps. Important transceiver characteristics are:

- only half duplex connections are possible, because at one moment a
transceiver can only receive or transmit;

- the tranceiver has no software control port: the only control
function is a hardware signal for selecting the transmit or receive
mode (so-called send key);

- a transmitter is ready to send data after about 10 msec from the
moment that a "send" command is given.

Each of our three PC's is equipped with an IEEE 802.3 10BASE-T
LAN-interface card.

Finally, we assume a channel quality similar to that of twisted pair
medium, due to the very short ranges (50 metres).

Our question is: "How must we configer such a wireless system with
minimum adjustment and/or enhancement of the current equipment?"
Hence, we very much prefer a solution without using (expensive)
routers.  In particular, we are interested to know if an output signal
of the 10BASE-T interface card can be used to generate the "send"
command.

Does anybody have a suggestion?

Suggestions may apply to: additional hardware circuits and/or
commercially attainable interface equipment, software adjustments to
control the LAN cards, etc.

Please send any replies to:
[e-mail]


TIA,

Ruud Overduin     TNO Physics and Electronics Laboratory
P.O.Box 96864                     [phone] (voice)
2509JG The Hague                    [phone] (fax)
The Netherlands              [e-mail] (email)

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

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Inquiry on Bellcore
Date: 14 Nov 1994 10:30:35 -0500
Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore)


In article <[e-mail]>, Victorio O. Ochave
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> I need information on how to order technical documents from BELLCORE;
> can anyone provide me with email address, fax number, contact person
> information? TNX in advance.

Bellcore documents can be ordered by calling the following:

Toll free in North America -  1-800-521-2673

International Callers:  1-908-699-5800

Hope that helps,


Bill Sohl, Bellcore NISDN Hotline Technical Consultant (1-800-992-ISDN)
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ   201-829-2879 Weekdays  [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #414
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24999;
          15 Nov 94 15:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03683; Tue, 15 Nov 94 07:50:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03673; Tue, 15 Nov 94 07:50:01 CST
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 07:50:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #415

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 15 Nov 94 07:50:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 415

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232 (John LaCour)
    Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232 (Chris Whittenburg)
    Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232 (Dan J. Declerck)
    Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232 (Russ Bryant)
    Re: Frac T1, sw 56k, or Some Scalable Internet Access (Jack Pestaner)
    Re: Computer <--> Modem <--> Modem <--> TNC (Jeff Regan)
    Re: Computer <--> Modem <--> Modem <--> TNC (Brendan Dowling)
    Re: Computer <--> Modem <--> Modem <--> TNC (Gary Breuckman)
    Re: FTS-2000 Database "A" and "B" (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Custom Ringing Detection (James Baker)
    Re: Additional Star Codes Used (David Leibold)
    Re: Town Considers Taxing Cell Phones (Chandler Heath)
    Re: EDI Security (Paul Robinson)
    IEEE 802.9 Standard (Rick Pannekoek)
    AT&T's Primitive Animal Tests (Douglas A. Percival)

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 America
On Line. 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 LaCour)
Subject: Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 10:39:46
Organization: U.S. Robotics, Inc.


> Lance Ellinghaus <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> A company called Primary Access has a product that will take a T1 (24
>> VOICE channels) and interpret the DS0 channels as modem connections
>> (v.32, v.42bis, etc..) and output standard RS232 to hook to a system.

>> What other companies have something like this?  Comments on their
>> products?  Contacts to get more information?

USRobotics also has a similiar product, the USR D-WAN Hub. One or two
T1s can be plugged into a rack of digital modems.  The modems and T1
card will convert the PCM of each DS0 into an RS232 datastream.  DNIS
and ANI information can be used to configure the modems dynamically.
Other features are supported as well.

You can write me for more info or check out:

1 800 USR CORP
ftp.usr.com
[e-mail].


Regards,

John LaCour          [phone]
USRobotics, Inc.      [phone] FAX
Systems Product Support      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Whittenburg)
Subject: Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232
Date: 14 Nov 1994 17:12:23 GMT
Organization: WilTel
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Lance Ellinghaus <[e-mail]> wrote:

> A company called Primary Access has a product that will take a T1 (24
> VOICE channels) and interpret the DS0 channels as modem connections
> (v.32, v.42bis, etc..) and output standard RS232 to hook to a system.

> What other companies have something like this?  Comments on their
> products?  Contacts to get more information?

Primary Access is probably best known for using their box for credit
card transaction processing.  They can configure their box to accept
calls on the T1 and make X.25 calls out the other side to a server to
verify the card.  Their product is pretty expensive.

I would check also with U.S. Robotics.  They have a box called
Enterprise Total Control or something like that which does what you
want.  A better solution is to use their box, and put their ethernet
card in it, and use that to connect to your host rather that 24 rs-232
connections.


Chris Whittenburg
Telecom Engineer     [phone]
WilTel Network Services     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232
Date: 14 Nov 1994 14:37:17 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group


> What other companies have something like this?  Comments on their
> products?  Contacts to get more information?

Try D.C. Hayes, Practical Peripherals, and US Robotics.

They also sell such animals. I've seen Primary Access's stuff (I've
never used it) and it looks pretty good.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (russb)
Subject: Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232
Date: 15 Nov 1994 09:48:59 GMT
Organization: XMission Public Access Internet (801-539-0900)


Many companies manufacture products as described.  I work for Txport
Inc., and we manufacture a product line called the Prism Series.  The
Prism T1 CSU/DSU will break out the T1 from the network and allow you
to incorporate several applications, high speed data (V.35, EIA530),
low speed data (RS232), voice and a fractional T1 for PBX DS-1
connectivity.  Prices start at $2500.

If your interested, I can mail you spec sheets, etc. for your perusal.


Russ Bryant   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Pestaner)
Subject: Re: Frac T1, sw 56k, or Some Scalable Internet Access
Date: 15 Nov 1994 03:58:59 GMT
Organization: Oregon Grad. Inst. Computer Science and Eng., Beaverton


As an internet provider in a specific area, I cannot offer you
service, but I can offer some suggestions:

1.  All internet access is not the same.  Many resellers have a
provider between them and the NSF backbone, typically Sprint.  You can
do a traceroute on their DNS server or net address to see how they
(and you) are connected to the ans backbone.  Note that if you buy a
56k service, but the provider has 100 other customers piped to the net
with a T1, it is likely your service will be VERY slow. Unfortunately,
I dont know how you can find this out.

1a.  Check with your regional Internet provider, probably suranet in
your area.  They wont be the cheapest, but surely the best in connectivity.

2.  Dont forget to add DNS and newsgroup service costs in the equation.
Most providers charge extra for them.

3.  Find out the telco circuit cost.  Some providers may have POPs in more
expensive areas relative to you than others.  This is never quoted in
their price so you need to be sure you understand this significant cost.

4.  Current observations -- Sprint and Alternet are very slow these days.

A whole other level of concern should be noted regarding the privatization
of the Internet backbone.  In a few short months, ANS, Sprint and MCI
will be providing backbones, and net providers at this level will need
to provide their own interconnections between the on-ramps.  This will
be expensive, and I will be fascinated to see how this is done, and
what cost ramifications it will have.


Good luck,

Jack

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

From: Jeff Regan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Computer <--> Modem <--> Modem <--> TNC
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 13:24:14 GMT


> I have a couple questions about using modems to commuicate between
> computers that I hope somebody on the net can help me with.

> Here is my problem. I have a ham radio TNC which runs on a RS-232 port
> (Figure 1).

>  ____________                                                 _______
> |            |                     RS-232                    |       |
> |  Computer  |-----------------------------------------------|  TNC  |
> |____________|                                               |_______|
>
>                                  Figure 1

> I have a new computer which does not have any free modem ports, but
> does have an internal modem.  I have an extra stand alone modem and I
> was wondering if it is possible to use the modems so I can commuicate
> with my TNC (Figure 2).
>
>  ____________            _____               _____            _______
> |            |  RS-232  |     |  Telephone  |     |  RS-232  |       |
> |  Computer  |----------|Modem|-------------|Modem|----------|  TNC  |
> |____________|          |_____|             |_____|          |_______|

The 2nd modem to TNC can be setup using a null-modem cable available
at most computer stores. It should have the correct connectors on it
(in your case, a male on each end I believe). You will need to tell
the second modem not to echo (ate0) not to return result codes (I
forget its 'AT' code) and store it in the modems normal memory ... then
put the modem in auto answer mode.  You would have to do that over a
phone line, but the problem with this is that the TNC has no security,
so if a deamon-dialer found your modem, the 'hacker' could use your
TNC and any damage (email etc) sent over the packet network would be
your responsibility. You could not just hook the modems together
unless your modem (on the TNC side) has a switch to 'answer the phone'
or go offhook in answer mode.

There are many other alternatives though. If you have an extra slot in
your machine, find a serial card ($20 or so) that supports address 2f8 or
3f8 and IRQ 5 or 7 then use it instead.


Good luck!

Jeff Regan
Internet: [e-mail]   -  Bell IIS:
Ham Packet: VE3XJR@VE3MGQ.#SWO.ON.CAN.NA - JEREGAN1

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

From: [e-mail] (Brendan Dowling)
Subject: Re: Computer <--> Modem <--> Modem <--> TNC
Date: 15 Nov 1994 00:24:47 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Barbara


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jeff
Okleberry) writes:

> I have a couple questions about using modems to commuicate between
> computers that I hope somebody on the net can help me with.

> Here is my problem. I have a ham radio TNC which runs on a RS-232 port
> (Figure 1).

> ____________                                                 _______
>|            |                     RS-232                    |       |
>|  Computer  |-----------------------------------------------|  TNC  |
>|____________|                                               |_______|

>                                 Figure 1

> I have a new computer which does not have any free modem ports, but
> does have an internal modem.  I have an extra stand alone modem and I
> was wondering if it is possible to use the modems so I can commuicate
> with my TNC (Figure 2).

> ____________            _____               _____            _______
>|            |  RS-232  |     |  Telephone  |     |  RS-232  |       |
>|  Computer  |----------|Modem|-------------|Modem|----------|  TNC  |
>|____________|          |_____|             |_____|          |_______|

>                                  Figure 2

> My second question is it possible to do the same thing in Figure 2
> with two computers?  A follow-on question is can I use my house's
> internal telephone wiring or do I need to run a direct link between
> the two modems?

You can probably just hook up the modem to the TNC and set the modem
to auto-answer.  Then you should be able to call in and talk to the
TNC over the fone line.  I guess if you wanted to, you could put a
computer between the modem and the TNC, but if all it's doing is
receiving from the modem and sending what it receives out to the TNC,
there's no reason for it.

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

Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 17:17:16 PST
From: Gary Breuckman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Computer <--> Modem <--> Modem <--> TNC


The first case, using a telephone line, should work fine.  The modem
needs to be configured for auto-answer and if the TNC does not provide
handshaking you will need to take that into account with regard to the
speed settings on the equipment and error correction.

However, for connecting the units directly, you need to take into
account how the TNC's modem will be made to answer.  Folks have
connected two computers in this fashion by entering commands on both
ends, ATX0D on the 'originate' end and ATA on the 'answer' end.  If
the TNC is not capable of generating commands, you will need to
configure the modem if possible in some sort of 'leased line' mode.
Some modems have this feature, where they effectively stay 'off-hook'
all the time.  The only other possibility would be some sort of ring
generator, they are available.

It would likely be less expensive to just add another serial port to
the computer.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 07:20:35 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FTS-2000 Database "A" and "B"
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


[e-mail] (Prime perf), writes:

> 1. Is such a database available in the public domain?
> 2. How does one become a subscriber?

FTS-2000 is the internal long distance telephone network for U.S.
federal government agencies.  The network is split among two carriers,
the "A" carrier being AT&T and the "B" carrier being Sprint.

His question does not fairly indicate exactly what he wants to know,
e.g.  does he want to know which carrier serves which agency, does he
want the conversion table as to which old seven-digit FTS 2000 numbers
convert to commercial numbers, does he want a complete list of every
service available, or what exactly?

GSA handles some provisions of FTS-2000; he might try calling them or
issuing an FOIA request to them for a list of which agencies are assigned
to which carrier, or whatever he is trying to find out.  GSA's National
Capital Area office is at 7th & D Streets, SW in Washington, he can
probably start by calling or writing there.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]
Reports on Security Problems: To Subscribe write [e-mail]
Voted "Largest Polluter of the (IETF) list" by Randy Bush <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (James Baker)
Subject: Re: Custom Ringing Detection
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 14:41:39 -0800
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John
Keith) wrote:

> I am looking for devices that can do custom ringing detrection and
> route the call to an appropriate device. Particularly useful would be
> the new breed of voice/fax cards for PCs that would have this
> capability. Can somepone point me in the right direction?

Telephone Products at 1-800-829-5960 makes a box that routes custom
ringing to seperate devices. It is called Switchboard. Cost is $89.95.
Also it is line powered so there is no power cord or wall charger.

<Disclaimer: I work for Telephone Products.>


James Baker  Seattle, WA   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (woody)
Subject: Re: Additional Star Codes Used
Date: 14 Nov 1994 22:54:14 -0500
Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-4151  Voice: 416-363-8676


In article <[e-mail]>, Bruce Brothers <Bruce_Brothers.
[e-mail]> wrote:

> I would also add the following (for NYNEX in Massachusetts, anyway):
> *99 - voice dialing maintenance menu

*99 has been spotted in Canada for voice mail maintenance functions,
rather than voice dialing. This can be found on NBTel's Talk Mail
service, for instance.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chandler Heath)
Subject: Re: Town Considers Taxing Cell Phones
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 22:44:02 -0600
Organization: Netcore


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

> A story in the November 7, 1994, editions of the {Washington Times},
> page A1, says that the Town of Vienna, Virginia, is considering
> putting a tax of $3 per month on all cellular phone accounts with
> Vienna billing addresses.  Vienna is a town of about 10,000 residents
> in Fairfax County, Virginia, about 12 miles west of Washington, DC.

I guess this means that the next step will be to require all cars that
have cellular phones, buy a "TAX DECAL" proving payment of the tax.
Just what they need, another sticker for the windshield.;-)

Being a FORMER resident of Fairfax County I do not miss the tax hassles
a bit.


Chandler

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 07:27:52 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: EDI Security
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


> My current project is to expand the concept of our in-house
> "message router" so that sources and targets need not be on
> the Internet...The part that concerns me is security.  The goal is
> that my API should be able to accept incoming calls.  If we do that,
> how do we handle security? Do we just use a system of "userids" and
> "passwords"?...One proposal... [was] special login... [and] run my
> API...This proposal has been shot down...

> If we don't use System Security, what kind of login/password-passing
> scheme do we use?  Is there any kind of standard?  We really can't
> make many assumptions about the client.

What we need to ask is, "How secure is the host and what services does the
host have available to it?"  If your host is secure from someone raiding
its password file, then you could use the POP mail transfer method
outlined in Internet RFC 1460, in which the host sends its name, the date
and the time to the user; the user's software should then internally tack
on the user's password to what it just received, creating a new text string,
and then return back to the host the MD5 message digest of that new string.
Passwords are never transfered at all.  RFC 1321 documents the means to
do MD5 including a source program in C to create a message digest.

RFCs may be obtained via ftp from ds.internic.net:/rfc/rfcnnnn.txt where
nnnn is the 4 digit rfc number.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]
Reports on Security Problems: To Subscribe write [e-mail]
Voted "Largest Polluter of the (IETF) list" by Randy Bush <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Rick Pannekoek)
Subject: IEEE 802.9 Standard
Date: 14 Nov 1994 10:55:08 GMT
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands


Can anyone provide me with information about the (draft) IEEE 802.9
standard concerning Integrated Voice Data LANs (IVDLANs)?  I'm
interested in solutions for integrating telephony and data networks.
As I understand, isoEthernet (one of those solutions) is part of the
802.9 standard.

Thanks in advance.


Rick Pannekoek

Faculty of Electronics Engineering
Technical University of Eindhoven
The Netherlands

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 06:07:38 -0800
From: Douglas A. Percival <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T's Primitive Animal Tests


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In my haste to clean up a backlog of
stuff here over the past few days, I inadvertently ran AT&T's *answer*
to the comment which follows prior to running the comment itself which
came in a couple weeks ago. See the Digest on Monday and the response
entitled "Gopher -- Literally!" for the reply to the following, then
see my added comments below.  PAT]


PETA ACTION ALERT:  AT&T CAUSES ANIMALS TO SUFFER

Animals in cruel and primitive experiments funded by AT&T need our
help.  AT&T pays government experimenters to trap pocket gophers in
the wild, confine them in tiny cages for the rest of their lives, and
make them gnaw on cable samples.  It is easy to design a machine to
simulate rodent gnawing, and PETA has repeatedly urged AT&T to use
modern mechanical testing methods instead of animals, but AT&T has not
agreed to end its inhumane experiments.

Please urge AT&T to stop exploiting animals and replace these barbaric
experiments with high-tech mechanical alternatives.  Don't use AT&T's
long-distance service as long as the experiments continue.  Write to:

Robert Allen, CEO
AT&T
295 North Maple Avenue
Basking Ridge, NJ 07920
Fax: [phone] or 908-221-1211

Or call AT&T's Executive Response Center, collect, at 908-221-4191.

Thank you for your concern and your help for the animals.  For more
information, contact:

PETA
P.O. Box 42516
Washington, DC 20015
301-770-7444



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Read "Gopher - Literally!" in the Monday
edition of this journal for AT&T's reply forwarded here. My own opinion
(you did not think you would get by without that, did you!) is that PETA
is too far out of touch with reality in most issues to have any real
credence given to their complaint. They are far outside the mainstream
animal welfare movement. I do not believe in cruelty to animals. I
believe all animals should be treated humanely. They have just as much
right to be here as human beings. On the other hand, I am not ashamed
to be at the top of the food and survival chain, as members of PETA seem
to be. Animals do *NOT* have rights. Human beings have rights. 'Rights'
implies to me certain ethical and moral requirements; it implies to me
having a 'conscience' -- something animals do not have. Animals respond
to one another like ... well, animals. Human beings make choices in the
way they respond to one another. Therein lies the difference where
'rights' are concerned. If it is wrong for people to kill animals for
the purposes of survival, and if animals are like people, as some in
PETA would claim, then it should likewise be 'wrong' for animals to
kill other animals for their survival. We don't punish animals for
their behavior toward other animals as we do people toward other people.

I am not a sportsman. I do not hunt animals or birds for the 'fun' of
it. I don't see any 'fun' in taking lives needlessly, be they the lives
of animals or people. Ditto the restricting of an animal or another
person's freedom to roam at will. On the other hand, I will do what is
necessary for my own survival, and not feel guilty at all. Remember
though that because of our unique place in the scheme of things, we
do have a tremendous and very special responsibility -- or custodial
relationship perhaps -- to the many forms of life around us.  Perhaps
some of my attitudes are illogical: I see no reason to wear fur in
the winter for warmth when cloth will do just as nicely. On the other
hand I've no objection to leather shoes or a steak for dinner. I see
no reason for continued use of animals in research for cosmetics, but
I am very mindful and appreciative of the animals which have been
sacrificed for purposes of medical research. Of course, where cosmetics
are concerned, I don't need any: I'm already beautiful. :)     PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #415
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22001;
          16 Nov 94 9:42 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11469; Tue, 15 Nov 94 12:59:13 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11461; Tue, 15 Nov 94 12:59:08 CST
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 12:59:08 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #416

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 15 Nov 94 12:59:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 416

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Strategic Alliances and Interconnection (J.A. Fielden)
    Freestanding Fax Modem/Printerless Fax Machine? (Anthony E. Siegman)
    Re: ANI Modem (Paul Robinson)
    Looking for V.34 Technical Info (John Desmond)
    Looking for Info on FAX-on-Demand Systems (John Desmond)
    Hollings Bill (Andrew Matters)
    Device Wanted For Logging Phone Calls (Thommy Gyorog)
    Exchange Codes Table Wanted (Wilson P. Snyder II)
    Motorola Micro TAC 5200 Phone Socket Specifications (Diomidis Spinellis)
    Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Update, and More Thanks (TELECOM Digest Editor)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. 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] (j.a. fielden)
Subject: Strategic Alliances and Interconnection
Date: 14 Nov 1994 19:16:26 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder


STRATEGIC ALLIANCES & INTERCONNECTION:
CONTRIBUTIONS OF GAME THEORY TO TELECOMMUNICATIONS

January 9  - 11, 1995

International Telecommunications Society & University of  Colorado

            Symposium

Strategic alliances are playing an increasingly prominent role in
emerging telecommunications, information processing and entertainment
markets.  These alliances promise to drastically alter the
technological, regulatory, and market landscapes throughout the world.
The transformation of the telecommunications marketplace is unique in
that it represents the merging of traditionally regulated firms (i.e.,
telephone and cable) with industries which have never been regulated
such as publishing, entertainment, and the computer industry.
Although players perceive numerous synergies among existing firms in
these sectors, it is not obvious, a priori, which alliances will prove
to be stable and beneficial to the firms involved, and to the public
at large.

Oligopoly theory and game theory in particular, is the systematic
study of strategic behavior. Game theory is no longer a branch of pure
mathematics, and it pervades modern economic thinking and analysis.
The informal insights it provides are increasingly used in business
school case studies, theoretical and empirical research by
telecommunications specialists and by strategic planners within the
industry. Game theoretic reasoning can be applied to practical
decision-making by corporations.  In a business environment, those who
think strategically not only attempt to outplay their adversaries, but
in addition realize that their adversaries will attempt to outplay
them.  An understanding of good competitive strategy can be essential
for survival.

In order to explore the informal, largely non-technical, insights that
theory can contribute to questions of current importance in the
telecommunications industry, industry representatives, regulators and
academics are invited to take part in this symposium.  The objective
is to provide an environment in which decision-makers will gain new
insights into game theoretic reasoning and academic participants will
gain new insights from the experiences of business leaders who have
been involved in the formation of telecommunications alliances and the
management of telecommunications firms.

The Symposium will consist of five half day sessions.  Each session
will be coordinated by an academic or an industry representative.  The
industry representative will introduce each topic and develop the key
issues which need to be considered.  Approximately one half of the
papers will be presented by academic specialists, while the other half
will be applied papers presented by academics or industry
representatives.  Presenters and discussants will be urged to elicit
an active participation from all of those in attendance.

Issues to be addressed will include (i) the theoretic framework for
examining the role of strategic alliances.  Examples will be drawn
from firms attempting to position themselves to maximum advantage in
emerging communications, information processing, and entertainment
markets, (ii) the convergence of technologies or the delivery of new
services, for example competition for video and multimedia delivery
and among network providers, (iii) spectrum auctions role in business
strategies in the emerging telecommunications structure, and (iv)
interconnection and vertical integration as in the case of the
simultaneous provision of local distribution and competitive services,
and the negotiation of interconnection agreements and the appeal
process.

Presentation of theoretical and applied papers will address these
issues in a non-technical manner with the aim of being informative and
provocative.  They will be used to provide a structure which will then
be expanded upon through an active participation by all in attendance.


1.  Strategic Alliances

This theme will develop the economic framework for the symposium.  It
will consider how telecommunications carriers approach strategic
alliances to improve their position in emerging communications,
information processing, and entertainment markets in a
economic/game-theoretic framework.  Issues of interest include
international alliances (e.g., Telefnica's strategy in Latin
America or Cable & Wireless' global network), inter-industry alliances
(e.g. the failed merger of Bell Atlantic and TCI), the provision of
end-to-end services (Syncordia), and vertical integration into
information services (Ameritech's investment in GEIS).

2.  Convergent Technologies

The convergence of technologies bringing together, in direct
competition or in strategic alliances, telephone companies, cable
television operators and content providers. Decision-makers are
challenged to establish boundaries to their business and position it
in an increasingly complex production chain in the rapidly evolving
technical and business environment. The object of this theme is to use
the experience of multimedia to address the complex set of issues
concerning horizontal and vertical integration.

3. Competition for Spectrum:  Auctions

Spectrum auctions are now a required component of the strategic
planning process.  The recent auctions have indicated the value of the
spectrum, and its importance in the coming competition in the wireless
market. As competition expands, technologies converge, and we move to
a world characterized by a network of networks, spectrum and its cost
will become even more important than today, and its strategic
implications will be of a greater importance to the various players.

The FCC is about to begin auctions for broadband PCS licenses.
Preliminary estimates are for the auction proceeds to exceed $10
billion.  These auctions pose numerous auction design problems for the
FCC, and strategic bidding problems for bidders.  This session will
discuss both relevant auction theory and how the auctions are
proceeding.

4.  Interconnection

The objective of the next two sessions will be to cover
interconnection in the context of vertical integration and market
dominance.  Exchange telephone companies currently are dominant
players in the local loop, which is an input into the provision of
their own interexchange services and those of their competitors.  One
of the key issues of interconnection policy is the set of rules under
which interconnection is negotiated.  For example, when
interconnection involves a co-location agreement, what is the power of
the government to impose conditions on a regulated firm?  What is the
proper role of antitrust legislation to provide a framework for
interconnection negotiations?  The Court fight between Telecom New
Zealand and Clear Communications illustrates a fundamental problem
with interconnection whenever it is not mandated by the regulator.

In Mexico, regulators from the Communications and Transportation
Ministry recently rejected the Telmex plan for ten interconnection
points.  Instead, the regulators approved a plan for 200 such points,
to be available by the year 2000.  The issue is the terms under which
the privatized Telmex will face competition.

Are standards requires for interconnection? If so, how are the rules
and obligations impacted by the standards set?  How do co-location,
divestiture strategies (e.g., proposals made by companies such as
Rochester Telephone and Ameritech to trade greater access to the local
loop for greater regulatory freedom) enter the picture?

At the other end of the spectrum, the access charges which were
imposed by the FCC at the divestiture of the Bell System illustrate
the problems with solutions which are unilaterally mandated by the
regulator without proper attention to market conditions and
alternative delivery technologies.  Pricing of interconnection as an
intermediate or "bottleneck" facility should ensure neither the
incumbent nor the entrant is disadvantaged by the pricing structure.
Moreover, in the context of alternative delivery systems, such as the
AT&T/McCaw Communications alliance or the bypass of the exchange
carriers by companies such as TeleCommunications Inc. subsidiaries,
the correct access prices become vital to insure efficiency of the
total system.

The worldwide trend toward privatization and deregulation of public
carriers raises these issues in a broader context.

                     _____________________


Boulder

The University of Colorado at Boulder is situated in a lovely natural
setting about 30 miles northwest of Denver.  The Front Range of the
Rocky Mountains is visible from the 786-acre campus, located in a
scenic valley 5,400 feet (1645 m) above sea level.  The campus is less
than 45 minutes form the Denver airport by car or shuttle service.
(Limited lodging is available on campus.)

Boulder, a community of 84,000 people, averages over 300 days of
sunshine each year.  Within its mountain setting of great natural
beauty, Boulder provides a rich array of recreation and cultural
opportunities.  World-class skiing is a short drive away.

                     ________________

Registration Information

Name
Title
Company
Address

City                    State/Province
Country
Telephone
Facsimile
E-Mail
Payment Method ($400):    Enclosed      [ ]
Credit Card:      Visa       [ ]        Mastercard     [ ]
Credit Card Number
Expiration date
Signature:

Attendees should respond by mail, facsimile, or phone, forwarding
check or credit card authorizations to:

Strategic Alliance Symposium
Interdisciplinary Telecommunications Program
Campus Box 530
Engineering Center
University of Colorado
Boulder, Colorado  80309-0530, USA

Telephone:      + 1 303 492 - 8717
Facilmile:      + 1 303 492 - 1112
E-mail:      [e-mail]

Registration Fees:
(includes lunches, dinner  and receptions)

Early Registration:             $400.00
(before December 12, 1994)
Registration Fee:               $500.00


Provisional Program

Sunday, January 8, 1995
Registration, 1:00 - 5:00 PM
Social Hour:  6:30 - 7:30 PM

Monday, January 9, 1995

Strategic Alliances: Overview, 9:00 - 10:30 AM

    Chair:  Ambassador Diana Lady Dougan,  Center for Strategic &
International Studies
Robert Crandall, Brooking Institute
Jonathan D. Aronson, University of Southern California
William Sharkey, Institut D'Economie Industrielle
    Discussant:  Francois Prothais, France Telecom

Strategic Alliances: Theory & Practice I, 11:00 - 12:30 PM

    Chair:  Larry Singell, University of Colorado
Andres Baude, Ameritech International, Inc.
Peter Strapp, Tele-Communications Inc.
Susan C. Simon, Simon & Simon
    Discussant:  Daniel O'Brien, Department of Justice

Lunch, 12:45 - 1:45
Gary Hart, Coudert Brothers

Strategic Alliances:  Vertical Integration, 2:00 - 3:30

    Chair:  Mark Cronshaw, University of Colorado
Martin Perry, Rutgers University
Yossi Spiegel, Tel Aviv University
Nicholas Economides, New York University
    Discussant: Ferid Gasmi, Institut D'Economie Industrielle

Strategic Alliances: Theory and Practice II, 4:00 - 5:30

    Chair: Gary Hart, Coudert Brothers
Mark Porrat, General Magic *
Koichiro Hayashi, NTT America
Keisuke Nakasaki, Thai Telecommunications
Marc Ivaldi, Institut D'Economie Industrielle
    Discussant:  John Vondrus, US West Communications

Reception, 6:00 - 8:00 PM


Tuesday, January 10, 1995

Competition for Video Delivery, 9:00 - 10:30

    Chair:  Joseph Pelton, University of Colorado
Lorenzo Pupillo, Itlia Telecom  *
Thomas Hazlett, University of California, Davis *
Glenn Woroch, University of California, Berkeley
    Discussant: David Reed, Cable Laboratories *

Competition for Spectrum:  Auctions, 11:00 - 12:30
    Chair:  James Alleman, University of Colorado
Mark Bykowsky, National Telecommunications and Information Agency
Simon Wilkie, California Institute of Technology
Yeon Koo Che,  University of Wisconsin
    Discussant:  Robert Pepper

Lunch, 12:45 - 1:45

Convergence of Media, 2:00 - 3:30

    Chair: Randall Lowe, Piper & Marburry
Larry J. Yokell, Convergence Industry Associates
Shane Greenstein, University of Illinois / Stanford University
David Sevy, France Telecom, CNET
    Discussant: Glenn Woroch, University of California, Berkeley

Interconnection, 4:00 - 5:30

    Chair: Robert Pepper, Federal Communications Commission *
P. Srinagesh; Bellcore
Oz Shy, Tel Aviv University
Eli Noam, CICT, Columbia University
    Discussant:  Dale Hatfield, Hatfield Associates, Inc.

Receptions and Dinner, 7:00
Ambassador Vonya McCann, United States Department of State *


Wednesday,  January 11, 1995

Joint Ventures & Privatization I, 9:00 - 10:30

    Chair: Mark Schankerman, LSE & European Bank for Reconstruction
and Development
George Yarrow,  Oxford University *
John Vondrus, USWest Communications
Leland W. Schmidt, GTE Telephone Services
    Discussant: Santiago Levy Algazi, National Commission on Competition
Telmex, Mexico *

Strategic Alliances & Capital Markets, 11:00 - 12:30 PM

    Chair: Larry J. Yokell, Convergence Industry Associates
Larry Darby, Darby Associates
Scott Meade, Goldman Sachs, United Kingdom *
John Chapman, Strategic Research Inc.
    Discussant: David Rush, University of Colorado

                ____________________________________

Participants

James Alleman, University of Colorado
Santiago Levy Algazi, National Commission on Competition Telmex, Mexico
*
Jonathan D. Aronson, University of Southern California *
Andres Baude, Ameritech International, Inc.
Mark Bykowsky, National Telecommunications & Information Agency
Larry Cole, GTE Labortories
John Chapman, Strategic Research Inc.
Yeon Koo Che, University of Wisconsin
Robert Crandall, Brookings Institute
Mark B. Cronshaw, University of Colorado
Larry Darby, Darby Associates
Micheal Davies, BellSouth New Zealand *
Hugo Dixon, The Financial Times *
Ambassador Diana Lady Dougan,  Center for Strategic and International
Studies
Jerry Duval, Federal Communication Commission
Nicholas  Economides, Stern Business School, New York University
Michal Even-Chen, BEZEQ, Israel *
Ferid Gasmi, Institut D'Economie Industrielle
Michel Gensollen, France Telecom *
Shane Greenstein, University of Illinois / Stanford University
Gary Hart, Coudert Brothers
Koichiro Hayashi, NTT America
Thomas Hazlett, University of California, Davis *
Larry Irving, National Telecommunications & Information Agency  *
Marc Ivaldi, Institut D'Economie Industrielle
Mike Katz, University of California, Berkeley and Federal Communications
Commission *
Frank Kiss, MATAV *
Jose Alberto Blanco Losada, Telefnica de Espaa *
Randall Lowe, Piper & Marburry
Scott Meade, Goldman Sachs, United Kingdom *
Patrick McCabe, Ministry of Commerce, New Zealand
Vonya McCann, Ambassador, United States Department of State *
Bridger Michell, Charles Rivers Associates *
Milton Mueller, Rutgers University
Keisuke Nakasaki, Thai Telecommunications
Eli Noam, CITI, Columbia University
Daniel O'Brien, Department of Justice
Hajime Oniki, Osaka University *
Joseph Pelton, University of Colorado
Robert Pepper, Federal Communications Commission *
Mark Porrat, General Magic *
Francois Prothais, France Telecom
Lorenzo Pupillo, Itlia Telecom
Patrick Rey, ENSEA/INSEE *
David Reed, Cable Laboratories *
David Rush, University of Colorado
David Salant, GTE Laboratories
Mark Schankerman, London School of Economics & European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development
David Sevy, France Telecom, CNET
William Sharkey, Institut D'Economie Industrielle
Oz Shy, Tel Aviv University *
Susan C. Simon, Simon & Simon
Larry Singell, University of Colorado *
Ray Smith, Director, BT Carrier Services *
Yossi Spiegel, Tel Aviv University
Peter Strapp, Tele-Communications Inc.
Pablo Spiller, University of California, Berkeley
P. Srinagesh; Bellcore
Marty Taschjian, US West Communications
John Vondrus, US West Communications *
Simon Wilkie, California Institute of Technology
Glenn Woroch, University of California, Berkeley
Larry J. Yokell, Convergence Industry Associates

                   * Invited


Sponsors

AGT (formerly Alberta Government Telephone)
France Telecom
GTE Telephone Operations
GTE Laboratories
Italia Telecom
NTT America
Hellenic Telecommunications Organization (OTE)
TELA Group
Telefnica de Espaa
Telia (formerly Swedish Telecom)
University of Colorado


Program Committee

James Alleman, University of Colorado
Mark B. Cronshaw, University of Colorado
Nicolas Curien, Ecole Polytechnique
Nicholas Economides, New York University
Alain de Fontenay, TELA Group
Koichiro Hayashi, NTT America
Milton Mueller, Rutgers University
Mark A. Schankerman, London School of Economic & European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development
Leland W. Schmidt, GTE Telephone Operations
William W. Sharkey, Institut D'Economie Industrielle
David Salant, GTE Laboratories
Glenn Woroch, University of California, Berkeley

                      _________________________


Jim Alleman, [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 14 Nov 94 8:47:42 GMT
From: Anthony E. Siegman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Freestanding Fax Modem/Printerless Fax Machine?


   Is there such a thing as a "free standing" fax modem with a modest
amount of memory, or a small fax machine with no scanning or printing
engine, that can receive (small) faxes and store them until one turns
on a computer and pulls off the received data?

   I have a TelePort Gold fax modem on my Mac at home which works fine
for sending and receiving very occasional faxes; but I don't like to
have to leave the Mac powered up and the HDs spinning all the time.


[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 07:47:00 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ANI Modem
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


In a prior message that I missed the last line of, [e-mail] asked:

> PS.  Is there such a thing as an ANI modem?  That would be a form
> of security.

The Practical Peripherals PP14400FX is an internal fax modem for MSDos PCs,
and I believe it also comes in an external model for other machines.  It
supports Caller-ID, and can provide it in either the raw ASCII, or in a
display format, with the ability to ask it to replay the last Caller-ID
string received, in either format.  I know it handles numeric Caller-ID,
as I had it for a while to test it; we won't be getting caller-id with
name until later this month.  I intend to try that service once we get it
and see if it does.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 13:22:10 CST
From: [e-mail] (John Desmond)
Subject: Looking for V.34 Technical Info


  I recently picked up some v.34 modems for myself.  It appears that I
have a line problem.  The problem is not noise on the line, but what I
suspect to be a problem with bandwidth available on the line.  Many
times the modems will connect at 26.4 and work fine, but other times
it will fallback to 19.2.

  I am looking for any information on the requirements for the telco
cable side of the connection.  Ie, the C.O to the subscriber.  I am
particularly interested in any information about cable make-up.  This
would be info on gauge of cable and the use of loads and bridge-taps.
I had asked one modem manufacturer to look in their spec, but he did
not see anything that covered that part of the spec for v.34.  I
suspect that this is pretty well covered by the manufacturer of the
chip sets that the modem manufacturer uses.

   Any info would be greatly appreciated.


John Desmond  K0TG        Saint Paul, MN
[e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 14 Nov 94 13:23:31 CST
From: [e-mail] (John Desmond)
Subject: Looking for Info on FAX-on-Demand Systems


  A friend of mine is looking for a FAX-on-demand system to replace a
single line system they have at this time.  They are looking for a
system that can handle more than line for incomming and outgoing FAXes
and requests.  It would be ideal if the system could do the following:

- Handle 2 or more outgoing FAX lines and at least one incomming request
  line.

- Have the ability to allow recording of their own voice prompts/greetings.

- Be easily expandable

  I myself am looking for a much smaller system.  I would like one
that is PC based and would prefer that it be able to operate in a
DOS/Desqview environment.  I will not rule out any Windows based
products though.  My needs are for a single line system sharing the
same line for inbound and outbound FAXes.  Basically, I am interested
in any info others may have.

  Thanks in advance!


John Desmond  K0TG        Saint Paul, MN
[e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 06:08:02 CST
Subject: Hollings Bill
From: Andrew=[e-mail]


Hi Patrick,

It is good to see you back on deck again!  I am unsure who to direct
this enquiry to, so apologies if this should have been directed
elsewhere ... I am interested in locating a copy of Senator Hollings
Bill, and the reasons it was dropped.  Were there any 'line of
business' (cross media ownership) issues raised?

Unfortunately I only have email access to the internet at the moment,
but may be able to gain more extensive access (with some luck) if
necessary to access this information.

Thank you in advance for your time and assistance.


Andrew Matters   Telecommunications Policy Review
Department of Communications and the Arts
Canberra, Australia.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If any readers care to respond to the
writer on this topic, please do so and send a copy of your reply to
the Digest for publication here.  Thanks.   PAT]

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

Date: 14 Nov 1994 18:38:01 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Thommy Gyorog)
Organization: The Personal Online Source
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Device Wanted For Logging Phone Calls


Since detailed phone-bills are even more expensive than the phone
calls here in Austria, I am looking for a "special" device, which
monitors my phone-line and logs the phone calls (incoming calls: start
date and time, end date and time; outgoing calls: start date and time,
end date and time + dialed phone number) The data should be printed out
on a serial printer/transmitted to a PC (serial/parallel),...

I know, PBXs offer this or a similar function.

Do you have an idea, if such a device is out already? Where can I get
it?  Did someone build such a box by himself? (It shouldn't be too
hard ...)


Thanks for any info!

Thommy Gyoeroeg    [e-mail]
sent via  m a g n e t / [phone] / [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wilson P. Snyder II)
Subject: Exchange Codes Table Wanted
Date: 14 Nov 1994 17:59:52 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp, Hudson MA


Does anyone know of a WWW or plain text file which can translate US
exchange codes to locations?

For example:

    ? 802-658-xxxx

    = Burlington, VT

Thanks!!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You need to correspond with Carl Moore
who keeps exactly the information you are seeking in a quite detailed
format. He is a regular participant here. Write [e-mail].   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Diomidis Spinellis)
Subject: Motorola Micro TAC 5200 phone socket specifications
Date: 15 Nov 1994 09:50:06 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computing, Imperial College, England


I am trying to integrate a modem on a Motorola Micro TAC International
5200 celular GSM phone.  Does anyone know where I can find a connector
plug for that socket, and - more importantly - the pin specifications
for the socket?  The socket has 8 pins and is used to interface the
phone to car kits and battery economizers.


Many thanks,

Diomidis Spinellis    Internet: <[e-mail]>  UUCP: ...!uknet!icdoc!dds
Department of Computing, Imperial College, London SW7     #include "/dev/tty"

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 11:55:00 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID


Although all of Chicago (312) and quite a bit of suburban 708 has been
equipped with enhanced custom calling features for some time now, here
in Skokie the new features including Caller-ID, Call Screening and the
others became available just yesterday. I called the business office at
about 9:05 AM this morning to have Caller-ID turned on. I told her I
still had my Caller-ID equipped phones from a few years ago when I lived
in Rogers Park (Chicago) and would not need to purchase any equipment.
All I needed was to have the service turned on.

She wrote up the order to put it on my two main lines (I did not bother
getting it for my fax line) and said there would be a fifteen dollar fee
for the order in addition to the normal $6.50 per line/month charge for
the feature. Regards the installation fee, I asked her, why don't you
do me a favor and write it off ... she thought about it for a minute and
said okay, she would do that since this is the first week of service and
I was the first person she had dealt with in Skokie who ordered Caller-ID.

She assured me she would get it turned on as soon as possible. She told
me to go ahead and hook up my phones and 'sometime later today or else
tomorrow morning' Caller-ID would be working.  It took me about ten
minutes to install the ID boxes at a couple locations here and put a
fresh battery in them. I no sooner had this done than the phone rang,
with a call for my brother ... and I'll be damned if the Caller-ID
was not displayed!  Now that's fast turn-around on a telco work order!
I've never seen a work order started and completed in 10-15 minutes.
I was so impressed in fact that I called her back and told her about it.
She likewise was astounded, and said her screen did not show the order
as yet being completed.

That got me to thinking, I wonder if somehow by accident when the software
was turned on over the past few days they somehow defaulted it to everyone
by accident ... had I not placed the order but merely plugged in my box
would I have gotten it anyway?  I tried other lines with my ID box and
did not get the information; therefore they actually processed my order
in a rather incredible 10-15 minutes!   Good work, Ameritech!

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

I only have two display units; one is built into a single line phone and
the other is a stand-alone box you can plug in series to the phone line
or parallel if desired. I wanted one display unit where my brother could
see it so I put the single line phone on my main line in our living room.
I did a little trick with the stand-alone unit and this might be helpful
information to someone else with Caller-ID on more than one line who does
not want to purchase additional ID boxes: I have an old Radio Shack
Duofone Two Line Auto-Controller (part 43-381) I was not using for anything
else. I plugged that into the two-line jack behind the desk in my
basement office in parallel with the two line phone that sits on my
desk. (I can answer my business line [if busy it hunts to my personal
line] and my personal line [it has call-waiting, direct, or hunt/rolled-over
calls from 0571] from my office downstairs or my bedroom on the second
floor. My brother and his wife merely have the personal line in our
living room, their bedroom and the kitchen.)

This auto-controller from Radio Shack was originally intended to allow
a single line phone to make calls on either of two lines or receive
calls from either line with incoming calls automatically forwarded out
to the phone regardless of the setting on the line switch. Instead of
a phone output, I plugged the ID box into it. Now, either line which
gets an incoming call (personal or business line) tickles the controller
box and it tosses the output (i.e. caller-ID info) to the display unit.

There are a couple minor flaws: About one call out of every twenty or
so (I tested it about a hundred times) a call to the line *opposite*
the position the controller box was last used in has its ID lost when
the ID is passed sooner than the box wakes up and toggles to that line.
Usually it toggles promptly during the first ring and the ID is passed
just after the first ring ends, so it is not a problem. If it is slow
in toggling -- and then only if the call in question is on the line it
it not resting on -- the ID may get lost.

The other flaw is that when used in auto-select mode, one of the two
line selector keys MUST be depressed as a 'default line' for outgoing
calls. If neither key is left depressed at all times, then both lines
are in a conference mode.  If I am on any phone in our house which is
attached to the 'default line' (whichever key was artibrarily left
depressed on the auto-controller box) then the auto-controller won't
pass Caller-ID for the other line should it happen to ring. The reason
for this is that as originally intended, Radio Shack did not want
ringing voltage from your second line to get tossed onto your phone
while it was off hook and up to your ear on the other line. If I am on
neither line then it works fine. Either ringing line triggers the auto-
controller, gets its attention and the incoming ID is sent to the display
unit.  To compromise on this, I left the auto-controller 'defaulted' to
my business line. If it is busy, then incoming calls would roll over to
the other line anyway and the ID would get through. If it is not busy
then it gets the ID as it would anyway. On the rare occassions when my
personal line is in use and a call happens to come in on the business
line, then the ID is lost since the auto-controller won't switch over
to accept the call ... just as Radio Shack intended it should not.

Ameritech offers name/number for $8.50 per month or number only for $6.50
per month. I don't think my units will work with names since they were
made a few years ago before that additional feature was available.

Overall, I am *very pleased* with how quickly Ameritech processed the
order ... and Caller-ID does truly put one in control of one's phones.
My early testing shows that Caller-ID is being sent long distance as
well ... Caller-ID was shown on three long distance calls received this
morning. It looks like it will soon be natiowide.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 08:04:57 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Update, and More Thanks


This is just a short note to let everyone know what is going on over here
with regards to my medical condition. I'm taking some pills twice a day
(a collection of pills, actually -- one taken once daily, another type of
pill taken twice daily, and a third I don't take but must carry with me
at all times in the event 'something' happens at an inopportune time, but
then, heart attacks always happen at inopportune moments, don't they?).

I've got to return to the hospital for a few more tests on an outpatient
basis, and that is going to keep me busy for a couple days this week.
Overall, I am feeling much better, but still get very tired and begin
to hurt a little when I walk more than about half a mile at a time. The
doctors want me to walk as much as possible, and I am trying to get in
a half-mile to a mile daily.

Meanwhile, cards, letters, flowers, generous tokens of financial assistance
and other things continue to arrive in the mail daily. At last count,
about 4000 letters and cards have arrived in the mail as of yesterday.
I want to extend my very sincere thanks to all of you who have written
either in email or via the postal service. Personal notes of thanks are
impossible.

There remains a huge backlog of subscription requests for the mailing
list. Admittedly, I have pushed these to the side, preferring to get the
editorial stuff out as promptly as possible, and I will begin to make
the list changes later this week as time and my strength permit. If you
have requested addition to the mailing list in the past three weeks or
so, I *will* get back to you soon with the 'new reader' and 'help' files
and other confirmation.

Again, thanks to all who have written and offered encouragement. My
work with the Digest is almost entirely reader-supported at this time and
your efforts mean a lot.


Patrick Townson
TELECOM Digest Editor

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #416
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22191;
          16 Nov 94 9:45 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14922; Tue, 15 Nov 94 14:41:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14911; Tue, 15 Nov 94 14:41:01 CST
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 14:41:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #417

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 15 Nov 94 14:41:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 417

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telus Presents Offer to Purchase Ed Tel (Cole Cooper)
    Caller ID in Sweden, Europe (Robert Lindh)
    1-800-CALL-INFO _is_ Tariffed (Paul Robinson)
    Local Phone Companies Capable of... (David Crawford)
    PC-Based Voice Mail Systems (Pat Barron)
    Enterprise Management Summit '94 - Summit Week ([e-mail])
    Collaborators and Contributors Behind the NII Project (Maria F. Delgado)
    Re: Old Card Dialer Cards (Wes Leatherock)
    Re: AT&T Personal Term 510/510a Help Needed (Gene Retske)
    Re: DSU/CSU For T1 (Jack Pestaner)
    Can a Customer Choose Their ANI? (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: The Blackbox Company and its Catalog (John S. Wylie)
    Re: The Blackbox Company and its Catalog (Michael Stanford)
    Store-to-Store Link (Christopher Zguris)

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 America
On Line. 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: Cole Cooper <[e-mail]>
Date: 15 Nov 94 10:53:19 EDT
Subject: Telus Presents Offer to Purchase Ed Tel


Telus corporation is the owner of AGT Limited, Canada's third largest
telephone company. EDTEL is Canada's largest municipally owned
telephone company.  This release is made avialable to all AGT Limited
employees and interested parties.

           TELUS PRESENTS OFFER TO PURCHASE ED TEL

TELUS representatives presented our offer to purchase ED TEL to
Edmonton City Council this morning. The offer states that TELUS wants
to join forces with ED TEL to create an Alberta-based group of
companies with the expertise and resources to expand beyond Alberta to
new global markets.

"Our industry faces a rapidly changing future," says George Petty,
president and chief executive officer, TELUS Corporation. "We have a
choice of maintaining the status quo or joining forces to become an
unbeatable combination. Looking at our customer needs and our
competition, joining together is clearly in the best interests of all
concerned."

The offer includes a net cash offer of $465 million to the City, plus
a commitment to cover the City's obligation for ED TEL debt of $170
million.

The full value of the total package is $720 million, including:

- TELUS covers debt: $170 million;
- Research and development investment: $12 million;
- Eliminate the cost of a public share offering: $27 million;
- Additional financial elements: $46 million;
- Cash proceeds: $465 million;

A joint City - ED TEL steering committee has already studied the offer
and will recommend either the TELUS offer or a public share offering
to City Council.  City Council will vote on that recommendation
Friday, Nov. 18. If the TELUS offer is accepted, TELUS hopes to reach
a final agreement by Dec. 19, 1994.

The offer includes a number of commitments to ED TEL employees and
customers, and the City of Edmonton.

For EDTEL employees:

 -- TELUS will honor all existing union collective agreements and
    employee and management compensation plans.

 -- TELUS will recognize the seniority of ED TEL employees.

 -- ED TEL management will continue to be responsible for staffing
    levels of ED TEL as part of their business decisions.

 -- ED TEL employees, as part of TELUS, will be eligible for the TELUS
    employee share purchase plan. All TELUS employees may be offered a one
    time special offer to purchase (subject to regulatory approval).

 -- ED TEL employees will have expanded career options as part of a
    group of companies with global market opportunities.

For ED TEL customers:

 -- All existing customer contracts will be honored.

 -- Current levels of ED TEL customer service will be maintained.

 -- Customers will get faster access to leading edge telecommunications.
 -- Businesses across the province will have access to similar services
    and benefits.

For the City of Edmonton:

 -- Control of ED TEL will remain in Edmonton.

 -- ED TEL will continue to operate as a separate company with its own
    management and board of directors.

 -- TELUS will expand Edmonton investment, spending more than $12
    million in 1995 to exploit leading edge technologies and develop new
    products and services targeted at key customer segments in health
    care, education and home service areas.

-- Combined research and development activities of ED TEL, TELUS,
   TRLabs sponsorship and the University of Alberta will make Edmonton a
   significant research and development centre of excellence, helping to
   attract technology professionals and knowledge workers to Edmonton.

-- TELUS will make the expected investments required to ensure modern
   world class telecommunications systems for Edmonton. That investment
   has been estimated by City financial advisors at more than $1 billion
   over the next decade.

There will be a high level of media interest in the TELUS - City negotiations
over the next few days. TELUS is committed to keeping our employees
informed as soon as events unfold. If you have questions or comments,
please contact Susan Tinker, TELUS internal communications at 403-498-7324.

Any media inquiries should be directed to Rick Preston, TELUS public
affairs at 403-498-7320.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Lindh)
Subject: Caller ID in Sweden, Europe
Organization: Ericsson Telecom AB
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 07:41:37 GMT


I today picked up a leaflet from the Swedish Telecom operator (Telia),
concerning their scheduled offering of the service "Caller ID".  The
leaflet that I quote below is "LZTA 8046138 (October 1994)". All
translation faults are mine, the leaflet is in swedish.  One USD is
approximately 8 swedish kronor (SEK).

"... you can see and save the telephone numbers of those who have
called you.  Even after you are back from holiday etc, you can see who
have called you while you were away ... available from december
1994...

 ...you can not see the telphone number of the caller if
the call is from a non-AXE-connected telephone, (My comment: when the call is
    from an 'old' type of telephone office; Telia plan to have all subscribers
    connected to AXE before the year 2000)
the call is from outside Sweden,
the call is from a cellular telephone,
the call is from another (non-Telia) operator within Sweden,
the call is from a public telephone,
the caller have blocked Caller ID...

 ...You order the service and then you buy an additional box that show the
telephone numbers, or a telephone with the function already built-in...
 ...The cost for the service is 20 SEK per month, if you are not a
company. 150 SKr per line as a one-time-charge, if you are a company...
 ...the cost of the box is additional...

 ...If you need to be anonymous when you make a call, you can either
temporarily block the transfer of your number, (My comment:
Block-per-call) or you can order a permanent blocking...

 ...the temporary blocking is free of charge, the permanent blocking
is free of charge the first time you order it, but cost 100 SEK to
re-activate ...
...  (My comment: if you have activated it once, then de-activated it,
then decide to re-activate it once more it will cost you 100 SEK)
 ...to de-activate a permanent blocking is always free of charge...

 ...when you call 90000, (My comment: this is the Swedish 911 service)
your number may be available to them even if you have blocked Caller
ID. If they should re-direct your call to some other, not life-critical
service, your telephone number will not be transferred...

 ...If you today have a non-published telephone number, you will
automatically get a permanent blocking of Caller ID activated. If you
want to have your telephone number visible even though it today is
'secret', please order a de-activation of the permanent blocking from
us...

 ...If you today do not have a 'secret' telephone number, your
telephone number will be visible to others, unless you either make a
temporary or a permanent blocking of the function..."

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 05:46:38 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: 1-800-CALL-INFO _is_ Tariffed
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


One of the things that came up earlier on the issue of MCI's
1-800-CALL-INFO service was the question as to whether it had been
tariffed or not.

I live in the Washington, DC area so the FCC is a local call for me.
By calling their main number, and calling several other people, I
finally found out whom I had to contact.

Frank Hopwood, 202-418-1524 is the FCC person who handles MCI's tariff
schedule filings.  I got ahold of his voice mail but it was several days
before he returned my call.

Mr. Hopwood was very polite, explaining he'd been on Jury Duty the past
few days.  MCI *DID* file a tariff for the service aproximately around the
11th of October, and it became effective October 18, 1994.  He noted that
for obvious reasons it wasn't indicated as being 1-800-CALL-INFO but had
a different name altogether.

Whether the tariff will withstand court challenge is the next issue.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Crawford)
Subject: Local Phone Companies Capable of ...
Date: 15 Nov 1994 14:38:56 GMT
Organization: Temple University, Academic Computer Services


Do you feel your local telephone company is capable of providing you
advanced telecom products and services; ie What do you feel are your
local phone companies strengths and weaknesses - from the perspective
of helping us (high tech, computer literate , mobile, work at home
types?)


David Crawford                          Multimedia Designer
[e-mail]          --------------------
Cochran Research Center                 [phone]
http://snowhite.cis.temple.edu:8080/

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: PC-Based Voice Mail Systems
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 08:57:52 -0500
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


Who can tell me about PC-based voice mail systems?  I'm not talking
about the cheezy little programs that come with these new
voice/data/fax modems, I'm thinking more about real multi-line voice
mail systems (preferrably not requiring to be used with a particular
kind of phone system).  ROLM PhoneMail is nice, but *way* more
expensive than I can afford.  I'm searching for other (much cheaper)
options.


Pat


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you should not forget about Dialogic.
They seem to have good quality stuff.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Summit '94)
Subject: Enterprise Management Summit '94 - Summit Week
Date: 15 Nov 1994 14:57:49 GMT
Organization: Netcom


The Enterprise Management Summit '94 has begun! Here is a summary of
the activities for the conference and exhibition which runs November
14-18 at the Santa Clara Convention Center, Santa Clara, California.

Exhibit Floor

Tuesday, 7:00pm - 10:00pm
Wednesday, 12:00pm - 7:00pm
Thursday, 12:00pm - 7:00pm

Vendor Shoot-Out

Bull, Computer Associates, DEC, HP, and IBM will compete head-to-head in
the Enterprise Management Theater on Wednesday and Thursday to see who has
the best enterprise management solution.
HP: Wednesday, 10:30am - 12:00pm
CA: Wednesday, 1:30pm - 3:00pm
IBM: Thursday, 10:30am - 12:00pm
Bull: Thursday, 1:30pm - 3:00pm
DEC: Thursday, 3:30pm - 5:00pm

Keynotes, General Session

Wednesday, 8:30am: "Evolution of Management Platforms", Dennis Yaro,
    SunSoft
Thursday, 8:30am: "Facing Today's Enterprise Management Challenges",
    Bill Warner, IBM
Friday, 12:45pm: "What Users Want; What Vendors Can Deliver", Panel

Other Activities

Tutorials (10): Monday-Tuesday
Technical Sessions (36): Wednesday-Friday
Product Directions Sessions (14): Wednesday-Friday

For More Information:

During Summit week, you can reach us at the Santa Clara Convention Center,
408-748-7117, 7114
Or call the San Francisco office,  800-340-2111
Fax: [phone]

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

From: Maria F. Delgado <[e-mail]>
Subject: Collaborators and Contributors Behind the NII Project
Date: 14 Nov 1994 22:12:34 GMT
Organization: Intelsat


I am doing a research about the real collaborators and contributors to
the so-called Info. Superhighway.  I would appreciate your feedback to
all or some of the following questionnaire.  Your opinion counts:

1.   Do you believe that the national information infrastructure
     should be financed by the government or have government
     interference?. In which relevant areas?
2.   What is the private sector's role?.  Private sector
     includes the telecommunications and computer industries,
     entertainment and cable-TV industries, telephone companies,
     information and related industries.
3.   What is your overall opinion about standards and
     regulations necessary to develop a national information
     infrastructure?
4.   Who do you think are the major contributors to the NII?.
     What are the payoffs expected, as a result of such
     investments?.
5.   Should R&D projects of NII technology be sponsored and
     supported by the government or by the industry?.
6.   Other comments:

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

From: [e-mail] (Wes Leatherock)
Date: 15 Nov 94 19:48:45 -0500
Organization: FidoNet Nameserver/Gateway
Subject: Re: Old Card Dialer Cards


Quoting [e-mail] (Bill Garfield):

> I have one of the (apparently rare) Western Elect 2660A card dialer
> telephones (circa early '70s).  It appears to be in perfect working
> order, tho I have no "new" cards for it.  There is a collection of
> already punched cards with it, but of course the numbers are no good
> to me and naturally the punched cards are not re-punchable.

> Are new cards still available from Ma Bell?  I asked at an AT&T Phone
> Center Store and drew a blank expression from the sales clerk ...
> "You've a WHAT?" was the response.

> Also does anyone know if there was ever a multi-line keyset (1A2)
> version of the card dialer phone?

        I don't know if any cards are available now; when I remember
card dialers was back in the days when you got your terminal equipment
from the local telephone company and there were additional cards
available then.  I don't know if extra cards were free or if they were
ever available directly from any other source.

        There was indeed a multi-line 1A2 key version; we used to use
them at conferences in Oklahoma.  We'd set up a little office, and
have a secretary with two or three lines, and a couple of telephones,
at least one of which was a card dialer, connected to the same lines
for the conferees' use.  We'd punch in advance cards for the home and
office numbers of the conferees, and if I remember right sometimes we
mailed the cards to the conferees with some of the advance material
for the conference.

           Of course, the secretary would also have some blank cards
for anyone who forgot theirs or wanted one for a different number.


Wes Leatherock
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: AT&T Personal Term 510/510a Help Needed
Date: 14 Nov 1994 04:12:38 GMT
Organization: SOLVOX Systems


Alex -

There were two versions of the 510 terminal; the 510A or analog and
the 510D or digital.  The A version used two standard tip and ring
lines, and the D used a single AT&T proprietary digital connection for
voice and data.  These were discontinued in about 1989 or 90.  You
might try the AT&T hotline for manuals, but they probably don't stock
them anymore.  a better bet would be a GBCS branch office that might
just have one sitting around gathering dust.  Good Luck, it was a good
little terminal, touch screen and all.


Gene Retske

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Pestaner)
Subject: Re: DSU/CSU For T1
Date: 15 Nov 1994 16:17:25 GMT
Organization: Oregon Grad. Inst. Computer Science and Eng., Beaverton


Good you asked.  You need to have a T1 csu/dsu, such as a Kentrox
T-ServII.  You may wish to invest in a Kentrox DataSmart if you later
plan to drop out data or voice channels for a combined data and voice
application.

You can get these from any telecom distributor like Alltel, Graybar, etc.
The tserv is about $800, the datasmart about $2500.

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 1994 16:03:21 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Can a Customer Choose Their ANI?


I'm curious to know if a (residential) customer can choose NOT to have
their ANI reflect a dialable number.  Or put another way, does ANI
always represent a DN.  If not, how does one go about that?  This is
not meant to defraud, just to enhance "privacy."

Simply curious.


Pete Weiss, PSU


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think ANI is something which can
be artibtrarily decided or presented. I think it is what it is ... and
gets delivered in that way. While your right to privacy is appreciated
and respected, my right to know what telephone calls I am obliged to
pay for supercedes your privacy right, or at least is equal to it.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: The Blackbox Company and its Catalog
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 94 21:26:04 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


My experience with them is also limited but very positive.


John S. Wylie - Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 23:15:31 -0500
From: Michael Stanford <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: The Blackbox Company and its Catalog


> I am interested in any feedback from people familiar with the Blackbox
> catalog:

I have had good experiences with them.  They will send out orders less
than $5.00 without any charge or billing in the expectation that it
will lead to more substantial business, which in my case it did.

                             -----

Patrick, I'm glad you're back.  I notice that many people put
inquiries of great interest to me with requests to respond directly by
email.  I would prefer to see the answers here in the Digest.  That is
to say, as a matter of general principle if an inquiry is worth
passing out, it seems to me that the response would be worth reading.


Michael Stanford


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even though many writers do ask for
responses by email, generally at least a few of the responders will
also send a copy of their response to me here. When I get such replies
I run them in the Digest, making the assumption that the original
correspondent is probably getting email versions of the same thing sent
to him.  As you mentioned about Black Box, they are a fine bunch of
people; I think everyone should at least review their catalog and give
consideration to purchases from them.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 13:04:00 EST
From: Christopher Zguris <[e-mail]>
Subject: Store-to-Store Link?


I'm looking for ideas on how to link two stores within Manhattan. Both
stores have independent multi-line key systems. I'm not looking to
_link_ the systems with anything like centrex; the systems will remain
indepentent.  I'm looking for a sort of dedicated store-to-store link,
so if, for example, store A picks up a line at store B will ring and
vice-versa (this would be _perfect_ since it would also integrate
nicely into both key systems that have extra capacity anyways).

The biggest question involves cost. Is it cheaper to do something like
this?  A local call here in Manhattan is $.08 for the first three
minutes. In addition to voice calls, data calls that connect store B
to the network at store A through a modem will also be made. Now if
these data calls last for any length of time, or many of them are
placed in addition to voice calls things could get pricey! I'm sure
centrex would do what I want, but I think it's priced _way_ out of my
ballpark (but I'm guessing, I've never priced it), what other options
are there? In other words, what should I ask about when I call NYNEX
so that I won't sound like an idiot and _they_ won't sell me something
I don't need (like centrex?). Opinions, suggestions, experiences, etc.
would be most appreciated!


Christopher Zguris    [e-mail]
(just another happy MCI customer)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can get a direct line -- sometimes
called a 'private line' or 'private circuit' or 'ringdown circuit'
between the two locations which will do what you want. When one end
goes off-hook, the other end will ring. You can terminate them on each
end either on the switchboard(s) or on single line instruments or as
a line appearance on a multi-line phone or what-have-you.

You are NOT getting an OPX (Off Premise Extension) from either location
to the other.  You are NOT getting an FX (Foreign Exchange) line at
either location ... just a ringdown circuit from point A to point B.

Now is it worth your money or not?  IMO (notice, there is no 'H' in
there; that's because I don't give *humble* opinions!) you will be
losing your shirt unless you keep that circuit loaded all the time; at
least for several hours per day. Telco is going to hit you hard on
installation costs ... a few hundred dollars, probably. You are going
to pay monthly *by the mile* and the number of CO's involved for this
line. You don't pay anything per call; just a flat monthly rate for
the wire. I imagine it would take you a few months at least of normal to
heavy usage on the line to even amortize the installation costs. These
lines were very popular long ago before services like speed-dialing
were available, and when long distance cost a lot more than it does
now. For example, when I worked for Diners Club back in about 1969-70
we had a 'tie-line' from Chicago to Denver where much of the credit
card processing was done. Lift the receiver on this dial-less, red
phone in Chicago and the other end started ringing instantly in
Denver, or vice-versa. It was used a hundred times per day, always
for 20-40 seconds at a time. We paid several hundred dollars per month
for the circuit, but that was in an era when long distance calls were
billed by the *minute* with a one minute minimum. Since our calls were
much less, we could get two or three calls completed within a minute
at roughly half to a third of what DDD would have cost back then. On
that basis, our ringdown -- even more than a thousand miles way to
Denver -- was worthwhile. I dunno about intracity, one side of Manhattan
to the other, if you could make it pay off or not.

Now-days, people use premise equipment attached to a regular phone line
to accomplish the same thing. You can get 'one number dialers' which
are wired in series behind a phone on which the dial has been disabled
and do the same thing. When the phone goes off hook the dialer kicks in
and dials the preset number of the phone like itself at the other store.
You either disable the dial or get a phone with no dial at all (yes,
they still make them that way) in order to prevent abuse of the line by
customers, employees, etc.  If it were me, I'd look at premises equipment
attached to a regular phone line instead. It'll be a lot less expensive
and probably work just as well.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #417
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22625;
          16 Nov 94 10:01 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26398; Tue, 15 Nov 94 20:57:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26391; Tue, 15 Nov 94 20:57:03 CST
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 20:57:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #418

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 15 Nov 94 20:57:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 418

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More! (Stu Jeffery)
    Re: Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More! (Olcay Cirit)
    Re: Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More! (Ian Stirling)
    Re: Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More! (Rich Greenberg)
    800 Calls Should be Free (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should Be *Banned* (Tim Gorman)
    Re: How is Japan's Phone System Different Than USA? (Clifton Koch)
    V.34 Modem Information Needed (Jim Miller)
    Tropez Platinum Questions (Warren Lavallee)
    Re: The Blackbox Company and its Catalog (Stu Jeffery)
    Wireless PBX Information Wanted (Eduardo Llama LLama)
    Re: Who Provides Directory Assistance (Greg Monti)
    Re: Any Way to Use Call Waiting to Avoid Second Phone Line? (Ian Stirling)
    Get E-Mail Anywhere! Test Users Needed: E-Mail/Pager Gateway (Doug Reuben)
    Get European Safety Approvals / Telecom Equipment ([e-mail])
    Please Cooperate With Us! Survey on "Future TV" (Yutaka Mori)

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 America
On Line. 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, 15 Nov 1994 09:49:51 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Stu Jeffery)
Subject: Re: Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More!


Brian Gilner writes:

> For you telecommunication and fax freaks:

> I got this cool device that turns a stand alone fax machine into a
> full-page scanner. I saw the ad in the November issue of Windows
> magazine, and it costs $69.95. I use it with WinFax Pro to perform OCR
> on my scanned documents. Check it out! The number is 1-800-367-1427.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know if this was sent to me
> in a sneaky way to be an advertisement for the product described or
> if the correspondent is merely a satisfied customer. Anyway, I pass
> it along for whoever wants to investigate further.   PAT]

PAT: I suspect it's an ad. BTW, welcome back and that was a very
interesting report; my wife is an Cardiac ICU nurse and she read it
with great interest.

I don't know why you need anything more if you have a stand alone fax
machine and fax software. Simply hook your fax machine into your modem and
send the fax. No need to make a phone call, simply start your fax machine..
it will send tones and activate the computer software. Quality is set by
the lowest element in the loop, which is probably the fax machine.

I have done it quite often using a Brothers 650M and faxSTF software on my
Mac. I don't see why any machine and software wouldn't work. It isn't
great, but it certaily works. I can't imagine what the "cool" device does
that my cable dosn't ... maybe it adds gray scale and fractionally rotates
the image; I'd shell out $ for that !!!

Regards,

Stu Jeffery            Internet: [e-mail]
1072 Seena Ave.                 voice:   415-966-8199
Los Altos, CA. 94024            fax:     [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 07:00:34 PST
From: [e-mail] (olcay cirit)
Subject: Re: Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More!


There is some freeware from SGI, called flexfax, and it lets you send
faxes from Unix boxes. With it, you can scan full page documents into
TIFF files, and convert TIFF to PS. You can also use it to print PS
files. I am not sure where to get it, but archie could probably find
it.


Olcay Cirit       |] X-Files Enthusiast
[e-mail] [| Editor-in-chief, Computer News

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

From: [e-mail] (I. Stirling)
Subject: Re: Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More!
Date: 15 Nov 1994 18:47:33 GMT
Organization: University of Stirling


Brian Gilner ([e-mail]) wrote:

> For you telecommunication and fax freaks:

> I got this cool device that turns a stand alone fax machine into a
> full-page scanner. I saw the ad in the November issue of Windows
> magazine, and it costs $69.95. I use it with WinFax Pro to perform OCR
> on my scanned documents. Check it out! The number is 1-800-367-1427.

YMMV, unless you have a fax which produces absolutely perfect faxes,
with no lines, smears or other defects you're very unlikely to get OCR
to work well. Anyway, $69 is way OTT, all you need is a fax/modem card
which you can tell to pick up the phone to recieve the call.


Ian Stirling

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Turn Fax Machine to Scanner and More!
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 04:20:26 GMT


What sort of device is this?

If you have a fax machine, a fax modem, and winfax pro, all you need
do is send a fax from the machine to the PC with the faxmodem.  I have
done this many times, just needs a seperate phone line on the fax and
the modem.


Rich Greenberg Work: TBA.
TinselTown, USA Play: [e-mail] 310-649-0238

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

Date: Thu, 10 Nov 94 11:11:12 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: 800 Calls Should be Free


In all of the comments about NPA.555.1212 and 1-800-CALL-INFO I think
that one vital point was overlooked: 800.555.1212 *is* still a free
call and the "reasonable man" has expectations that any 800 number
will be free.

I have just called the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Affairs to ask and their off-the-cuff opinion is that charging for an
800 number is not permitted here but I need to send in a formal
inquiry for them to look deeper -- will do tonight, was provided a FAX
number so should be quick (Floridians note: 904.487.4177 attn Gwen
Worlds).

Also called the Florida Public Service Commission -- Division of
Consumer Affairs (800.342.3552). They were already looking into it but
have not yet made a decision - are going to mail me the result.

Just looked in the new 1995 Southern Bell directory, and while
Anonymous Call Rejection and free blocking of 900 and 976 numbers is
mentioned, most mention of 800 numbers also include the words "toll
free" or "no charge" -- not all do however and I could not find any
"blanket" statement.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

Date: Tue, 14 Nov 94 10:13:58 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Caller-Charging 800 Numbers Should Be *Banned*


> TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:

            ****** stuff deleted  ******

> So I still
> maintain that 555-1212 is still an AT&T monopoly: you can purchase the
> information direct from them (by default if their customer) or you can
> purchase the information *resold to you* by one of their competitors who
> obtains it for you transparently when you dial 555-1212 via one of the
> competitors. If some other carrier wants to run their own database -- not
> just buy and immediatly resell AT&T to you, they have to use some other
> number to do it on, since 555-1212 latches right into the AT&T centers.
> Did you think that somehow MCI and the others intercept calls to 555-1212
> and do their own thing with it? Not hardly ... so if MCI wants to
> collect its own data from whatever sources and sell its own data -- not
> just resell AT&T -- what telephone number should they use?    PAT]

I will not guarantee that AT&T uses the RBOC's DA centers exclusively
but they use them a LOT. I have absolutely no direct knowledge of any
AT&T Directory Assistance center. They deliver their traffic to our
centers the same way the other carriers do. DA is definitely NOT an
AT&T monopoly -- very, very far from it.

I should point out that this is one service that many of us in the
industry see having rough times ahead as local competition gains
ground. The RBOC's spend a lot of money on this service. I think you
will find that the rates are definitely NOT compensatory. Thus, this
is a service that the RBOC's will not be able to afford to keep up
as competitive pressures build - assuming that competitors will find
this an easy area to compromise in order to minimize costs. While I
do not want to be alarmist, this will also ultimately have an impact
on 911 service since the same data bases and processes are used for
DA and 911 data updates. Consider the consequences of using the same
information for 911 that someone in the digest mentioned they received
from a DA service for people that had moved six months prior.


Tim Gorman    E-mail: [e-mail] (Tim Gorman)

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

From: [e-mail] (Clifton Koch)
Subject: Re: How is Japan's Phone System Different Than USA?
Date: 15 Nov 94 19:33:52 GMT
Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group


Jerry Skene <[e-mail]> writes:

>> How does the Japanese phone network differ from the phone system in
>> the US?

> One difference is the impedance of the phone line. The Japanese system
> has a higher characteristic impedance, about 900 ohms, compared to the
> US's 600 ohms.

> It is also much more restictive on echo return loss.

Also they use a different CRC algorithm for T1 extended frame operation.

  From all appearances, it appears that a lot of the differences found
in Japan standards from other standards are aimed at keeping their
market closed (Please don't start a flame war about this, it's just my
uninformed opinion).


Cliff Koch     Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Division
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (JimM8021)
Subject: V.34 Modem Information Needed
Date: 15 Nov 1994 01:34:57 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


I am developing a research paper on the background, history and theory
behind the new V.FC (V.fast or V.34) 28.8 kbps modems.  I am looking
for references to any publications, technical literature, real-world
performance data, or design information related to these new modems,
and possibly to establish alliances with knowledge persons or
consultants.  I have already obtained a draft copy of the ITU modem
standard, and am looking for additional detailed information.  I am
especially interested in information on the Rockwell or other chip
sets that implement these new modems.

I am considering the simulation of some aspects of this type of modem
technology on a COMDISCO SPW (e.g trellis decoding, adaptive
equalization, echo cancellation, etc.), and would be interested in
knowing if others have done the same. Also, if others have developed
laboratory test beds to evaluate these modems.

And can you point me to any other newsgroups that address this?

Please address email to: [e-mail].  Please include your return
email address in the main body of your message.


Thank you,

J. Miller

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

From: [e-mail] (Warren Lavallee)
Subject: Tropez Platinum Questions
Date: 15 Nov 1994 09:13:58 -0500
Organization: Light of the World Christian Church, Milford, NH.


Does anyone have a Tropez platinum phone?

How is the range?
Battery life?
Sound volume?

Would you buy it again?


Warren Lavallee  Sr. System Administrator     [e-mail] (MIME OK)

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 11:22:47 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Stu Jeffery)
Subject: Re: The Blackbox Company and its Catalog


Jeffrey bronchick writes:

> I am interested in any feedback from people familiar with the Blackbox
> catalog:

> Good, bad, indifferent, service? Pricing? Why them versus others,
> Merisel, etc?

I have used Blackbox on several occasion and I was very happy with
them; their staff is knowledgeable and efficient and helped me get the
correct unit mating cables. The product arrived on time and was what I
wanted.

They seem a bit pricey, when compared to discount houses, but that
efficient and knowledgeable staff needs to be paid. Very useful
catalog.


Stu Jeffery           Internet: [e-mail]
1072 Seena Ave.                voice:   415-966-8199
Los Altos, CA. 94024           fax:     [phone]


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

From: [e-mail] (Ing. Eduardo Llama LLama)
Subject: Wireless PBX
Date: 15 Nov 94 02:05:46 GMT
Organization: ITESM, Campus Monterrey


If is there anyone who may know ANY information about ANY wireless
PBX or where can I find it (ftp sites, etc), please let me know.
I will appreciate it a lot.

The kind of information I'm looking for is:

- Coverage Area.
- Channel Capacity.
- Number of cells (if is a micro-cellular system)
- The Company that developed the system.
- User's Capacity
- Protocols
- Number of trunks.
- Technology involved.
- Etc...  (whatever)


Thanks,

Eduardo Llama Llama

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 11:20:25 EST
From: Greg Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Who Provides Directory Assistance?


Those who remember MCI or others telling you to use AT&T to get a
distant number are partially correct.  There was a long period after
divestiture and equal access, when there was a function that only AT&T
could do: *international* directory assistance.  AT&T did not provide
the directory lookup service itself, just the carriage of the call to
the foreign DA bureau.

Back about 1990, I needed a number in Birmingham, England.  My home
phone is presubscribed to Sprint.  I dialed 00 and asked the Sprint
operator for UK inquiry.  He said, "you have to hang up and dial
10-288-00."  Which I did.  The AT&T operator forwarded me (apparently
with the press of a single key) to UK Inquiry, which looked up the
number.  The AT&T operator stayed on the line while the UK Inquiry
operator and I talked.  When the UK guy had given the number to me,
the AT&T operator asked if I knew how to dial it.  I said yes and hung
up.

And I dialed the call itself on Sprint.

The call to UK Inquiry was free.  I believe that this use (abuse?)  of
AT&T is what eventually had to come to an end.  I called UK Inquiry
for another number around 1992 or 93, and, by that time, Sprint was
able to handle getting the UK Inquiry operator on the line.


Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    [phone]
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      [phone]
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (I. Stirling)
Subject: Re: Any Way to Use Call Waiting to Avoid Second Phone Line?
Date: 15 Nov 1994 18:39:20 GMT
Organization: University of Stirling


M. K. Smith ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I was just wondering if there is any software available that can
> recognize a call waiting signal and prevent the current modem
> connection from being dropped?  I am trying to avoid a second phone
> line (~15/month); however, I need to know when people are trying to
> reach me by phone.  I know voice mail through the local phone company
> is available (~$7/month), but call waiting is much cheaper
> (~2-3/month).

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: On most modems now-a-days you can set
> one of the S-Registers high enough to do what you are seeking; i.e. the
> call waiting signal will cause you to get a lot of garbage on the screen
> but the modem will physically hang in there and stay connected. There
> now arises a couple of problems: Can you live with the garbage as a
> result?  I guess if you are just working on text files the garbage does
> not matter too much, but I can't imagine you would want to taint some
> binaries you were downloading (as one example) with some nonsense buried
> deep in the file the modem passed along. If you are down/uploading some
> customer account information, can you live with the errors caused by
> a call-waiting signal hitting in the middle of it?

Only if you'r using a non error correcting modem; if you arn't, why
not, they are so cheep. Anyway, no sane person would up/download
account information over an uncorrected link using no protocol (X,Y,Z
modem etc)


Ian Stirling.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are correct; no person would do that.
However, that still does not account for the modem on the other end of
the line disconnecting should you decide on your end to take the call
waiting. That still does not mean the other end is set up to do the kind
of error correcting needed or to have the tolerance your modem has.  PAT]


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

From: [e-mail] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: Get E-Mail Anywhere! Test Users Needed for New E-Mail - Pager Gateway
Organization: Interpage (TM) NSG / CID Technologies  /  (203) 499 - 5221
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 20:08:19 GMT


Testers Needed For *Enhanced* E-Mail -> Pager Gateway

*KNOW when E-Mail arrives on YOUR own pager! Announcing the startup of
a new E-Mail to Pager gateway which will work with ANY pager to let
YOU know when you receive important mail, WHO sent it, the content of
your inbound mail, and more!

InterPage Network Services Group has recently been established to
provide the Internet Community with a fast, economical, and
feature-rich online service oriented towards Numeric and Alphanumeric
pager users. InterPage (TM) will naturally provide basic E-Mail to
Pager notification of inbound e-mail messages, but will go *beyond*
that to allow for many other features. Some of these include: message
screening, dispatch to OTHER pagers, group lists, direct user option
control, and much more!

We will shortly announce in a full release the exact details and
pricing of our service. In the meantime, however, why not help us out
in fine-tuning the Interpage system and at the same time get some free
usage yourself?

As we are currently in the testing stage, we'd like to set up a small
group of about 30 testers to give our service a thorough workout.  All
we would need you to do is (obviously) have some sort of pager with
which our system can communicate. You should also have an e-mail
account so that we can communicate with you, although this will not be
necessary once the system is fully operational.

The test will of course be free, and you will get two month's worth of
access for free after we become fully operational just for helping us
out.  We won't bother you to sign up after the trial is over, and
won't bombard you with mail or forms or anything to fill out. All we
want is for you to USE it so that we can see how robust the system is
on various pager systems. We would also be very interested in your
opinion of the service, what you think you would feel comfortable
paying, and of course your ideas on how you think we could improve
InterPage.

If you are interested in participating in this test, or have further
questions, please drop us a note or call and we'll be glad to help!

Thanks for your help!


Doug    [e-mail]  * CID Tech / INSG *  (203) 499 - 5221

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Get European Safety Approvals / Telecom Equipment
Date: 15 Nov 1994 05:57:27 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


Forbairt was established by the Irish Government to facilitate the
development of Irish industry, to encourage technology and innovation
and to provide technology services to all firms. The National
Electronics Test Centre (NETC), a division of Forbairt, was
established in 1978 to provide a range of test and consultancy
services to the IT & T industry. These services include electrical
safety testing, telecommunications test and development, environmental
testing and electromagnetic test and consultancy.

NETC is the Irish laboratory which provides safety testing to IEC,
CENELEC and Irish standards. It specialises in testing information
technology equipment and laboratory instrumentation. Testing can be
carried out in the laboratory in Dublin or in the client's facility.
The Centre carries out testing for a number of its US clients in their
factories in the States.

Forbairt is the Irish body notified to make reports in accordance with
the Low Voltage Directive (LVD). NETC is a recognised laboratory under
the CENELEC Certification Agreement (CCA), the IECEE CB Scheme and has
laboratory accreditation to EN 45001. The Centre provides test
services to the following safety standards:

IEC 950     Information Technology, Business and Telecommunications
EN 60950    Equipment.

EN 41003    Equipment to be Connected to the Telecommunications Network

EN 50091    Uninterruptible Power Supplies (UPS)

IEC 65      Electronic Apparatus for Household or Similar Use
EN 60065

IEC 1010    Measurement, Control and Laboratory Equipment
EN 61010

IEC 335     Domestic Appliances
EN 60335

IS 401      13A Plugs and Sockets

NETC's Telecommunications Testing Laboratory tests terminal equipment
for connection to the PSTN and for the ISDN. Its ISDN services for NET
3, the European mandatory requirement for Basic Access and NET 5, the
European mandatory standard for Primary Rate Access have been
accredited to EN 45001.  These services were developed in conjunction
with European partners under the EU Conformance Testing Services (CTS)
programme.

NETC provides its international clients with:
    *   Short queues
    *   Competitive prices
    *   Fast test turnaround
    *   Accredited services


For more information on NETC's testing services, Jackie FitzGerald
(Internet: [e-mail]), Tel [phone], Fax [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Yutaka Mori)
Subject: Please Cooperate With Us! Survey on "Future TV"
Date: 14 Nov 1994 21:46:09 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology


Dear Friend,

My name is Yutaka Mori. I'm a graduate student at the MIT Operations
Research Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts. For my masters thesis I
am doing research on an interactive TV, the future multimedia service
on a Cable TV network. As part of my research I'm conducting a survey
on the use of TV, Cable TV, video rentals, and some hypothetical
interactive TV services.

If you are interested in responding to this survey, please send an
e-mail to [e-mail] and I will forward to you via e-mail a copy of
the questionnaire.  Your time and cooperation in the survey will be
very much appreciated.


Thank you,

Yutaka Mori

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #418
******************************

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23799;
          16 Nov 94 11:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28544; Tue, 15 Nov 94 22:27:30 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28537; Tue, 15 Nov 94 22:27:27 CST
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 22:27:27 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #419

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 15 Nov 94 22:24:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 419

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options (Doug Reuben)
    Rate Table Databases, Telephone Number Databases (Evan Champion)
    Nazis Sell Long Distance (Phillip Dampier)
    Information Wanted on Mercury Communication Ltd. in U.K. (Marc White)
    Japan's Telecom Ministry Opens WWW Server (Nigel Allen)
    Re: DSU/CSU For T1 (Michael Todd Lattanzi)
    Re: DSU/CSU For T1 (Bruce Sullivan)
    Re: Device Wanted For Logging Phone Calls (Marc Saegesser)
    Re: Device Wanted For Logging Phone Calls (Danny Burstein)
    Re: Custom Ringing Detection (Lester Wan)
    Re: PC-Based Voice Mail Systems (Prakesh Thatte)
    Re: Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID (Ernie Holling)
    Dialogic and Rhetorex Technical Specs Wanted ([e-mail])
    Need Conference Unit For Students/Teacher (TELECOM Digest Editor)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. 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] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 13:06:59 PST


Just got the bill from NYTel/NYNEX. Apparently, they will soon use TWO
codes: a "BLOCK" code and an "UNBLOCK" code instead of just the current
*67 toggle code, and they are also changing the way Call-Return (*69) works.

Briefly:

1. Starting December 15th, 1994, to BLOCK a call from ANY line dial: *67
   Starting December 15th, 1994, to SHOW your ID from ANY line dial: *82

2. *67 will also block "Call*Return" (*69), so even if a call shows up as
   PRIVATE, you will no longer be able to return the call.

I DO like the idea of having separate BLOCK and SHOW/UNBLOCK codes.
For a long time I have complained that there is no way to know what
will display UNLESS you know the status of the line you are calling
from.

If the line you are using normally has "All Call Restrict" in place,
where all calls will show up as PRIVATE unless you enter *67 to toggle
"off" the restriction, and YOU DON'T KNOW THIS, you may hit *67
thinking that you will be blocking the call when in fact you will be
forcing the ID to appear on the receiving end.

This new *67=Block / *82=Show ends this problem once and for all. It
is independent of the line you are using. If you are on a line that is
blocked ("All Call Restrict") and hit *67, it will do nothing -- all
calls will still show up as PRIVATE. You will need to enter *82 to
display your number.

The same will be true the other way -- if you have a line where Call
ID is normally "sent" and it appears on the distant end, and you opt
to hit *82 anyhow, it won't do anything. *67 will of course continue
to block as usual.

As to the change in the way *69 is handled, I am a bit concerned that
this will eliminate a great deal of the versatility of the feature. I
rarely use it myself, although I know of a number of people who were
receiving annoying calls who eventually chose to just pay the $.75 per
call, and *69 every harassing call until the callers stopped. This
usually took care of matters quite quickly and with minimal fuss.

Now, as long as someone makes sure they hit *67 in front of every
call, or if they have "All Call Restrict" and don't hit *82, they can
make harassing calls and the customer receiving them has no recourse
other than to use Call*Trace or call the annoyance office at NYTel.

I'm not sure why they did this ... do they want more people to use the
more expensive Call*Trace (*57) service? Doubtful, since it's a good
deal of work for them to process these calls. Or were there too many
people who had accidentally dialed the wrong number and just hung up
instead of taking the two seconds to say "Oh, excuse me, I think I
have the wrong number. Sorry ...", only to find that the person who had
been called accidentally didn't enjoy being hung up on and hit *69 to
find out who it was? (Or did the NY-PSC order this and NYTel just had
to comply?)

This doesn't make too much sense to me ... I sure hope NYTel doesn't
continue to charge for *69 REGARDLESS of whether the attempt was
successful or not, as there are likely to be a LOT more unsuccessful
attempts after Dec 15th when *69/Call Return is modified as per the
above.

I'd also like to see them implement Anonymous Call Rejection so we
don't have to worry about Call*Returning (*69) PRIVATE calls -- they
will all simply be blocked when I chose.

At least they have the *67/*82 codes lined up -- I'm glad to see some
progress on that front. Hopefully other Telcos will follow suit prior
to the implementation of nationwide (US/Canada-wide actually)
Caller-ID in 1995.


Doug Reuben    CID Technologies    (203) 499 - 5221
*FTP to: 'ftp.netcom.com', pub/cidtech for MacPager Call ID -> Pager Demo*
*ALSO: FTP to above for info on Free Test of InterPage E-Mail Paging Svcs.

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 21:23:42 +0000
From: evan champion <[e-mail]>
Subject: Rate Table Databases, Telephone Number Databases
Organization: Bell Northern Research


We are looking for two databases.

The first is a rate table database.  Basically, given two phone
numbers anywhere on the planet we need to find out how much it would
cost to call there for a particular period of time.  This information
needs to be of high enough quality so that a phone company could use
it for their billing.  In addition, it must be able to tell me the
city/province/country of where the call came from and is going to, and
the city/province/country must contain the full, complete name and not
a condensed name (ie: in one database I have seen, Rancho Bernardo,
California, is reduced to RANCHOBERNDO, CA).

The second is a database that would contain every telephone number in
North America.  Given a particular phone number, it would be able to
tell me who the owner is of that number and their address.  Again, top
quality is required.  A very nice feature would be that it should
return a generic company name for phone numbers hidden behind a PBX
(ie: entering 613-765-1234, which is part of a block of numbers owned
by Bell-Northern Research in Ottawa, should return BNR's name and
their address rather than drawing a blank).

These databases will be implemented in C structures, so being able to
easily translate the database from its native format in to C structures
is a good thing.


Thanks very much.

Evan Champion   Bell-Northern Research

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 14:47:22
Subject: Nazis Sell Long Distance


Radio stations are often prime targets for every unusual organization
in America.  Not a day passes when I don't receive something from one
group or another with some axe to grind.

But in today's mail, I was surprised to learn that the Aryan Nations,
Hayden Lake, Idaho, have announced their push into providing long
distance services.

Not only does the Aryan Nations organization get a percentage of the
revenue earned, they are also recruiting decent, upstanding, WHITE
representatives to help resell their service on behalf of their
"church."

The organization dumb enough to fall into this public relations
nightmare is Excel Telecommunications of Dallas, Texas, which appears
to be a reseller of Allnet.

One interesting feature on the plan is their own version of MCI's
Friends & Family.  In the case of these guys, perhaps they could call
it Hopelessly White and Ignorant.  Any member of your cross-burning
calling circle who is also an Excel customer gets 50% off.  Obviously,
this offer does not apply to Jews, "mongrel races," Gays and Lesbians
(a perennial favorite target,) and anyone that graduated from high
school.  :-)

In any event, should you wish to express your concerns about this turn
of events, Excel's listed customer service number is 1-800-875-9235.
The ID number for the Aryan Nations organization is 6017.  But, far be
it from me to suggest that only people upset with the Aryan Nations
call.  There may even be some readers that might want to sign up.
They don't list rates on the form, unfortunately.

This may herald a new dawn in fringe group long distance.  Linda
Thompson could sell Sprint.  The Cosmic Awareness Association could
sell AT&T (they already worship their logo), and the Shrine of
Virginity could sign up customers for Wiltel.

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc White)
Subject: Information Wanted on Mercury Communication Ltd. in U.K.
Date: 16 Nov 1994 01:30:27 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Could anyone please give me any information about this company?  I'd
like to know the impact they are having on BT.  I also heard they've
purchased a new billing system which is supposed to give them the most
competitive edge in the U.K.


Thanks in advance.

[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 11:32:36 -0500
Subject: Japan's Telecom Ministry Opens WWW Server
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Allen Telecommunications Policy Consultants


The Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications of Japan is now
participating in the World-Wide Web.  The address is http://www/mpt.go.jp/

In its offering, the Ministry is making available a range of image and
text information in English, including a chart of the ministry's
organization, the "MPT News" newsletter (which is published every two
weeks), a May 1994 report from the Telecommunications Council entitled
"Toward the Intellectually Creative Society of the 21st Century," and
the 1994 Communications White Paper.

[The above information is taken from the October 17, 1994 issue of
"MPT News".]

Other telecom-related WWW sites include:
 Pacific Bell    http://www.pacbell.com/
 Bell Atlantic   http://www.ba.com/
 U S West        http://www.uswest.com/  (doesn't seem to be working yet)
 Industry Canada http://debra.dgbt.doc.ca/


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would like to add that Wiltel is
also running WWW now ... perhaps someone from that organization will
write and give details for using their service.  You'll be able to
get the Telecom Digest and Archives material from Wiltel.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Todd Lattanzi)
Subject: Re: DSU/CSU For T1
Date: 15 Nov 1994 22:34:29 GMT
Organization: Mississippi State University


Marc Collins ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I'm installing a T1 line and I ordered a 56k DSU/CSU for the line.
> I'm now concerned, can I use this DSU/CSU with this line or do I need
> to order a higher speed unit.  I'm having the line installed this
> comming Thursday and would appreciate any comments or suggestions!

A better product than the Kentrox is the ADTRAN T1 CSU/DSU.  Call
ADTRAN sales at [phone].  Excellent equipment.


Todd Lattanzi   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 15:18 EST
From: Bruce Sullivan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: DSU/CSU For T1


> I'm installing a T1 line and I ordered a 56k DSU/CSU for the line.
> I'm now concerned, can I use this DSU/CSU with this line or do I need
> to order a higher speed unit.  I'm having the line installed this
> comming Thursday and would appreciate any comments or suggestions!

Unfortunately, the 56k DSU/CSU will NOT work here.  It will be
expecting 56k framing from the network interface and will not see it.
The ONLY thing that will work is a T1 CSU/DSU.

As a side note, you will also need to know whether your T1 was
provisioned with D4 or ESF framing, as well as the line coding (AMI or
B8ZS).


Bruce

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Saegesser)
Subject: Re: Device Wanted For Logging Phone Calls
Date: 15 Nov 1994 19:52:00 -0600
Organization: Chicago's First Public-Access Internet


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

> Since detailed phone-bills are even more expensive than the phone
> calls here in Austria, I am looking for a "special" device, which
> monitors my phone-line and logs the phone calls (incoming calls: start
> date and time, end date and time; outgoing calls: start date and time,
> end date and time + dialed phone number) The data should be printed out
> on a serial printer/transmitted to a PC (serial/parallel),...

> I know, PBXs offer this or a similar function.

> Do you have an idea, if such a device is out already? Where can I get
> it?  Did someone build such a box by himself? (It shouldn't be too
> hard ...)

   Wow.  Not more than an hour ago I was thumbing through a catalog
from JDR Microdevices that came in today's mail and noticed a device
that does exactly what you are looking for.  Talk about coincidence.
It's a kit called the PC Call Recorder and sells for USD99.95.  The
order number is EK-TM1.

   Here's what the blurb says (over use of exclamation points and
goofy wording is their's):

   Monitor outgoing calls with your computer!  This kit decodes
touch-tone signals and transmits them through the parallel port to
your computer!  Included software displays date, time and length of
call, the number dialed and any other touch-tone information.  Record
the number of rings before answer, plus date, time and length of call.

   -  Log incoming and outgoing phone calls
   -  Telephone monitor software on diskette
   -  Requires 12-18VDC, 200mA wall transformer

JDR Microdevices
1850 South 10th St.
San Jose, CA  95112-4108

Voice:  408-494-1400
FAX:    [phone]

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

Marc Saegesser   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: Re: Device Wanted For Logging Phone Calls
Date: 15 Nov 1994 22:07:47 -0500
Organization: mostly unorganized


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Thommy Gyorog) writes:

> Since detailed phone-bills are even more expensive than the phone
> calls here in Austria, I am looking for a "special" device, which
> monitors my phone-line and logs the phone calls (incoming calls: start
> date and time, (dieled numbers, etc., etc...)

Alas, five years ago Radio Shack had exactly this device, for about
$150.  Unfortunately they stopped selling it (supposedly under pressure from
folk worried about its use for improper monitoring).

The company, Hello Direct (1-800-Hi-Hello, don't have their international
number at hand) had something similar in their last catalog, but for
quite a bit more money.


[e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Lester Wan)
Subject: Re: Custom Ringing Detection
Date: 15 Nov 1994 21:29:04 GMT
Organization: International Internet Association.


John Keith ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am looking for devices that can do custom ringing detrection and
> route the call to an appropriate device. Particularly useful would be
> the new breed of voice/fax cards for PCs that would have this
> capability. Can somepone point me in the right direction?

The ZyXEL U-series modems detect distinctive ring.  Here's the
definition of the S-register which they use:

S40=    bit    dec    hex    Bit mapped register    *000

    1    2    2    No result code displayed
                in answer mode Q2

    2    4    4    Enable Caller Number Delivery
                (see also S42 bit 2)

    3    8    8    Distinctive Ring Type #1:
                1.2/2 s on, 4 s off

    4    16    10    Distinctive Ring Type #2:
                0.8 s on, 0.4 s off,
                0.8 s on, 4 s off

    5    32    20    Distinctive Ring Type #3:
                0.4 s on, 0.2 s off, 0.4 s on,
                0.2 s off, 0.8 s on, 4 s off

    6    64    40    Distinctive Ring Type #4:
                0.3 s on, 0.2 s off, 1 s on,
                0.2 s off, 0.3 s on, 4 s off

You can reach ZyXEL at zyxel.com, or 800/255-4101.


Lester Wan   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Prime perf)
Subject: Re: PC-Based Voice Mail Systems
Date: 15 Nov 1994 21:00:40 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


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

Check out Applied Voice Technology in Kirkland, WA. The system is sold
exclusively through dealers/distributors. It is a PC based multi-line
system (up to 64 voice mail ports), supports FAX-on-Demand, FAX
Broadcast, FAX Mail (private FAXes into your personal mailbox),
interfaces to the LAN and provides an E-Mail type list of pending
messages on your PC (including name of sender, if internal, and length
of message). They are eating everyone's lunch right now.

Other recently announced features include, E-Mail to speech and E-Mail
to FAX for remote delivery of pending E-Mail messages.

System also has a very powerful set of IVR capabilities with a neat
scripting tool!

Have tons of information in the office as we expect to become
distributors soon. Call or send E-Mail if you have any questions or
require any more information.


Regards,

Prakash Thatte
Prime Performance Technologies, Inc.
703-318-0800

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

Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ernie Holling)
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 1994 21:11:00
Subject: Re: Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID
From: [e-mail] (Ernie Holling)


Bell Atlantic did it well here in PA.

On Sep 1 CLID became available -- we have the gear on the phone
system & had not seen anything as a "pre-release" leak.

I called the morning of Sep 1 and it was running within an hour.

Now, if UNKNOWN CALLER can be replaced prior to the mandated date
next year it would be great.

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

From: [e-mail] (Faust)
Subject: Dialogic and Rhetorex Technical Specs Wanted
Date: 15 Nov 1994 13:32:14 -0800
Organization: Inpherno Data Haven


Is anyone familiar with Dialogic and Rhetorex boards used for CTI,
dictation systems, etc.? I need to determine the sampling rate,
sampling algorithm, etc. of these boards. Do they vary from model to
model? I am curious to know if these boards use a proprietary file
format or if sampled sounds can be played back on either card (or
other cards, regular PC sound cards, etc.).


                 \\  //         Faust          \\  //
                  \\//   Inpherno Data Haven    \\//
                  //\\      [e-mail]     //\\
                 //  \\ THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE //  \\

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

Date: Tue, 15 Nov 94 22:06:46 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Need Conference Unit For Students/Teacher


A special education teacher of my aquaintence here has a special need
and wonders if any TELECOM Digest readers can be of assistance. He
works regularly with three or four handicapped young people who are
unable to attend regular school by visiting them at their home and
working with them on the telephone. There are times, he tells me,
when it would be ideal to have a 'class discussion' in which all the
students might chat on a given topic (current events, etc) as a group.

I mentioned to him that there are devices similar to conference
bridges -- really, I guess that is what they would be -- but much
less sophisticated and without a lot of bells and whistles ... basically
just a device into which four or five phone lines can be connected
with each caller able to hear and speak with the others with some
reasonable clarity. For instance, all are local here in Skokie and
Evanston, so circuits to treat the audio would not be too important.
There need not be password protection since use would be limited and
under his supervision, although passwording would help to prevent
abuse/misuse at other times. It could be operated manually if needed,
by opening and closing key switches to allow the various phone lines
into the conference area.

Am I correct that there are still around here and there the very old
unsophisticated conference bridges of this sort which were used back
in the 1950-60's ... simple little boxes with a place to plug in the
lines and switches to be manipulated by an operator?  (Of course he
would not object if it were somewhat automated ... so much the
easier!)

Also, once I seem to remember long ago seeing a six-button, five-line
phone with a peculiar thing about it: The 'hold button' (first
button on the left side) had been wired via the control unit so that
it in fact joined all the 'calls on hold' into a conference.  The
conference operator talked with each caller by pressing the associated
line button as always, but once the operator pressed the 'hold' button
that call was tossed into the conference in progress. I also once saw
a six-button, five-line phone which had been modified so that the
little ball bearings under each button had been removed, allowing more
than one button to be pressed down (and stay down) at the same time.
This had the same effect: any two, three or four buttons pressed at
the same time allowed all callers to be in a conference via the common
circuit in the phone's handset.

If anything like this is still around, would any Digest reader happen
to have it and would you part with it?  He has been setting up his
weekly conferences using a commercial service, but the expense is
starting to get to him. If any old unit is around that would do what
he wants -- enable four or five to students to converse with him and
each other at one time -- I told him when obtained I would help him
install it. To repeat, it need not have bells and whistles or the
latest technology; just be a working and small conference bridge. His
budget is nil -- almost zero.

Thanks for your help.


PAT

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #419
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21146;
          18 Nov 94 13:19 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04365; Fri, 18 Nov 94 06:34:24 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04357; Fri, 18 Nov 94 06:34:21 CST
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 94 06:34:21 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #420

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 18 Nov 94 06:34:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 420

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    MCI Hit With Major Legal Action re: 'Call-Info' (Danny Burstein)
    Details on Pac*Bell Pricing Changes (Linc Madison)
    Lecture: Dr. Norman Toms "Wireless Revolution..." (Carl E. Krasnor)
    AT&T Will Carry Local Toll Calls in NPA 410 (P.C. Hariharan)
    New ISDN BRI Tariffs in Colorado (Jim Hebbeln)
    PD Benchmarking Study (omni![e-mail])
    Call Waiting and The Message Center at Pacific Bell (Mark Brader)
    Flow Control and OSI Layers (Daniel Joha)
    Protocol in Data Link Layer (Daniel Joha)
    Motorola Complaint and Praise (Mahboud Zabetian)
    Fake Automatic Dialing (Clive D.W. Feather)

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 America
On Line. 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] (danny burstein)
Subject: MCI Hit With Major Legal Action re: 'Call-Info'
Date: 17 Nov 1994 22:23:35 -0500


Apparently, the (huge number of) complaints about MCI's new service
offering (you all know what I'm talking about...) has jogged the
governmental powers that be into action.

A coalition of State Attorney Generals (or should that be States
Attorneys General??) has filed a multi-state action against MCI
raising all the issues we've discussed in this forum.

In deference to Pat's hometown, this is the opening lead of the {Chicago
Sun-Times} of November 16, 1994:

   &&&&& start of quote &&&&&

Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris and his counterparts from
(seventeen) other states filed documents with the FCC Tuesday seeking
to halt MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO service in it's present form. The brief,
filed by attorneys general in Michigan, California, New York and
several other states, supports a complaint filed by AT&T shortly after
the service went into effect amidst a media blitz last month.

"Our contention is that the service is misleading because it charges
customers 75 cents for 800 calls," said Jim Leach, a Burris spokesman.
"800 numbers have become synonymous, in the minds of consumers, with
free calls".

    &&&& end of quoted text&&&&&

The article goes on to discuss how even businesses with blocked lines
to prevent 1-900 calls tend to leave 1-800 open to this problem, and
adds that there have been -many- complaints from businesses, hotels,
and colleges and universities.

Sidenote: About ten years ago as the Federales pretty much moved out
of the areas of consumer law enforcement, the States tried filling the
vacuum. The interstate nature of much of the fraud (especially with
improvements in telecommunications) led to a coalition forming,
representing a large number of individual states. While each
individual Attorney General was pretty much limited to their own
jurisdiction, when they worked together they were able to do quite a
few nationwide prosecutions.

Most commonly this is used against boiler room scams, but there have
been actions against banks, car companies, and other national and
international entities.


[e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 22:42:06 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Details on Pac*Bell Pricing Changes


Another month, another billing insert.  This one is entitled "WE'RE
CHANGING OUR PRICES: Important Changes to Your Residence Telephone
Service."  All typos mine; sections in {braces} are in bold type.

1. NEW PRICING FOR LOCAL TELEPHONE SERVICE

The California Public Utilities Commission has decided to allow
long-distance companies to compete with Pacific Bell in handling calls
within your service area.  This decision sets the prices of basic and
local toll services closer to what it costs to provide each service.
Starting January 1, 1995, you will have a choice: you can continue to
have Pacific Bell complete calls within your service area, or you can
select another provider for your calls.  {Pacific Bell will continue
to provide your basic telephone service (dial tone).}

WHAT IS A SERVICE AREA?

California is divided into ten telephone service areas (also known
as LATAs).

Your Pacific Bell local calling area is *part* of your service area
and *will not change*.

This map will help you find your service area.  A service area
includes one or more area codes.

*Today*, Pacific Bell handles all the calls you make within your
service area.  Long-distance companies handle *only* the calls
*between* service areas and to other states or countries.

[sidebar] SERVICE AREA CALLS CONSIST OF:
1. Local calls -
* calls within about 12 miles of your home;
* calls within about 13 to 16 miles of your home, if you live near a
  large city or in some surrounding areas (also known as Zone Usage
  Measurement or ZUM calls);
AND
2. Local Plus (sm) calls (used to be referred to as service area
   toll calls -
* calls beyond about 17 miles of your home but within the boundaries
  of your service area.
For a list of all prefixes and area codes in your service area,
consult the Customer Guide section of your Pacific Bell White Pages.

MAKING SERVICE AREA CALLS AFTER JANUARY 1, 1995

* Simply dial the number as you do now, and Pacific Bell will handle
  all your local and Local Plus calls.
* Dial the access code of any long-distance company you want to use
  for local, ZUM, and Local Plus calls and then the number you are
  calling.  Access codes are listed on the back of this brochure.
  Note: the charges for calls completed by a long-distance company
  may be different from Pacific Bell's charges.

2. ON JANUARY 1, 1995, PACIFIC BELL PRICES FOR LOCAL PLUS CALLS WILL
   DROP BY AN AVERAGE OF 40%

Here are some examples showing the the [sic] current Pacific Bell
price of daytime four-minute calls and the price of those same calls
beginning January 1, 1995:

4-minute daytime call           current           from 1/1/95
=====================           =======           ===========
San Francisco to San Jose         $1.09              $0.52
Los Angeles to Anaheim              .97                .48
Sacramento to Davis                 .73                .48
San Diego to Escondido              .85                .48

Our new prices for Local Plus calls are listed below:

Pacific Bell Local Plus Calls: Daytime Rates* 8 a.m. - 5 p.m.

Miles     Current price            New price
          1st min  add'l min.      1st min.  add'l min.
13-16     $0.2000   $0.1000        $0.1140    $0.0700
17-20       .2200     .1300          .1140      .0700
21-25       .2500     .1600          .1360      .1140
26-30       .2800     .1900          .1360      .1140
31-40       .3100     .2200          .1360      .1140
41-50       .3400     .2500          .1470      .1250
51-70       .3700     .2800          .1470      .1250
71+         .4000     .3100          .1470      .1360
*Discounts apply to evening and night/weekend rates.
Explanation of rates: $.1360 is about 14 cents, $.1470 is about 15 cents.
{Additional discount plans are described in section 4}

3. CHANGES IN PACIFIC BELL BASIC MONTHLY TELEPHONE PRICES

{Pacific Bell will continue to provide your basic telephone service.}
While the prices of Local Plus calls are dropping sharply, the monthly
charge for basic service will increase.  For low-income customers who
qualify, we will continue to offer Universal Lifeline Telephone
Service at half the monthly price of basic service.

Services for Residence Customers           Current price   New price
================================           =============   =========
Flat rate                                   $8.35/mo.      $11.25/mo.
Measured rate                                4.45/mo.        6.00/mo.
    Installation charge                     34.75           34.75

Lifeline -- flat rate                        4.18/mo.        5.62/mo.
Lifeline -- measured rate                    2.23/mo.        3.00/mo.
Lifeline -- installation charge             17.38           10.00

Foreign Exchange Service -- flat            15.10/mo.       35.95/mo.
For. Exch. Service -- measured               8.50/mo.       30.70/mo.
{In addition, Foreign Exchange mileage rates have decreased by an
average of 68%.}

FLAT RATE SERVICE = You pay one montly price for unlimited calls within
your local calling area.

MEASURED RATE SERVICE = You are charged for all calls.  However, each
month you are given a $3 allowance which applies to calls within your
local calling area and Zone 3 in ZUM areas.

To see which service is best for you, you may change from Flat Rate to
Measured Rate Service or Measured to Flat Rate and back again at {no
charge (between January 1, 1995, and March 31, 1995)}.  Please call the
local Pacific Bell office number listed on your bill if you want to change
your service.

4. ADDITIONAL SAVINGS ON LOCAL PLUS CALLS ARE AVAILABLE.

On January 1, 1995, we'll be discontinuing our current discount plans,
including our CALL BONUS Plan, and introducing these new plans.

PACIFIC BELL DIRECT DISCOUNT PLAN
* Gives you an automatic 15% discount on Local Plus call charges over
  $5.00 per month, {with no need to sign up.}
{Applies to:} direct-dialed and Pacific Bell Calling Card calls
(non-operator-assisted) within the service area.

OPTIONAL DISCOUNT PLANS: You {must sign up} if you want one of the
following plans instead of our Direct Discount Plan described above.
If you make many Local Plus calls and you think one of these plans
would benefit you, call 1-800-826-5100 and request a free three-month
bill analysis from Pacific Bell.

PACIFIC BELL 24-HOUR DISCOUNTS -- SERVICE AREA PLAN
* Benefits those who make many Local Plus calls
* Basic monthly charge is $4.50
* There is a one-time $5.00 sign-up charge.  If you are a current Call
  Bonus subscriber, we'll waive this charge if you sign up before April
  30, 1995.
{Applies to:} direct-dialed and Pacific Bell Calling Card calls (non-
operator-assisted) within your service area.
{Discount:} 30% on calls up to $45.00 per month,
            40% on calls over $45.01 per month.

PACIFIC BELL 24-HOUR DISCOUNTS -- COMMUNITY PLAN
* Benefits those who make many Local Plus calls to a designated community
* Basic monthly charge is $7
* There is a one-time $5.00 sign-up charge.  ... [as above]
{Applies to:} ... [as above]
{Discount:} 40% on calls to one designated community in your service area
            30% on calls to all other communities in your service area

5. HOW TO USE A LONG-DISTANCE COMPANY FOR YOUR LOCAL AND LOCAL PLUS
CALLS STARTING JANUARY 1, 1995

To use a long-distance company instead of Pacific Bell for your local
and Local Plus calls, you must first dial that company's access code
then the telephone number.

[ list of about 70 LD companies, about 20 of them with "not available
for print" listed for their 10XXX code. ]

For recorded highlights of Pacific Bell's new prices, please dial
1-800-2-INFORM (1-800-246-3676).  If you have other questions, please
call the Pacific Bell office number listed on your bill.


Linc Madison  *  Oakland, California  *  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Also see another message in this
issue saying that AT&T was moving in on the local call business in
area code 410.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl E. Krasnor)
Subject: Lecture: Dr. Norman Toms "Wireless Revolution..."
Date: 17 Nov 1994 16:58:32 -0500
Organization: McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada


"Wireless Revolution - or Hertzian Anarachy?"
17th Annual Alexander Graham Bell Lecture
Speaker: Dr. Norman Toms
President and Chief Executive Officer
Sierra Wireless, Inc.
Richmond, B.C.

To be presented Monday December 5th, 1994
3:00 PM
Ewart Angus Centre, Room 1A5
McMaster University
1280 Main St. West
Hamilton, Ont. L8S 4K1 CANADA

Abstract:

History always provides post-facto definitions of whether an event
should be considered the reckless anarchy of some deranged group or
should be dignified by the title of revolution. Yet every day we read
of the Wireless Revolution (among many other so-called revolutions) -
prejudging that, in fact, some meaningful change is occurring. This
talk gives a quick overview of the developments in terrestrial
wireless communications with its bewildering array of options, and
attempts to put some perspective on the claims of different factions
to have discovered a holy grail of ubiquitous communications over the
radio spectrum.  Buzzwords like "Narrowband PCS", "Broadband PCS",
"Digital Cellular", "Mobile Data", "Two-way Paging", are discussed and
put into a context of reality.

Background:

This lecture series, sponsored annually in November/December by the
Communications Research Laboratory, was created in honour of Alexander
Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone.  The series seeks to offer
leaders in the telecommuncations and related fields the opportunity to
speak to the larger issues and trends in communications, by drawing
upon their experience and extensive activities in this field.  As
such, the talks are largely non-technical, being more philosophical
and reflective in nature, and are therefore suitable for a more gneral
audience.

For more information, please contact
Sue at [phone] ext. 22906 or
Lola at ext. 24291 or
Brian Currie at [e-mail]


Carl Krasnor, Communications Research Lab, McMaster U., Hamilton, Ont. CANADA
[e-mail]   VA3CK   Tel:[phone] x24171   FAX:[phone]

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 09:05:45 EST
From: Hariharan <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T Will Carry Local Toll Calls in NPA 410


AT&T has taken out a half-page ad in the Sunday Sun of November 13,
1994 advising callers that "now when calling from home you can choose
AT&T within the shaded area on the map just by dialing 10-ATT first".
It goes on to say:

That's 10-ATT + 1 + the area code + the number. And when you sign up
for AT&T True USA Savings that choice means big 20% savings over the
local phone company*.  All you have to do is spend $25 a month on
qualifying AT&T calls (that's your 10-ATT toll calls combined with
your long distance).

If you haven't signed up yet, now is the perfect time.

* Savings vs Bell Atlantic basic rates as of 9/30/94.  Savings apply
to qualifying domestic AT&T calls.

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

It is not clear, from the black and white map with the blue shaded
area, if the shaded area is ALL of 410.


[e-mail]     P C Hariharan


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T is also advertising the same thing
heavily in 312/708. From anywhere in either area code here, calls outside
the very local 'A' band to the same or other area code can be dialed via
AT&T. The newspaper ads from AT&T are saying 'how easy it will be to
remember that there is just one rate of seven cents per minute ...' and
Ameritech ads in response are claiming AT&T's rate is nearly 81 percent
*higher* than what Ameritech is charging for the same thing. What I
thought was sort of humorous was that AT&T took out a full page ad in
the {Chicago Sun-Times} a few days ago to announce this new service and
Ameritech also ran a full page ad in the same issue (but the newspaper
thoughtfully placed the ads a couple pages apart from each other) telling
people what a ripoff the AT&T plan was!

Watch and see what comes next: The (formerly) 'long distance' carriers
are going to complain that requiring the subscribers to dial 10xxx to
access them for local service is unfair since it requires additional
digits. They're going to try and force the local carriers to install
default seven digit dialing by subscriber pre-subscription, just as they
do now with 1+ long distance. That is, if you indicate you want AT&T
to handle your local calls, you'll be able to do so with seven digit
dialing.  PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 15:18:26
From: [e-mail] (Jim Hebbeln)
Subject: New ISDN BRI Tariffs in Colorado


About November 1, 1994, the Colorado PUC authorized U S West to modify
their ISDN Basic Rate Interface (BRI) tariff that has existed only
since April 1994.

First, the monthly rate has been reduced by $10.00 per month; the
standard 2B+D flat-rate voice and data service (Circuit Switched Data
and Packet Switched Data including two X.25 logical channels) is now
$59.50 per month.  This includes voice features of three Call
Appearances, Conference/Transfer, Hold, Drop, Call Forward Variable/Busy/
Don't Answer, Display of called/calling number, intercom, and Shared
Directory Numbers.  Contrast this to standard 1FB flat-rate analog
business service in Denver at approximately $37/month with no
features. (None of these rates include the FCC Customer Access Line
Charge (CALC) of $6/month per wire pair - not per ISDN B-channel.)

Note that this is flat-rate local service.  Many of the other ISDN
rates bandied about on the 'net are for measured-rate local services.

Second, but more significantly, U S West will now extend BRI service
to any customer served by a non-ISDN capable central office that is
within a 100 mile radius of an ISDN capable switch.  This physically
covers about 3/4 of Colorado's land mass, but it probably more nearly
provides reasonable ISDN rates to 95% of the state's populace.

Installation charges are $70 for a "loop qualified" wire line less
than 18,000' in length from the customer's local central office.  An
additional one-time charge of $25.50 is levied if the customer's line
is non-loop qualified: it is served by Subscriber Line Carrier-96
(SLC-96 services many customers in a neighborhood/rural area over T1
carrier), or, I believe, if a mid-span ISDN repeater needs to be
spliced into the customer's line that is longer than 18,000'.

All of U S West's ISDN central offices are 5ESSs running with the NI-2
compliant 5E9 Software Upgrade.

Colorado Area Code 303 has some of largest numbers of Internet users;
only California Area Code 415 and 408 have more.  This "ISDN
Everywhere within 100 miles" tariff should help bring Internet into to
people's small businesses and homes at speeds high enough to
effectively enable applications such Mosaic or Pipeline, or switched
video.  Work-at-home just got a big shot in the arm in Colorado - our
air quality needs all the telecommuting help it can get.

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

From: omni![e-mail]
Subject: PD Benchmarking Study
Date: 17 Nov 94 22:44:58 GMT


If you are involved in new product development and would be interested
in participating in a Product Development Benchmarking Study, please
call Karen Wolters at 314-331-9818.  Participation requires completion
of a questionnaire and/or a 15 - 30 minute telephone interview during
the first part of December.  The study focuses on the product
development process within your company, the types of product
development tools you utilize to rank services and who you consider to
be 'best-in-class' companies in new product development.  All
responses will be aggregated.  Thus, no companies will be identified,
nor will information relative to individual products or profitability
be requested.

My e-mail address is omni![e-mail].

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Call Waiting and The Message Center at Pacific Bell
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 94 05:48:13 GMT


Owen Leibman is a friend of mine who lives in San Francisco.  His home
phone is on the 415-759 prefix, served by Pacific Bell, and he has
Call Waiting and The Message Center on the line.

He observes that when:

1. he is already on two calls and a third one comes in;
2. he declines to interrupt a call to take a second one; or
3. he suspends Call Waiting by dialing *70 before a call, and a second
   call comes in while he is on the line,

in each case the last call does not roll over to The Message Center.
Owen asks if there's any technical reason WHY not.

He would also like to know, if he CAN get any of those calls (the
third case in particular) to go to The Message Center, what magic
words he has to say to someone to make it work.  "Needless to say," he
adds, "discussions with the customer service reps has proven
especially fruitless in the past."

You can respond directly to Owen at [e-mail]; if I see
a response posted here, I'll forward it to him.


Mark Brader, [e-mail], SoftQuad Inc., Toronto


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: He should make sure his line is set up
with 'Transfer on *Busy*/No Answer' and not just 'Transfer on No Answer'.
In situations one and three above, his line would be genuinely 'busy'
at the time of an arriving call; these will not go to the Message Center
(or anywhere else) unless he has Transfer on Busy on his line. In situation
two, calls will not go to the Message Center because his line is not 'busy'
(he can accept a call-waiting), nor is it truly after several rings in a
'no answer' status (because he did answer and is talking).

Call-waiting and hunt present the same problem: if you have two or more
lines set up so that if one is busy an incoming call hunts to the next
line then you can only have call-waiting on the very last line in the
hunt group. What *70 does is to tell the central office 'pretend like
there is no call-waiting on this line for the duration of this call', and
with that pretension, the central office reverts to the old way of
doing things where calls to a busy line are shunted elsewhere; in your
friend's case this would be to the message center.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 07:59:59 +0100
From: Daniel Joha <[e-mail]>
Subject: Flow Control and OSI Layers
Organization: TUBerlin/ZRZ


At which OSI layer would one implement flow control?

- Data Link Layer (2)
- Transport Layer (4)

Thanks for any answer.

Daniel

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

Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 08:01:59 +0100
From: Daniel Joha <[e-mail]>
Subject: Protocol in Data Link Layer
Organization: TUBerlin/ZRZ


How would one choose a specific protocol for the OSI Data Link LAyer
(2)?

I would appreciate any answer.


Daniel

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

From: [e-mail] (mahboud)
Subject: Motorola Complaint and Praise
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 01:00:05 -0800
Organization: AG Group, Inc.


One complaint about Motorola: Why do they call their cellular phones
digital when they are not?  Three different dealers I called told me
they had many different digital Motorola phones; one went as far as
saying that all phones that Motorola makes is digital!

I now know that there are only two Motorola phones that sends digital
signals to cells, and also the promised digital elite.  Motorla's
product names are deceptive.  I was told that the term digital refers
to the phones internal circuitry.  I still think it is deceptive.

Now here's a cool story.  I was biking across the Golden Gate Bridge.
As I crossed over to the Marin side, not over the water anymore, my
Motorola Advisor pager fell off my belt, bounced on the sidewalk, flew
towards the road, hit barrier, bounced off and went through the gap
between the road and the sidewalk.  I went over and looked through the
gap.  I could see the ground below, but no pager.  I thought that I
would go to the bottom and pick up the peices.  I figured the peices
might be worth something.  I made a mental note of what landmarks were
directly below.

I biked down and almost immediately found the pager.  But for some red
paint on the corners, the pager was in perfect shape!  Not even a
scratch!  The point of impact is only slightly higher than sea-level.

Nice job Motorola!!


Mahboud Zabetian   [e-mail]
ag group, inc.  2540 camino diablo, suite 200
walnut creek, ca 94596
510-937-7900 voice 510-937-2479 fax
510-937-6704 ara  ftp.aggroup.com anonymous ftp

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

Subject: Fake Automatic Dialing
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 13:03:19 GMT
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>


The following amusing snippet, from Alan J. Flavell, just appeared on
uk.telecom:

When I went to Bishop's Stortford in, er, 1963 I guess, I found they had
a bizarre system.  It was a manual exchange, but appeared to support
automatic inward dialing.

In fact, as was explained to me on a conducted tour of the new
automatic exchange being built, what actually happened in the manual
exchange was that the incoming number would appear on a display over
an operator position.  The operator would then plug in to the desired
number, if it was free.  If, on the other hand, it was busy, they
would throw a key to reject the call.

So the caller would hear (pretend-)ringing tone, while the operator
was getting his or her act together, and then, surprise surprise, it
might suddenly change to busy tone.  Indeed, this happened to me on a
couple of occasions when dialling a B.S. number from outside.

And yes, like Robin said, there were some rural automatic exchanges
that were dependent on B.S as their group centre and consequently
could not make automatic calls beyond there.  Nor receive them, as far
as I know: the above trick was for calls destined to B.S subscribers.


Clive D.W. Feather     | Santa Cruz Operation    | If you lie to the compiler,
[e-mail]          | Croxley Centre          | it will get its revenge.
Phone: [phone] | Hatters Lane, Watford   |   - Henry Spencer
Fax:   [phone] | WD1 8YN, United Kingdom |


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There was a short period of time here
in the early 1950's to the best of my recollection when the city of Chicago
was in the final stages of being converted entirely to dial from manual
exchanges that the same situation was possible. After our number was
changed to dial, I had a friend whose number was still manual. I was
able to dial his number direct but to call me he had to ask the operator
for my number. There were three procedures in place then: phones which
had been automated could call other automated phones in Chicago by just
dialing the number. Automated phones calling (not-yet) automated lines
in some cases dialed the number anyway (as per above story) and in other
cases we dialed (I think) '511' to reach the manual operators to pass
our request verbally. I know we were not to use the zero operator for
this purpose. If it was a suburban (still manual) point such as northern
Indiana and Whiting we dialed '911' to reach the manual operators for
those places.

An oddity from the manual days was that there was a ringing tone; it
sounded like the one we hear today. But there was no busy tone. If you
asked for a number and it was busy, the operator would report back in
voice 'the line is busy'.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #420
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22134;
          18 Nov 94 14:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05311; Fri, 18 Nov 94 08:13:12 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05304; Fri, 18 Nov 94 08:13:07 CST
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 94 08:13:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #421

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 18 Nov 94 08:13:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 421

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options (John Covert)
    Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options (Olcay Cirit)
    Re: Rate Table Databases, Telephone Number Databases (Evan Champion)
    Re: Store-to-Store Link? (Tad Cook)
    Re: Need Amp to Boost DTMF Strength (Tad Cook)
    Re: Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID (Ed Ellers)
    Re: Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID (Paul Beker)
    Re: Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID (Bradley Ward Allen)
    Re: Can a Customer Choose Their ANI? (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Can a Customer Choose Their ANI? (Robert W. Berger)
    Re: Dialogic and Rhetorex Technical Specs Wanted (Jeffrey W. Loomans)
    Re: Dialogic and Rhetorex Technical Specs Wanted (Paul A. Lee)
    Burned by a 900 Number (Joe Portman)

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 America
On Line. 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, 18 Nov 94 06:27:11 EST
From: John R. Covert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options


Dave Reuben <[e-mail]> wrote:

> *67 will also block "Call*Return" (*69), so even if a call shows up as
> PRIVATE, you will no longer be able to return the call.

> I'm not sure why they did this ...

Because the private number would then be revealed on your next bill,
if it was from an area to which toll charges apply.


john

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

Date: Fri, 18 Nov 94 07:05:51 GMT
From: [e-mail] (olcay cirit)
Subject: Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options


> I'd also like to see them implement Anonymous Call Rejection so we
> don't have to worry about Call*Returning (*69) PRIVATE calls -- they
> will all simply be blocked when I chose.

If you don't want to wait, I have seen CNID devices that recognize
blocked calls, and play a short message saying something to the effect
of "We are sorry. This number does not except blocked calls" then
hangs up.


Olcay Cirit       |] X-Files Enthusiast
[e-mail] [| Editor-in-chief, Computer News

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 17:04:11 +0000
From: evan champion <[e-mail]>
Subject:  Re: Rate Table Databases, Telephone Number Databases
Organization: Bell Northern Research


> The second is a database that would contain every telephone number in
> North America.  Given a particular phone number, it would be able to
> tell me who the owner is of that number and their address.  Again, top
> quality is required.  A very nice feature would be that it should
> return a generic company name for phone numbers hidden behind a PBX
> (ie: entering 613-765-1234, which is part of a block of numbers owned
> by Bell-Northern Research in Ottawa, should return BNR's name and
> their address rather than drawing a blank).

If I simplified the requirements so that given a particular phone
number, it should return the name of the phone number's owner or a
company if the number is part of a block hidden behind a PBX, would it
make it easier to find a database to do the job?

The quality would still need to be quite good.


Evan Champion   Bell-Northern Research

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

From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: Store-to-Store Link?
Date: 17 Nov 1994 20:08:05 GMT
Organization: Seanet Online Services, Seattle WA


Christopher Zguris ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I'm looking for ideas on how to link two stores within Manhattan. Both
> stores have independent multi-line key systems. I'm not looking to
> _link_ the systems with anything like centrex; the systems will remain
> indepentent.  I'm looking for a sort of dedicated store-to-store link,
> so if, for example, store A picks up a line at store B will ring and
> vice-versa (this would be _perfect_ since it would also integrate
> nicely into both key systems that have extra capacity anyways).

Pat mentioned the expense of a private line, but depending on how you
do it and what the local tarrifs are, it may not be too expensive.

You can call the telco and order an O2AC2 circuit, which is a dry
cable pair running between dedicated CO line ports on the two key
systems.  Then at one end install a PROCTOR 46220 ringdown circuit in
series with the pair.  Either end going off-hook on that line will
cause the other end to ring.  In addition to ringing, it supplies 48
volt talk battery to each end.

You can contact Proctor at 206-881-7000, or via fax at 206-885-3282,
or via email at [e-mail].


Tad Cook    [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
or [e-mail]   Seattle, WA

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

From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: Need Amp to Boost DTMF Strength
Date: 17 Nov 1994 20:15:16 GMT
Organization: Seanet Online Services, Seattle WA


Pat Trimble ([e-mail]) wrote:

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

>> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Dave
>> Levenson) writes:

>>> I use one of these on an OPX line between a Panasonic PBX and an
>>> off-premises station.  I don't particularly like it, however.  It is
>>> half-duplex, like a speakerphone.  You can't interrupt a long-talking
>>> far-end speaker, and you can't hear the far end at all if there is a
>>> significant background noise level at the near end.

>>> But, can anybody suggest a better solution?

>> If the signal level is not within spec, get your carrier to correct
>> the problem.

> Voice lines are not half-duplex; it sounds like there could be a level
> problem. You need some test equipment: HP 3551 is a good one. Find

It was left out of the above quote, but what he was using was an R-TEC
Voice Frequency Repeater.  This unit IS half-duplex.  It trys to sense
which end is talking, and amplifies to the other direction.

> where your level adjustments are. If it's on T-1 carrier between the
> PBX and the station, there will be level adjustments in the channel
> cards. I'd recommend you put 2.0 db of loss in both the transmit and
> receive sections of both the FXO (PBX side) and the FXS (Station side)
> channel cards. Check the impedance setting on the FXS card, I'd
> recommend 900 Ohms. If there is a BOC (Build-out Capacitance)
> adjustment on the FXS card, try taking all capacitance out if the
> station is within 100 feet of the channel bank. Let me know if this
> helps or not.

The OPX would appear at the customer premise as a dry cable pair, not
likely T1, since he is extending a little Panasonic system.

What he is asking is how to overcome the loss on a typical telco OL13C
type dry cable pair circuit, without actually using a repeater
amplifier, because he doesn't like the half-duplex effect.



Tad Cook    [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
or  [e-mail]    Seattle, WA

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

From: Ed Ellers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 94 10:44:56 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]> writes:

> Ameritech offers name/number for $8.50 per month or number only for $6.50
> per month. I don't think my units will work with names since they were
> made a few years ago before that additional feature was available.

If you don't have documentation for a particular display unit, the
only (approximate) way to tell -- before you order name display
service -- would be to hold it up to a strong light to see what sort
of LCD display features exist.  If you find both an alphanumeric AND a
numbers-only display area on the LCD panel you may well have name
capability, but if you can see only one display line (aside from
indicators like OUT OF AREA) you probably don't.  (If all you see are
seven-segment readouts, it's obviously numbers-only.)

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 22:34:19 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Paul Beker)
Subject: Re: Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID


Hi, Pat ... welcome back!

In comp.dcom.telecom you write:

> Ameritech offers name/number for $8.50 per month or number only for $6.50
> per month. I don't think my units will work with names since they were
> made a few years ago before that additional feature was available.

I currently have Calling-Name-Delivery on my line, and I have two
Caller ID boxes -- one new box (designed to show the name), as well as
an old "Gemini" Number-Only Caller ID box.  I didn't expect the old
box to work when I switched to Calling-Name-Delivery when it became
available, but in fact, it is working just fine.  So... you might want
to give it a try!

One more comment about Calling-Name-Delivery here: It seems to ignore
the unlisted/non-published status of the caller -- I always get a name,
with the exception of certain oddities like PBX trunks, cellular
trunks, etc.  (The only time I see "Private" is when the number itself
is blocked.)

Oh yes, one more big gripe -- is BellSouth the only RBOC to NOT offer
*67 on a per-call basis??


Paul Beker - Atlanta, GA    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (bradley ward allen)
Subject: Re: Ameritech Effeciency and Caller-ID
Date: 18 Nov 1994 02:04:03 -0500
Organization: URL:http://www.armory.com/~ulmo/


TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Now that's fast turn-around on a telco work order!  I've never seen a
> work order started and completed in 10-15 minutes.  I was so
> impressed in fact that I called her back and told her about it.  She
> likewise was astounded, and said her screen did not show the order as
> yet being completed.

When I was in Pacific Bell land for the last two years, similar
happens to me: I order a new feature, the lady says politely it will
be tonight or tomorrow morning, I press the hookswitch, let it up less
than a second later, and many of the ordered features are already
working.  Sometimes only half of the features are immediately working,
and the other half take the half-day the lady mentioned.  Usually,
it's instantaneous for everything.  This must be the automatic system
I want 411/911 updates to be.

My experience with NYNEX is not the same.  (Still takes forever, more
flaws, etc.)

Which reminds me.  Sprint's 800 numbers are nice when they work (they
don't always work): updates are within 15 minutes, 24 hours a day.
Moving becomes trivial.  And the circuit is connected fast when
dialed.  I still want a touch-tone retargetable 800 number,
caller-pays touch-tone retargetable number that works from
international locations, and the ability to give out a new phone
number for every person I meet.

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 16:12:56 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Can a Customer Choose Their ANI?


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think ANI is something which can
> be artibtrarily decided or presented. I think it is what it is ... and
> gets delivered in that way. While your right to privacy is appreciated
> and respected, my right to know what telephone calls I am obliged to
> pay for supercedes your privacy right, or at least is equal to it.  PAT]

My ANI represents "me."  That representation can be my DN or it can
simply be a unique ID that the LEC associates with my account.  Thus,
regardless of whether ANI maps to my DN or my LEC account, you get the
same requisite information i.e., you can make a go/nogo decision on
whether to accept the call, and if you do "go," what account to bill
it to.

The only think you would NOT get is a foot into my door via telco wire.
OTOH, I don't know what the implications would be on E911, if any.

What is so interesting is that my duly registered cell phone does not
have the DN read back to me (when I used the 800# MY-ANI-IS (?)), but
that of the service provider (I assume) -- it is not even on the same
LEC, nor is (probably) uniquely my ANI.

I willing to bet that if LEC thought they could make a buck from that
service, they'd do so in a New York Second.


Pete, Penn State

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

From: Robert W. Berger <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Can a Customer Choose Their ANI?
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 17:15:57 -0500
Organization: Carnegie Mellon


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think ANI is something which can
> be artibtrarily decided or presented. I think it is what it is ... and
> gets delivered in that way. While your right to privacy is appreciated
> and respected, my right to know what telephone calls I am obliged to
> pay for supercedes your privacy right, or at least is equal to it.  PAT]

It gets trickier if the number I'm calling your 800 number from also
gets billed for incoming calls.

Apparently it is common practice for the ANI reported for cellular
phones to be a non-dialable number.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have noticed that also. When I used my
cellular phone a lot, one thing I tried was calling my house so I could
see what the Caller-ID looked like. I got an 'out of area' report. But
when I used my cellular phone to call my 800 number, then the 800 ANI
report showed the cellular phone with some strange number in one of
the western suburbs -- but with a 312 area code! -- which when checked
through the name and address service turned out to be listed to a
'subscriber' known as 'IBT Co'. The address given was that of a central
office in the suburbs. Dialing the number got me an intercept saying
the number was not in service for incoming calls.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey W. Loomans)
Subject: Re: Dialogic and Rhetorex Technical Specs Wanted
Date: 18 Nov 1994 09:34:02 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.


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

> Is anyone familiar with Dialogic and Rhetorex boards used for CTI,
> dictation systems, etc.? I need to determine the sampling rate,
> sampling algorithm, etc. of these boards. Do they vary from model to
> model? I am curious to know if these boards use a proprietary file
> format or if sampled sounds can be played back on either card (or
> other cards, regular PC sound cards, etc.).

I had to deal with this issue about a year back when we reconfigured
our commercial telecom software to run on both companies' cards.  At
the time we faced the problem that the Rhetorex cards handled four
algorithms, one of which mimicked Dialogic's old format but only at
the default sampling rate.  Another one was proprietary, and the other
modes were supposedly standard and could playback sampled sound.
Since then I have not kept up with Rhetorex's support, but from the
Dialogic manual (pp. 4-266 through -269) the new boards support: ADPCM
and PCM (Adaptive Differential Pulse Code Modulation - 4 bit encoding,
and Pulse Code Modulation - 8 bit) sampled either at 6 or 8 KHz.
Presumably, if your hardware can digitize in one of these formats you
could play sampled sounds; I'm have little DSP experience so I cannot
comment on how standard these algorithms are - at the very least
samples recorded on Dialogic (at the right rate) were playable on
Rhetorex and v.v.


Jeff Loomans   Integrated Business Software

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

Date: Thu, 17 Nov 1994 14:01:44 -0500
Subject: Re: Dialogic and Rhetorex Technical Specs Wanted
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


In {TELECOM Digest} Volume 14 #419, Faust <[e-mail]> wrote (in part):

> Is anyone familiar with Dialogic and Rhetorex boards...? I need to determine
> the sampling rate, sampling algorithm, etc. of these boards. Do they vary
> from model to model? I am curious to know if these boards use a proprietary
> file format or if sampled sounds can be played back on either card (or other
> cards, regular PC sound cards, etc.).

Dialogic originally used a proprietary 6053 Hz 4-bit ADPCM encoding.
Later models from Dialogic appear to be backward-compatible, as are
many Dialogic emulators, such as models from Rhetorex, Pika, New
Voice, and a few others.  Current boards from Dialogic and the others
can also encode and decode other PCM, ADPCM, and even delta schemes,
depending on the firmware on the board and the driver software being
used.

The storage format of the encoded sounds also depends on the driver
software being used. There are drivers and trancoding utilities
available that can store and play across several different formats
with some fairly good results (within the limitations of the ultimate
hardware-level encoding or decoding).  In typical use, though, the
telephony-grade encoding used with Dialogic and similar boards uses a
completely different file format (to conserve disk space and compress
silence) than typical PC (multimedia or sound card) files (which tend
to strive for fidelity).

A good general source of information is the book, "PC-Based Voice
Processing", by Bob Edgar, available from the Telecom Library
(800-LIBRARY or 212 691-8215).

You could also try obtaining product literature, application notes, or
other info from the following hardware and software vendors:

Bicom                            800-766-3573     203 268-4484
Dialogic                         800-755-4444     201 334-8450
Natural MicroSystems             800-533-6120     508 650-1300
New Voice                        703 448-0570
Parity Software                  415 989-0330
Pika Technologies Inc.           613 591-1555
Rhetorex, Inc.                   408 370-0881
SpeechSoft, Inc.                 609 466-1100
Voice Information Systems Inc.   215 747-5035


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

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

From: Joe Portman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Burned by a 900 Number
Sender: [e-mail] (Joe Portman)
Organization: Alternate Access Incorporated
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 1994 05:12:28 GMT


I am still trying to figure out how this happened. I run a small
BBS/Internet provider. At the time in question, I had no users and
no net connection:

I got a bill from U.S. West with an extra page detailing $234.00 worth
of calls to a 900 number. Get this, 6 calls within 10 minutes. Each
call was billed at $39.00! They claim these are direct dialed calls,
from my lead telephone number.

I have a problem with this:

1.  There is no telephone connected to the line, ever.
2.  The modem and phone lines are in a locked room.

I KNOW I did not make these G*DD*MN calls. I know no one else in my
family made these calls (no visits from anyone in the time period
stated).  I am pretty D*MN sure my modem did not make the calls.

The upshot is, I called the vendor (ITA) and asked them to remove the
charges, they replied they would sue me for the amount.

How can this be? I have no contract with these sh*theads. I have no
order for service, no agreement, and no human dialed their slimy sex
line. Yet I am told by U.S.West "Sorry, we can't do anything about
this, it's between you and ITA". Yeah, right. I called ITA's 800
number. 30 minutes of hold music later I finally get a human, after
listening to "Your call is important to us" for about 50 times.

I cannot believe this. How can I be liable for these charges? Worse,
when I had the lines installed, I made a point of telling the order
taker that I wanted "No outgoing calls, no long distance and no pay
calls, period". Well I can't get a line with no dial tone (what I
wanted).

So the upshot is, now I have wasted over half a day fuming and
calling. I have called the attorney general, the FTC and U.S. West.
Next stop is the PUC, if I can get through their hold music.

Anybody go any idea what I can do?


Thanks,

Joe Portman - Alternate Access Inc.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Although they can sue you for the $234
it is unlikely they will do so since it is a small amount and the cost
of the suit would be prohibitive. They can record the debt with a credit
reporting agency if they desire, but again, this is a pretty low priority
item with the bureaus; no one is going to later deny you a mortgage or
credit card because of it. There are a couple possible things that may
have happened. One, someone might have gained access to the wire pair
at a point outside your premises. This is difficult or impossible to
prove, and if you knew how many times the sex IPs have people calling
them to protest "I did not make that call!" you'd be amazed, and perhaps
have some sympathy for their point of view. Everyone loves sex, and
no one wants to have to pay afterward. The IPs are deluged with fraud
both before and after the fact; people who insist up and down they did
not make the call when you know damn good and well they did or their
children did, etc. That's not to say *you are guilty*; just that 99
percent of the time, the 'innocent victim' is in fact the person who
used the service or else some member of their family or circle of
friends, etc. Because wire-pair interception from outside the customer's
premises is relatively rare compared to the number of times the customer
is simply being fraudulent, I trust you'll understand the IP's position
when they take a hard line toward those who -- in their phraseology --
are 'in denial' ...

The second thing which might have happened -- and this is more common
than not -- is that if you just recently had that phone line turned on
there might have been charges in transit from the prior subscriber on
that number. That is, Joe Blow had the number, ordered the service turned
off (or for all we know it was a credit disconnect or whatever) and
among his final calls on the line prior to the service going out were
calls to the IP. The billing tape from the IP through the telco serving
him to the telco serving you was delayed for whatever reason. Maybe in
fact your telco ran the tape and by that point Mr. Blow's phone was
turned off; the charges fell out as a result, went into suspense and
in due course an adjustment clerk in telco's accounting department looked
at it and lacking a place to bill the calls charged them back to the
originating telco who in turn charged them back to the IP. A month or
two months could easily pass ... the orginating telco or the IP look
at the chargeback and say this is a crock; they reverse the chargeback
to your telco and send the charges through again. They reach your telco
just after the cycle cutoff and sit in the vault for a month or so
until your next billing date. By this point, two or three months after
Mr. Blow has split town, telco has reassigned the number to you. When
the next billing cycle comes around, guess where those charges are
going to land ... what does the computer know about your interest in
sex or lack thereof? So if the number to which the charges were billed
has only been turned on in your name for one or two months, and if
numbers in your community tend to be quickly re-assigned then there is
a possibility if the charges from the IP were delayed in processing
that they belong to the former user of your number. You did not say
how long you've had the number in particular, only that at the time
you were starting a BBS on it.

I've seen legitimate long distance charges delayed in billing for
whatever reason for as much as three or four months. Typically these
are cases where the originating telco supplied incorrect information
on the charge to begin with or there was some other problem and the
charges fell out during billing (that is, the computer was unable to
place them on some account) and the computer billed the charges to
'suspense' pending human review. The humans lack imagination or the
desire to straighten it out and it is easier to credit suspense and
charge it back to whence it came. That telco, not about to eat it,
corrects the problem and reverses the chargeback; but maybe they only
halfway correct it or maybe they only make it 'more incorrect' in the
process. What's really funny is when your telco decides to charge it
back to wherever they got it, *but they don't know where they got
it from* and they charge it back to the *wrong telco*. Two or three
telcos later here it comes again presumably with correct billing
information this time. And the computer goes zap and sticks it on
the account of the present occupant of the telephone number shown and
this time the billing sticks and what do you mean you did not make
the calls in question? Of course you did, (you pervert) ... the calls
were direct dialed from your telephone line (you sex maniac) ... now
pay the bill or get sued (you jerk). Telco back-offices are strange places
with sometimes strange people. Like credit card processing back-offices
you need a certain mentality and personality to work in those places.

It has been said that the Social Security Administration is the 'armpit
of federal agencies' due to the way their back-offices run and some
of the people they hire to work in those dungeons pushing paper all
day. The telcos run a close second; years ago AT&T's 'Separations and
Settlements' department really took the cake.  Hundreds and hundreds
of employees pushing millions of scraps of paper back and forth at each
other all day, each making scribbles and 'correcting' the errors of
the others as they made errors of their own in the process.

Check the dates on those 900 charges and ask the IP to look into it
just a bit further. Don't bother the consumer protection people with
this nonsense just yet.     PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #421
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21161;
          21 Nov 94 15:08 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28571; Mon, 21 Nov 94 09:34:15 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28557; Mon, 21 Nov 94 09:34:10 CST
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 94 09:34:10 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #422

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 21 Nov 94 09:34:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 422

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Toronto Free-Net Off and Running (David Leibold)
    Pinouts on RS232 and Echoed Back Characters (William Ono)
    Rochester Tel Open Market Plan (Phillip Dampier)
    RTS/CTS For Flow Control (Brian Pirie)
    FCC E911 Proposed Rulemaking on Internet ([e-mail])
    Single-User ISDN Router Debuts At Under $1,000 ([e-mail])
    Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe (Mitch Weiss)
    PCS Slips Into GATT (Trade Week in Review via Dale Wharton)
    RS449 Information Request (Dorab Patel)
    Best PBX for 1000 Lines (John Little)
    PC-Based Voice Mail Service (Daryle Sewell)
    What is Q3 Protocol? (Cathy/Thad Beier)
    Videoconferencing Seminars ([e-mail])
    Brunei Telecom Contact Phone Number Wanted (Emmanuel Gadaix)
    Vert/Horiz to Lat/Long? ([e-mail])
    Information About Arrowsmith Technologies ([e-mail])
    Re: Telco Voicemail (Michael Stanford)
    Help With PBX Decision (Randy Hoffmaster)
    Wanted: Packet Radio Help (Marcos Redondo Fonesca)

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 America
On Line. 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, 21 Nov 1994 00:37:06 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Toronto Free-Net Off and Running


As this message shows, the Toronto Free-Net is on the net. In fact,
the official opening was 3rd November, allowing access to guest
accounts and user registrations. Unfortunately, it will take some time
for the Free-Net admin folks to process all those registrations (I
don't have the official counts handy, but with assigned Free-Net
format userids in the ar### series, this indicates the order of at
least 18,000 applied users so far).

Much credit should be given to the many volunteers who wanted to see
TFN happen. That I've noticed no technical disasters since the grand
opening is a tribute to the technical skill of the hardware/software
volunteers.  That TFN saw the first modem lines open in the face of
the doubters and critics and in the face of a massive potential user
base is a credit to all of the TFN workers from the leadership to the
rank and file. There remain substantial challenges in the months
ahead, however, as user demand and capacity requirements will develop.

I do some Information Resource volunteer work for TFN, and have set up
Transport 2000 Ontario as an information provider. I am not an
official TFN spokesperson, however.

TFN can be reached on the Net via "telnet freenet.toronto.on.ca" or land
line at [phone].


David Leibold     [e-mail]   [e-mail]
(Note: mail at my io.org address is currently inaccessible to me, due
to a botch-up on that system; those trying to reach me there in recent
days should try the Free-Net address instead).

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

From: William Ono <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pinouts on RS232 and Echoed Back Characters
Date: 21 Nov 1994 02:07:33 -0500
Organization: Mail to Usenet Gateway


If anyone has the list of pinouts for the RS232 style port, could they
please mail it to me?  (news is flakey at my site..)  I am using a
DB25 connector, but a DB9 pinouts list would also be helpful (I'm sure
I can dig up a conversion chart almost anywhere).

Also, I was just wondering -- is it possible to echo a character from
the Send Data pin to the Receive Data pin by simply fusing the two
pins together?  I mean, if I wanted to just send everything back to
the computer that has been sent down the Send Data line, could I just
connect RD to SD, or do I need to do some processing first?

Thanks in advance!


William Ono - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 1994 22:45:21
Subject: Rochester Tel Open Market Plan


New telephone directories and bill inserts are heralding the upcoming
introduction of competition in residential local telephone service
early in 1995.  Rochester will be the first major city in the country
with multiple local service providers serving both residential and
business customers.

Rochester Tel has an 800 information line that works from a touchtone
phone.  I am not sure what limits Rochester Tel has placed on
accessing the number, but it is 1-800-477-9371

On January 1st, the Rochester metropolitan area, excluding a handful
of suburbs served by independent telephone companies, will see major
changes in their telephone service options.

Effective 1/1/95, Rochester residential subscribers will see their
bills decline by about $1.55 as touchtone service becomes free of
charge.  This will set basic rates at $12.96 per month flat-rate
calling county wide (as well as parts of all surrounding counties),
$4.53 for message rate service.  Rates are then frozen for seven
years, although there may be provisions for reducing them further to
remain competitive.

Rochester Tel is also expected to announce that several communities
south of Rochester may soon be able to dial Rochester city and nearby
suburban exchanges without incurring a toll charge.  These communities
include the city of Canandaigua, Geneseo, LeRoy, Hemlock, Springwater
and Mt. Morris.

More than a dozen companies want to be players in Rochester -- many on
a test case basis.  Rochester Telephone reported that even the German
PTT is watching the Rochester market closely.

Certain players which are certain to enter the residential market next
year are ACC, a locally-based long distance provider with aggressive
plans for reaching the UK and Canada, and Time Warner.  Time Warner's
Greater Rochester Cablevision has already launched their new cellular
service this week - reselling capacity from Rochester Tel cellular and
Cellular One.  Their schedule for wired phone service is early second
quarter 1995 for installation in large apartment complexes, late
summer 1995 for residential homes.  Rollout is expected to be
system-wide, not in parts.

Residents who take both cable and telephone service will receive a
substantial discount on both, according to cable industry trades.

Other potential players looking at the market include several Canadian
telephone concerns, NYNEX, British Telecom/MCI, and possibly even
another Baby Bell from outside of the NYNEX region.

Rochester Telephone has relaunched itself as Frontier Communications,
and invested $1.5 million into a new baseball stadium in Rochester
which will now be called Frontier Stadium.

Residential customers will continue be billed by Rochester Telephone
Corporation to reduce confusion, but some business customers (Centrex,
data, etc.) will be reassigned to Frontier.

Rochester will also be a major test case city for big players getting
into data communications.  Internet access will be dirt cheap around
here by the end of next year.  New cable modems can deliver up to
230,000bps without much effort and there is lots of talk of flat rate
Internet access for as little as $10/month or less.

Customers will be sent ballots to select a local telephone company
once another player exists in the market.  Residents who do not return
a ballot or do nothing will stay with Rochester Telephone.

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Pirie)
Subject: RTS/CTS For Flow Control
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Brian Pirie)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 1994 13:39:42 GMT


I am trying to learn how the RS232C RTS/CTS lines are used for flow
control with a modem. When is it appropriate to raise and lower the
RTS signal, and what should the program do in response to changes in
the CTS signal?


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (USCG TELECOMMS)
Subject: FCC E911 Proposed Rulemaking on Internet
Date: 20 Nov 1994 23:24:23 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail]


The FCC posted their Notice of Proposed Rulemaking concerning Wireless
Services interconnection with Enhanced 911 on their Internet server as
CC Docket 94-102, available from gopher or ftp fcc.gov.  Don't know
the file number -- I found it accidently by typing "GPS" on their WAIS
search entry.

Appears like their may be some serious problems getting new wireless
services, particularly satellite telephones, working with E911 ALI and
ANI, or even connecting to an appropriate 911 center.

Comments on this matter are due in early Jan.


JoeH

                        COAST  GUARD  COMMUNICATIONS

          Telephone: [phone]         U.S. Coast Guard (G-TTM)
          Fax:       [phone]         Washington DC 20593
          Internet:      CGComms/[e-mail]

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

From: Electronic Pen, Inc. <[e-mail]>
Subject: Single-User ISDN Router Debuts At Under $1,000
Date: 20 Nov 1994 23:53:07 GMT
Organization: InterNex Information Services, Inc.


Single-User, ISDN Router From Ascend Debuts At Under $1,000

On November 7, 1994, Ascend Communications released an ISDN router
designed specifically for the telecommuter and Internet user. The
Pipeline 50 HX delivers high-speed (up to 512 Kbps) access to remote
corporate networks and to public networks including the Internet. It
is a full-function bridge and IP router that integrates Ethernet to
ISDN Basic Rate (BRI) with NT1 (U interface), dial-on-demand routing
and bridging, inverse multiplexing, dynamic bandwidth allocation,
compression, filtering, SNMP management, and multilevel security. It
has a small footprint (8.2 inches long, 6 inches wide and 0.5 inches
deep) and is software upgradeable to multiuser capability. The
Pipeline 50 HX is priced as low as $995, significantly less than
previous prices for similar products. Complete details have been
placed on new pages linked from Ascend's Internet Home Pages. Direct
your browsers to:

  http://www.internex.net/ascend/

You will find a Product Description of the Pipeline 50 HX, including a
photograph and complete technical specs. There is also a Press Release
with a graphic showing the remote ISDN access market. If you don't
have a Web browser, or would like information via a more conventional
route, you can receive it from: Ascend Communications, email:
[e-mail], toll-free (USA): 1-800-621-9578, fax: [phone]
1275 Harbor Bay Parkway, Alameda, California 94502 USA


 From the Webcats at the Electronic Pen, Inc., San Mateo, CA.
([e-mail]).

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

From: [e-mail] (Mitch Weiss)
Subject: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 02:27:03
Organization: IAC


In the United States, calls are priced based on time and distance
using a V&H (vertical and horizontal) coordinate system.  In Europe,
they are priced based on something called Metered Pulse.  How does
that work?  Is there a constant price per pulse?  Also, if I have a
PBX, how does the SMDR represent this information?  Thanks!


Mitchell Weiss   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 08:49:29 EST
From: Dale Wharton <[e-mail]>
Subject: PCS Slips Into GATT


This item originated in Minneapolis.

Dale Wharton   [e-mail]    M O N T R E A L    Te souviens-tu?

8<--------------------------- couper ici --------------------------->8

/* Written  2:07 PM  Nov 16, 1994 by kmander in igc:trade.news */
Trade Week in Review
Thursday, November 17, 1994
Volume 3, Number 46

       _________________________________________________

Over 90 Lame Ducks Will Determine GATT Outcome

The 103rd Congress is scheduled to return to Washington the week after
Thanksgiving for a special lame-duck vote on GATT.  Over 80
Representatives, including House Speaker Tom Foley, and 11 Senators,
including Majority Leader George Mitchell, will not be returning next
year. The lame-duck session is limited to GATT unless members of
Congress vote unanimously to bring up other issues.  Many opponents of
GATT argue that such an important issue as GATT should not be decided
by a lame-duck Congress, especially at a time many retiring or
voted-out members will be looking for employment.

The Senate Commerce Committee held hearings Monday on the GATT funding
mechanism that could give billion-dollar discounts to three companies
for new wireless telephone licenses.  Both current chair, Senator
Ernest Hollings (D-South Carolina), and the probable new chair,
Senator Larry Pressler (R-South Dakota), have criticized the
administration for slipping the provision into GATT implementing
legislation.

Sources: "US Trying to Work Out GATT Deal," REUTER, November 14, 1994;
Rex Nutting, "Administration Defends PCS Deal in GATT," UPI, November
14, 1994.

[...]
          _________________________________________________

For more information about the Institute for Agriculture and Trade
Policy, send email to [e-mail].

Trade Week in Review is produced by:
Kai Mander
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP)
1313 5th Street, SE, Suite 303
Minneapolis, MN 55414-1546 USA
tel: [phone]  fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dorab Patel)
Subject: RS449 Info Request
Date: 20 Nov 1994 22:17:01 -0800
Organization: Twin Sun Inc, El Segundo, CA, USA


I need to connect up a Sun server to an external system via RS449 and
need information (preferably soft-copy) on it.  I was told that RS449
is the same as CCITT V.11 which I obtained from the ITU-T gopher, but
that was just the electrical specification -- and not the protocol
and/or pin specifications I am interested in.  I also did not find
anything in the telecom archives.  Could someone please point me to
information on RS449 or give me an idea of what it entails?  Email
would be preferable -- I'll summarize if this turns out not to be a
FAQ.


Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Little)
Subject: Best PBX for 1000 Lines
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 07:49:13 GMT
Organization: Dylex Technology


What, in your opinion, is the best 1000 line (extension) PBX system?
This would be a system like the NT Meridian Option 61.  How do the
features compare to the NT system?  What about the voice mail
platform?  How advanced are things in the CTI arena?  Any info would be
greatly appreciated.


John Little  -  Dylex Limited  -  Toronto, Ontario, Canada
email: [e-mail]   phone: [phone] fax: 7640

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 03:09:07 EST
From: Daryle Sewell <[e-mail]>
Subject: PC-based Voice Mail Service


I currently own a pc-based business, and would like to expand into
voice mail services.  I'm planning on starting with 15 lines, and
would like to know the most cost efective way of setting up 15 phone
lines in either a residential, or commercial setting. I've looked into
a 15 number DID set-up, but that's a little spendy. Also, what kind of
equipment would I need to do this. any input would be appreciated.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Cathy/Thad Beier)
Subject: What is Q3 Protocol?
Date: 20 Nov 1994 18:22:32 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Hello you telecom experts,

What is Q3, please? (Not July-August-September or Q*Q*Q.)

Thanks in advance,


Cathy

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Videoconferencing Seminars
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 94 19:31:57 PST
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link


Educational Seminars on Videoconferencing are being offered by
Peirce-Phelps, Inc., who is a videoconferencing system integrator
based in Philadelphia, PA. Peirce-Phelps is a group of recognized
experts in this industry, and has been involved in videoconferencing
for over 15 years.

The seminars provide objective and current information on all aspects
of videoconferencing, and they include detailed discussions of system
capabilities, network interconnection services, costs and standards,
as well as a comparison of all major products from the different
manufacturers. The advantages and disadvantages of all currently used
systems will also be addressed. The seminars last one full day. This
is NOT a sales presentation.

If you would like to attend one of these seminars, or if you would
simply like more information, please call Mel Brake at 1-800-862-6800,
extension 7021. Or you can send your request to me at this email
address: [e-mail].


Jonathan Morton   Peirce-Phelps, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Emmanuel Gadaix)
Subject: Brunei Telecom Contact Phone Number Wanted
Date: 20 Nov 94 21:01:01
Organization: Nokia Cellular Systems, Tampere, Finland


We are looking for the phone number of Brunei Telecom.  If anybody has
got any idea where to find that, please forward.

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

From: [e-mail] (HBMA bbs)
Subject: Vert/Horiz to Lat/Long?
Organization: Ripco Internet BBS Chicago
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 04:36:09 GMT


Does anyone know if Bellcore's Vert/Horiz can be translated to
latitude/longitude and what that formula is?


Thanks in advance,

TonyH

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Information Wanted About Arrowsmith Technologies
Date: 20 Nov 1994 22:50:55 GMT
Organization: NASA/Johnson Space Center


Is anyone out there familiar with a company called Arrowsmith
Technologies, Inc?  If so, do you know of a good technical contact?

Thanks.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 08:18:18 GMT
From: Michael Stanford <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telco Voicemail


> 2. he declines to interrupt a call to take a second one; or

My Bell Atlantic voicemail works great in this situation.  It's why I
have it.  If not for this feature telco voicemail would have no
significant advantage over a cheapo answering machine.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Help With PBX Decision
Date: 20 Nov 94 14:59:40 -0400
Organization: NRL SPACE SYSTEMS DIVISION


My company is about to purchase a new phone system.  Currently we are
looking at PBXs and all this talk about open phone systems makes the
decision much harder.  I am fairly new to the telephony stuff but here
is what we want to do.

First, buy a PBX which we can control through software.  We don't have
a specific application but want that capability.  We have a Novell
network and I am hearing alot about the TSAPI interface, but we do not
want to have to be dependent on having a Novell network in order to
talk to the switch.  We are looking for a switch with 12-15 CO lines
and 64 extensions.

Second, we want to write our own voice mail application using either a
Dialogic or Rhetorex voice processing board.

I am getting confused about how much functionality the switch should
have versus how much we can do with the voice processing board.  Here
are a few questions I have.

Are some switches more programmable than others? If so, what features
should be programmable?

What kinds of stuff should we be looking at for PBXs?

What kind of CTI interfaces do PBXs have?

Are there any dependencies between the voice processing board and
the switch?

Can we control the switch through the voice processing board by using DTMF?

What PBXs are recommended?

What voice processing boards are recommended?

Can anyone tell me where I can find more information on these topics?
Books?  Magazines?  Internet sites?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.  Could anyone who post a response
to the newsgroup also send me e-mail.  Our news reader doesn't queue more
than a couple days of posts.


Randy Hoffmaster   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 15:02:08 GMT
From: [e-mail] (MARCOS REDONDO FONSECA)
Subject: Wanted: Packet Radio Help
Organization: Universidad de Oviedo


Please I need as soon as posible info about radio-packets.

I dont want programs, I want technical information about HW and the
description byte per byte of the info contained inside radio-packets.
If you know something about this topic please answer. If you know how
can I can get information please answer too.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #422
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23929;
          21 Nov 94 18:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02899; Mon, 21 Nov 94 11:54:28 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02886; Mon, 21 Nov 94 11:54:24 CST
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 94 11:54:24 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #423

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 21 Nov 94 11:53:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 423

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    InternetMCI Announcement (Stephen Goodman)
    MCI's Announcement (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Telephony Applications in Windows (Brian McAuliffe)
    Subnetting a PPP Network Solved (Evan Champion)
    Re: Store-to-Store Link? (Alan Boritz)
    Re: RTS/CTS For Flow Control (James Carlson)
    Re: Burned by a 900 Number (Jim Ancona)
    Re: Nitsuko NVM 2000 Problems (Joe Portman)
    Re: Burned by a 900 Number (Michael P. Deignan)
    Re: DSU/CSU For T1 (Bud Couch)
    Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232 (Jim Mercer)

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 America
On Line. 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, 21 Nov 94 10:42 EST
From: Stephen Goodman <[e-mail]>
Subject: InternetMCI Announcement


                        MCI INTRODUCES internetMCI:
         PORTFOLIO OF SERVICES INCLUDES NEW SECURE SHOPPING MALL,
      EASY TO USE SOFTWARE AND HIGH-SPEED CONNECTIONS TO THE INTERNET

        ATLANTA -- November 21, 1994--Making it easier for businesses
and consumers to use and shop the Internet, MCI today announced
"internetMCI," a portfolio of services featuring such components as a
new secure electronic shopping mall, a user-friendly software package
for easy Internet access and high-speed network connections to the
Internet.

        "MCI is making the Internet as easy to use, as accessible and
as critical to businesses as today's global phone network," said
Timothy F. Price, president of MCI's Business Markets. "With
internetMCI, businesses of all sizes will now be able to not only
display but also directly sell their goods and services over the
Internet.  For the 25 million people on the Internet, shopping the
Internet will become simple and secure."

        The new MCI offering represents the most comprehensive set of
Internet services in the industry, according to Price. "There are
other companies that offer Internet-related services, but no one else
offers the full range of applications software, access, storefronts
and consulting services in one package," he said. "We now have
everything companies need to promote commerce over the net. This is
what American businesses have been waiting for."

    Users of internetMCI will be able to browse and shop in MCI's new
Internet shopping mall called marketplaceMCI. MCI said it is working
with a number of America's most well-known retailers and information
providers to design storefronts for them when marketplaceMCI opens
early next year. MCI has already begun beta testing on-line electronic
shopping with about 40,000 employees.

        A key component of internetMCI is a software system developed
by Netscape Communications (formerly Mosaic Communications).  Using
encryption technology from RSA Data Security, the system integrates a
number of components into a secure environment.  Included are the
Netscape Navigator server and database software for storefront
management and secure credit-card clearing.  Also included is a
digital signature system operated by MCI to certify and identify valid
merchants for internetMCI.  The complete system allows consumers to
shop and make secure transactions directly over the Internet without
the fear of having their credit card number or other sensitive
information stolen by electronic eavesdroppers.  The software package
also has point-and-click technology that lets consumer and business
users easily and quickly browse the Internet's World Wide Web over
ordinary phone lines.

        "Transaction security is the last major hurdle to making the
Internet a viable marketing and distribution channel for businesses,"
said Price. "By the year 2000, MCI expects commerce on the Internet
will exceed $2 billion and be as common as catalog shopping is today."

        Through an agreement with FTP Software, Inc., MCI will provide
the Internet Protocol software along with the Netscape software in one
easy-to-install package. FTP Software, the leading independent
supplier of TCP/IP-based network software, will also provide MCI with
integration and support of its software. MCI will offer internetMCI
software to customers at prices starting as low as $49.95. The
internetMCI software will also be included at no additional charge to
customers of networkMCI BUSINESS, an integrated information and
communications software package.

        MCI will market storefronts to retailers and service companies
that want to promote and sell their goods to the estimated 25 to 30
million people who can now access the Internet worldwide. MCI will
offer businesses consulting in the design, implementation and
management of their storefronts, in addition to the added value of
MCI's ongoing promotion and marketing of the new mall services.

MCI To Provide High-Speed Connections to Internet

        MCI's internetMCI Access Services will be fully integrated
with its existing business long distance services.  Internet access
will be available in a wide range of methods from switched local and
800 access and dedicated access to more advanced switched data
services such as ISDN, frame relay and, in the future, SMDS and ATM.
A full Internet service provider, MCI will offer dedicated access to
the Internet from nearly 400 locations in the U.S.

        Another component of internetMCI is the company's new
high-speed connections to the Internet through the new MCI Internet
Network. This network is one of the highest capacity, most
widely-deployed commercial Internet backbones in the world, providing
businesses with direct and reliable connections to the Internet.
Compared to most conventional Internet access networks, MCI Internet
Network offers greater transmission speed and capacity because the
network operates at 45 megabits per second. Next year, MCI will
increase the speed of the MCI Internet Network to 155 megabits per
second, capable of transmitting 10,000 pages in less than a second or
a 90-minute movie in just three minutes.

                MCI Selected as Primary Internet Carrier

        Following its selection by some of the major regional Internet
providers in the U.S., MCI will become one of the world's largest
carriers of Internet traffic -- carrying more than 40 percent of all
the U.S. Internet traffic. The regional Internet providers BARRnet;
CICnet; CSUnet; JVNCnet; Los Nettos; Merit; MICHnet; MIDNet; NEARnet;
NorthWestNet; SURAnet; and Sesquinet) have been a part of the Internet
since its inception and have been a major force in the drive towards
ubiquitous network connectivity, which has helped make the Internet so
popular.

        MCI's Internet initiatives are being directed by Vinton G.
Cerf, MCI senior vice president for data architecture, and an
industry-recognized "Father of the Internet," along with a team of
world-class experts on the Internet.

        "The Internet is a global resource of unmeasured value and
potential to educators, governments, businesses and consumers," said
Cerf.  "MCI is preserving and enhancing the intelligence and economic
power of the Internet while making it easier and more accessible than
ever before."  MCI Showcases Interactive Multimedia Message on the
Internet

        Earlier this month, MCI began an innovative marketing campaign
on the Internet that plays off the company's successful Gramercy Press
ads for networkMCI BUSINESS. Users of the Internet can, with a click
of the mouse, learn more about the characters in the Gramercy Press
commercials, even hear their voices or see video images of them. The
campaign, which already has been viewed by more than 100,000 Internet
users, has an interactive component that allows Internet users to
actually submit their art, poetry or short stories for viewing on the
Internet. MCI selects pieces and publishes them on the "net," where
they can be viewed by the millions of users of the Internet worldwide.

        Internet users can travel to Gramercy Press on their own
(address: http://www.mci.com/gramercy/intro.html) or via "Hotwired,"
the new on-line spinoff of "Wired" magazine. MCI is a sponsor of the
magazine's "Flux" section, which offers news about Internet movers and
shakers. Hotwired members can reach Gramercy Press at
http://www.hotwired.com (click-on "signal" zone).

        "The Internet is a marketer's dream come to life," added
Price.  "It's full-color, full-motion and full of potential.  MCI not
only expects to be on the leading edge of marketing its own services
on the Internet, but also in the forefront of helping our customers
tap the marketing power of the Internet."

        For more information on internetMCI, call 1-800-779-0949.

        With 1993 revenue of nearly $12 billion, MCI Communications
Corporation is one of the world's largest communications companies.
Headquartered in Washington D.C., MCI has more than 65 offices in 58
countries and places.  The company's Atlanta-based MCI Business
Markets provides a wide range of communications and information
services to America's businesses, including networkMCI BUSINESS, long
distance voice, data and video services, and consulting and
outsourcing services.

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 94 11:03:10 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: MCI's Announcement


I only became aware of MCI's Internet announcement early Monday morning
and as a result was able to give barely an hour's notice to readers of
this forum who wanted to listen in on the conference call. As a courtesy
to people who were unable to join the conference because of the short
notice given, it will be rebroadcast on a continous basis all afternoon
on Monday to callers at 800-857-4387, passcode 7777.

No mention was made of one substantial component of the Internet, that
of Usenet and the several mailing lists or e-journals which circulate
on the net.  Numerous questions were allowed and there was such a
backlog of questions that many went unasked as the time allotted for
the conference began to run short.

I was in the queue for questions, but was not called upon. My question
was to be addressed to Mr. Cerf and was simply this: what relationship
will exist, if any, between 'Internet MCI' and the several information
providers currently serving the net with e-journals such as this Digest
(to name but one, but the list could go on to include for example the
Airwaves Journal, the Computer Underground Digest, RISKS, and many
others).

As a long time participant in the net, Mr. Cerf will surely recall how
ten years ago -- about the time I was first getting involved in Usenet
and the Internet in 1983 -- the task of 'moderator' was quite an easy
one.  As the oldest mailing list on the Internet, TELECOM Digest began
in 1981 with about two dozen names on the mailing list, and enough
traffic to publish an issue every two or three days. In large part
because of the addition of commercial services to the net such as MCI
and its mail service along with others like Compuserve and America
OnLine, all the mailing lists have grown tremendously. This e-journal
alone has a mailing list of several thousand entries, and others with
more popular or general interest topics are larger still. If I were
physically able to do so, I'd love to publish everything that comes
in, but this is impossible unless I spend eight hours per day doing
the Digest, and I am not yet quite ready to make that plunge.

So my question to the conference, unasked, was to be what will happen
with Usenet and the various newsgroups. Let's forget for a minute the
task of defining the quality of the various 'news' groups and simply
talk in general terms. Where do they fit into the scheme of Internet MCI
as we move to the end of the decade and the millenium?  At the conference
they talked extensively about the new shopping mall they are going to
begin and some other aspects of the net, but not a single word about
Usenet and its place in the scheme of things.

Any answers from MCI and/or Mr. Cerf?


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telephony Applications in Windows
Date: 21 Nov 1994 10:03:13 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


Does anybody know anything about how extensively TAPI (the new
telephony API standard developed by Microsoft and Intel) has been used
to date.  What are its limitatations? Is it reliable? I believe there
is also a telephony services API called TSAPI (a Novell/AT&T
partnership).

Microsoft recommend using the Windows SDK in conjunction with the
Telephony SDK for developing Windows telephony applications.  Has
anybody any experience of developing applications in this manner, or
would it be better to use something like Visual Basic/C++ instead of
the Windows SDK?

Is there a version of the Telephony SDK available for NT, or will
there be? (The version I know about is for Windows 3.1.)

I am looking for information on this field as I want to base my
final year university project on the subject of PC telephony (my
background is in telecommunications).

Any replies will be greatly appreciated. I can be e-mailed at:

[e-mail]

Brian McAuliffe
Dublin  Ireland

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 16:35:19 +0000
From: evan champion <[e-mail]>
Subject: Subnetting a PPP Network Solved
Organization: Bell Northern Research


Original problem: not enough host density using a netmask of
255.255.255.248 (32 hosts/network).  Network contains all PPP hosts
with no networks behind the hosts.  Need to find a way to get more
hosts/network due to problems in getting new networks from the
Internic.

I redesigned the network layout so that the terminal server's serial
ports were set to 199.84.53.1 and each PPP host became
199.84.53.[2-254].  No subnetting was required because the hosts are
point-to-point and not broadcast media.  Everything works great!

Thanks very much to everyone who helped me out on this problem!


Evan

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

Subject: Re: Store-to-Store Link?
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 94 21:11:36 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


Christopher Zguris <[e-mail]> writes:

> I'm looking for ideas on how to link two stores within Manhattan. Both
> stores have independent multi-line key systems. I'm not looking to
> _link_ the systems with anything like centrex; the systems will remain
> indepentent.  I'm looking for a sort of dedicated store-to-store link,
> so if, for example, store A picks up a line at store B will ring and
> vice-versa (this would be _perfect_ since it would also integrate
> nicely into both key systems that have extra capacity anyways).

What you want is called a ring-down-tie-line, similar to a
"hoot-and-holler" circuit.  They're great, as long as you don't have
to pay the bill for the circuits on which they operate.

> The biggest question involves cost. Is it cheaper to do something like
> this?  A local call here in Manhattan is $.08 for the first three
> minutes. In addition to voice calls, data calls that connect store B
> to the network at store A through a modem will also be made. Now if
> these data calls last for any length of time, or many of them are
> placed in addition to voice calls things could get pricey!

Dedicated circuits can be pricey, too.  Think about how many local
calls you can make for between $200 and $300 a month.

The City of New York did a traffic study some time ago to determine
how much ddco traffic went from the Municipal Building switch (a
Northern Tel SL1) to the lower Manhattan centrex (thousands of people
with reasons and opportunity to make telephone calls).  Although there
was considerable daily traffic between the two exchanges (enough to
block a 15 tie-line group for several hours a day), there wasn't
enough traffic for the tie-lines to be cost-effective, not even with
least-cost-routing.

> I'm sure centrex would do what I want, but I think it's priced _way_
> out of my ballpark (but I'm guessing, I've never priced it), what other
> options are there?

There are some applications where centrex is far more cost-effective
than individual switches or key systems.  The only way you're going to
know for sure is by doing your homework and pricing them out.

> In other words, what should I ask about when I call NYNEX
> so that I won't sound like an idiot and _they_ won't sell me something
> I don't need (like centrex?).

Then you're wasting your time.  NYNEX is practically married to
Northern Tel., and will give you a serious pitch on centrex with
proprietary (Northern) instruments.  Most telecom people would cringe
at the thought of being pitched for service they've expended a lot of
effort to eliminate to avoid (financial justification for large
switches often involves a payback compared to centrex), but your
application might be one for which it might work.

Is your "tie-line" need a real or imagined need?  Tie-lines are rarely
cost effective in Manhattan.  If you need the *convenience* of a
ring-down-tie-line, you can substitute an automatic dialer that will
simulate the function, either with a cv set or on the business end of
a key system.  If you need a *cost-effective* solution, think again.


[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Carlson)
Subject: Re: RTS/CTS For Flow Control
Date: 21 Nov 1994 16:31:05 GMT
Organization: Xylogics Incorporated
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Brian Pirie) writes:

> I am trying to learn how the RS232C RTS/CTS lines are used for flow
> control with a modem. When is it appropriate to raise and lower the
> RTS signal, and what should the program do in response to changes in
> the CTS signal?

For "normal" modems, you assert RTS to the modem when you've got
buffer space available and are ready to receive data.  You deassert it
when you're near the end of your buffer or are no longer willing to
receive data.  (Be aware that a few characters may still be received
after you drop RTS, so it's not a good idea to drop it too close to
the end of your internal buffers.  Be aware, also, that some modems
behave strangely to RTS low.  Some will refuse to answer a ringing
line even though DTR is asserted.)

CTS will be deasserted by the modem when the modem is low on buffer
space.  You must stop transmitting when you see that this has
happened.  When CTS is asserted again, you can start transmitting.


James Carlson <[e-mail]>            Tel:  [phone]
Annex Software Support / Xylogics, Inc.               [phone]
53 Third Avenue / Burlington MA  01803-4491     Fax:  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Ancona)
Subject: Re: Burned by a 900 Number
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 10:43:15 GMT


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

> I got a bill from U.S. West with an extra page detailing $234.00 worth
> of calls to a 900 number. Get this, 6 calls within 10 minutes. Each
> call was billed at $39.00! They claim these are direct dialed calls,
> from my lead telephone number.

> I have a problem with this:

> 1.  There is no telephone connected to the line, ever.
> 2.  The modem and phone lines are in a locked room.

> I KNOW I did not make these G*DD*MN calls. I know no one else in my
> family made these calls (no visits from anyone in the time period
> stated).  I am pretty D*MN sure my modem did not make the calls.

Pat replies:

> That's not to say *you are guilty*; just that 99
> percent of the time, the 'innocent victim' is in fact the person who
> used the service or else some member of their family or circle of
> friends, etc. Because wire-pair interception from outside the customer's
> premises is relatively rare compared to the number of times the customer
> is simply being fraudulent, I trust you'll understand the IP's position
> when they take a hard line toward those who -- in their phraseology --
> are 'in denial' ...

This may be, but I think billing errors (or even fraud on the part of
providers) may be more common than you think, Pat. Over the summer I
received a bill for several calls to a 900 sex line on a date/time-of-day
when no one was home at my house. I called NE Tel (oops, NYNEX), and
they removed the charges (which were a lot less than Joe's), and added
a 900 block. Well, last month I was billed for another call to a 900
Keno line. This time, I called the provider and had the charge removed.
Since the block was in place, the second occurrence, at least, could
not have been a case of wiretapping. I've had the phone number for
years, so it's not a case of delayed billing.  I'd be interested to
hear others experiences.

BTW, Pat glad to hear you're feeling better, and back online.


Jim Ancona               [e-mail]               [e-mail]
Opinions expressed are my own, and not those of D&B Software.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Fraud on the part of the IP is certainly
not unheard of, however fraud by customers is a lot more common. Ah,
the things which come to mind this morning ... the year, 1974. I had an
office downtown with a two line phone: WEbster-9-4600 and 4601. Those
were for my administrative use while I was operating my recorded message
information service. I had about twenty lines in a rotary hunt which
began with HArrison-7-1234 and ran upward. These lines all had recording
machines and were 'slaved' to each other so I could record a single message
on the lead machine and it automatically was placed on the other machines.
I gave a three minute daily announcement, courtesy of various sponsors whose
messages were heard in the first thirty seconds. I was logging four or
five thousand incoming calls each day; the sponsors paid me money to talk
about them and events going on at their establishments, etc. These were all
one-way incoming lines; if you picked up the line to make an outgoing call
all you got was battery; no dial tone.

On my two admin phones however, one month I got a phone bill with a bunch
of calls; far more than I could have possibly made. The next month I got
the same thing. I called IBT to complain about the excessive number of local
calls, and the service rep assured me I must have made the calls since they
were all dialed direct. ESS had just been cut in in that central office, and
she offered to send me a print out of the calls for the last month. When it
arrived, I looked it over very carefully, using this criteria:

1) If I recognized the number at any time of day, I assume I made the
call;
2) If I didn't recognize the number, but it was a time of day I was likely
to be in the office, I assumed I made the call;
3) If I didn't recognize the number and it was shown at a time of day that
I was very unlikely to be in the office, I investigated further by calling
the name and address service to see who it was listed to.

I found five or six hundred 'message units' on the bill for a mere handful
of numbers which appeared over and over on various days. Calling the name
and address service got me responses like, 'The number is listed to the
IBT Co, 65 West Congress' ... or 'The number is listed to the IBT Co,
warehouse and truck repair facility, Aurora, IL' ... hey, Aurora is quite
a long distance and a *very expensive* 'local' call.  One was even listed
to the IBT Co at 343 S. Dearborn; the same building where my office was
located. That one turned out to be a room in the basement where IBT kept
lots of supplies and where the repair guys wound hang around at lunch time.

Well, I called back the service rep with a big grin on my face. She was
sure that now that I had seen the print out I would recognize all my calls
and why the bill was so high. Uh huh ... I asked her if she had ever heard
the term 'theft of service' ... *you* know how all those calls got on the
bill:  the repair techs here in the building are in the basement doing
some work, they need a pair to call the foreman or the supply depot so
they used mine. I am not in the office at 7:30 AM when all these calls are
being made day after day ... or maybe some of the calls are being made
right from the central office; some dude needs to make a call so he walks
right over to the frame and since there my line sits right on the end of
the frame he used it. His thinking no doubt was that since the number
ended in zero zero (hundred) it was probably a large company and they
would not miss the extra message units anyway ...

I got a call back later in the day from the business office manager;
she agreed it was theft of service from me and she agreed to write off
all the message units on my bill for the past three months rather than
invesigate them one by one.  I got a visit later in the day from the
foreman in charge of the repair guys at 343 S. Dearborn and he said he
would have a 'little talk' with his guys the next day and tell them to
use their own line in the basement for calls instead of mine in the future.

So one thing you might want to consider is that sometimes telco employees
like to get off on sex phone calls also ... grin ...   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Portman)
Subject: Re: Nitsuko NVM 2000 Problems
Organization: Alternate Access Inc.
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 14:07:40 GMT


Ian Cochrane ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I'm having a problem with the Nitsuko NVM 2000 auto attendant/voice
> mail.  Callers get lost in the unit because, I presume, the unit
> doesn't recognize the digits they dial. People calling from cellular
> phones, residential phones and other PBX phones have had this happen.
> They get into the auto attendant and after being prompted, they dial
> the three digit extension they want. After several minutes, the auto
> attendant repeats its request to dial an extension. Our vendor has
> tried a few solutions, none of which have worked. They have now become
> very unresponsive to our requests for assistance with this problem.
> Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Oh boy. If I had a nickel for every one of these type of complaints I
had to run down. I am the author/maintainer of voice mail for a large
hotel chain.

Your description of the problem is a pretty good indication of what is
wrong. The VM is not discriminating enough to recognize sub-standard
or short length touch tones.

VM (Voice Mail) systems are driven through the touch tones they
receive in response to the prompts they play. If the touch tones
transmitted by the caller are not in spec, many VM cards will not
recognize them as touch tones and reject them. Also, many VM systems
are designed to reject "talk off", which is voice tones that fool the
system into thinking a touch tone button has been pressed. Older VM
cards are particularly susceptible to "talk off", so to avoid this,
the vendor will set the touch tone thresholds quite high. This solves
the "talk-off", but makes the cards reject many legimitate touch
tones.

Solutions:

1. For cellular customers, there is not a lot you can do. I have
experienced this problem with many different voicemail systems,
including the one I maintain. The newer digital cell phones seem to
have less of a problem, but the real problem is noise/dropouts in the
audio stream. The human ear can compensate for missing information and
filter out noise a whole lot better than any VM card I have yet seen.

2. For certain PBX's, which put out weak or short touch tones, you can
probably tune your VM system to have a lower "talk-off" rejection
threshold.  IE, tune the VM cards to recognize touch tones of less
than 70ms. The method of tuning will vary by the product.

4. If the vendor is not using state of the art VM cards, such as
Dialogic D41/D or D121/B cards, then a solution might be to try to get
your vendor to upgrade the cards in the system. Our systems showed a
dramatic improvemnt in touch tone recognition and talk-off rejection
when we upgraded to the latest generation of DSP based cards.

5. Finally, if possible, have your prompts tell the caller to dial
SLOWLY and CAREFULLY. You would be amazed at the difference the
dialing habits of the caller makes.

Hope this has been helpful, or at least informative.

If you have some specific questions, I would be happy to respond via email.


Joe Portman - Alternate Access Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: Burned by a 900 Number
Date: 20 Nov 1994 19:11:23 GMT
Organization: Gloats R Us.


In article <[e-mail]>, Joe Portman <[e-mail]>
writes:

> I have a problem with this:
> 1.  There is no telephone connected to the line, ever.
> 2.  The modem and phone lines are in a locked room.

> I KNOW I did not make these G*DD*MN calls.

Just another thought. You say you're setting up a BBS. Are you using a
callback verifier? Some BBS sysops in this area have had problems like
this in the past with people putting in 900 and 976 numbers for
callback.


MD
------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Bud Couch)
Subject: Re: DSU/CSU For T1
Organization: ADC Kentrox Industries, Inc.
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 14:29:55 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael
Todd Lattanzi) writes:

> Marc Collins ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> I'm installing a T1 line and I ordered a 56k DSU/CSU for the line.
>> I'm now concerned, can I use this DSU/CSU with this line or do I need

> A better product than the Kentrox is the ADTRAN T1 CSU/DSU.  Call
> ADTRAN sales at [phone].  Excellent equipment.

Finally got around to reading news this week, and I couldn't just let
pass, Pat.

I really can't claim any sort of impartiality, but I'll throw this
out.  Check the units out for yourself. and see if the feature set,
price, reliability and company support match your requirements.

If someone is putting up a single T1 line and doesn't expect to add
any more, a minimal feature set unit like the Adtran may be a good
match (of course, Kentrox does offer the D-Serv for this type of
service ;-), as well), but if you expect to install a multiple line
network, I believe that the additional built-in network control
features (like telnet and SNMP support) offered by the DataSmart make
it a better choice.

Ten years ago, when Kentrox was first getting into this business, I
spent about 15% of my time handling support calls. Make sure that your
chosen vendor is both willing *and* ready to do this. We now have a
department (manager, secretary, call distribution setup and all) to
handle support.  Make sure that you can get support when you need it.

When it's finally installed and configured, how many years do you
expect it to operate? Kentrox is an ISO 9001 certified company, and
the proven in-service MTBF is huge.

I'm beginning to sound like a commercial, so I'll just close with
this: For any purchase, do your homework. Get copies of the trade mags
(LAN Mag, Network World, Comm Week, etc). Call every vendor you find
(and there are a lot more than Kentrox and Adtran in this market), and
get their sales literature. For the products that appear to be what
you want, get more information, *then* make your choice.


Good luck.

P.S. Kentrox has an 800 number, as well. 1-800-733-5511.


Bud Couch - ADC Kentrox       [e-mail] (192.228.59.2)

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Mercer)
Subject: Re: T1 -> 24 x v.32 -> RS232
Organization: Reptilian Research, Toronto, Canada
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 09:53:41 -0500


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

> Lance Ellinghaus <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> A company called Primary Access has a product that will take a T1 (24
>> VOICE channels) and interpret the DS0 channels as modem connections
>> (v.32, v.42bis, etc..) and output standard RS232 to hook to a system.

> Primary Access is probably best known for using their box for credit
> card transaction processing.  They can configure their box to accept
> calls on the T1 and make X.25 calls out the other side to a server to
> verify the card.  Their product is pretty expensive.

When I spoke to Primary Access a while ago, they were working on an
ethernet/terminalserver extension.

> I would check also with U.S. Robotics.  They have a box called
> Enterprise Total Control or something like that which does what you
> want.  A better solution is to use their box, and put their ethernet
> card in it, and use that to connect to your host rather that 24 rs-232
> connections.

The big difference between the Primary Access and the USR/Hayes/Gandalf
and other similar facilities, was that the Primary Access system used
fewer DSP's to emulate more modems.

Also, the Primary access system (at that time) allowed v.22, v.32,v.32bis
(ie. 300-14,400) as well as switched 56K and ISDN connections.

Totally dynamic.

I haven't spoken to them for some time, they may have ethernet access now.


Jim Mercer   [e-mail]   [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #423
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa06487;
          22 Nov 94 17:19 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05826; Tue, 22 Nov 94 10:46:04 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05818; Tue, 22 Nov 94 10:46:01 CST
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 10:46:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #424

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 22 Nov 94 10:46:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 424

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: MCI's Announcement (John Higdon)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Re: Burned by a 900 Number ([e-mail])
    Re: Burned by a 900 Number (Clarence Dold)
    Re: Burned by a 900 Number (Peter Lamasney)
    Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options (A. Laurence)
    Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options (Alan Boritz)
    Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options (loeb@netcom)
    Re: Motorola Complaint and Praise (Kyle Cordes)
    Re: Motorola Complaint and Praise (David Miller)
    Re: Motorola Complaint and Praise (Rob Lockhart)
    Re: F&S: What ISLIP Stands For (Mehmet Orgun)
    Re: Can a Customer Choose Their ANI? (Pat Trimble)
    Re: Freestanding Fax Modem/Printerless Fax Machine? (Stu Whitmore)

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 America
On Line. 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, 21 Nov 1994 22:22:17 -0800
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement


[e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor) writes:

> So my question to the conference, unasked, was to be what will happen
> with Usenet and the various newsgroups. Let's forget for a minute the
> task of defining the quality of the various 'news' groups and simply
> talk in general terms. Where do they fit into the scheme of Internet MCI
> as we move to the end of the decade and the millenium?  At the conference
> they talked extensively about the new shopping mall they are going to
> begin and some other aspects of the net, but not a single word about
> Usenet and its place in the scheme of things.

> Any answers from MCI and/or Mr. Cerf?

My first reaction after reading that announcement was to go balistic.
Then reality and reason set in. MCI is singing the forty-third verse
of a song people stopped listening to years ago: Shopping From Home.
Yes, now that the Internet has achieved critical mass, the bean-counters
and marketing people see dollar signs everywhere. MCI no doubt sees
itself as becoming awash in money, controlling both ends (and the
middle, for that matter) of countless merchandizing transactions.

But wait! There's less (much less) than meets the eye. Home shopping?
As in "catalog shopping"? One can do that with a pretty four-color
slick catalog (printed on paper) and a telephone. Unless MCI has
figured out how to transport merchandise over the Internet and put it
into the customer's hands in a flash, marketplaceMCI offers nothing
more than something we can all do right now with a telephone.

You don't believe it? Notice the reduction in size of CompuServe's
"Electronic Shopping Mall" compared to several years ago. Or perhaps
you have noticed what a rousing success Prodigy has become. (Seriously,
it has picked up somewhat since the "traditional" Internet-style
services were expanded.)

MCI obviously has no vision concerning what spawned the Internet or
what has made it grow. This very publication and others like it are
the manifestations of the "real" Internet. MCI has no use for anything
that is not part of the bottom line of its vision for its InternetMCI.
But what is so frequently overlooked by the marketing geniuses is the
fact that what people enjoy for "free" is not necessarily something
they will pay for.

It is unclear just exactly how MCI intends make a distinction between
this product and all of the other communications packages that already
exist.  Further, it is unclear just exactly how MCI intends to cash in
on the Internet usage by the thousands upon thousands of sites already
live on the net without benefit of MCI's pay-for-play commercialization.

It would appear that small Internet access providers, BBSes, friendly
commercial sites, and managers and editors of publications such as
this one will end up on MCI's "hit list". It brings to mind the
concern about telcos attempting to snuff out local "free" BBSes by
playing shell games with the telephone rates.

MCI is a marketing driven company. It is no surprise that it would
move on this scale to commercialize the Internet. But the net has been
here for a long time. I don't recall seeing a "For Sale" sign out
front. MCI can offer any products it likes. People don't necessarily
have to buy them. This may not be the gold mine that MCI predicts that
it will be.


John Higdon  |    P.O. Box 7648   |   [phone]     |       FAX:
[e-mail] | San Jose, CA 95150 | 10288 0 700 FOR-A-MOO | [phone]
          (coming soon: www.ati.com)

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 94 22:02:36 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement


Wonderful, YASP (yet another service provider), but missing from the
announcement was one vital one: CO$T. If by the hour, I'm really not
interested. If "premium services" are involved, they can keep them
(would expect a discount to put up with advts etc.).

In comparison, the "pablum providers", Prodigy, Compuserve, etc. have
been following addictive pricing and can get very expensive very fast.
I'net access is on a "per byte" pricing basis. I'net services are a
"slight additional charge". If so, no thanks.

True, what I want may be an impossible dream but I want fixed, unlimited
use pricing. OK if business hours rates are higher but need access
when I want and to be able to budget in the expense like cable.

Just wonder what they are planning?


Warmly,

Padgett


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They talked about a software package for
$49.95 which would be similar to Mosaic, and one thing they stressed
over and over was that in the future, when people 'think Internet, they
will think MCI ...'  In other words, the they will go together like
(as the song put it) love and marriage. Just as love and marriage go
together like a horse and carriage (From "My Fair Lady") the thrust
of their marketing will be to convince people that Internet goes with
MCI. Alright students, now it is time for a pop quiz based on the
press conference yesterday. Select two words or phrases from the list
below which do not go with the others:

Internet
MCI
Shopping Mall
Usenet Newsgroups
E-journals and mailing lists

Did you pass the test?  If not, you can stay after school and clean
the erasers. If you've been reading my sermons here for the past year
or so none of what was said yesterday should come as any surprise. You're
probably saying to yourself, 'what else is old?' ... According to MCI
the new shopping mall with its trimmings starts in January.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kronos)
Subject: Re: Burned by a 900 Number
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 07:43:11 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ...

> ... the repair techs here in the building are in the basement doing
> some work, they need a pair to call the foreman or the supply depot so
> they used mine.

Back about twenty years ago our local Bell company would allocate
entire prefixes for their exclusive use -- depots, business office,
conference rooms, employee phones, etc.

The billing programs would just "ignore" any call made to any number
beginning with one of these prefixes.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We had the same thing here. The prefix
used was OFFicial, as in OFFicial-9100, later OFficial-3-9100 for the
business office as one example. Long ago, telco business offices were
always '9100' in the days of manual service then (something)-9100 when
dial service started. Even today I think Ameritech/Illinois Bell uses
312-727-9100 for their main corporate number here. Of course, in the
days of manual service few people bothered to ask the operator for
9100; they'd just ask for the Business Office.

Trouble is, the 'official' prefix was generally only in the front office
and a few other departments. In the central offices the testers and
foremen and people like that always had (something)-99xx. The chief
operator here was 9901; a direct line to the directory assistance
(information) supervisor was 9904; the foreman might be 9910, etc.
And downtown, where IBT had a 'lockerroom' or storeroom in nearly
every highrise building for the use of the installer or repair person
assigned to that building, the phone number there was whatever it was.
In the second sub-basement of the building where my office was located
a large room was given over to all the incoming wire pairs for the
building -- thousands of them -- and the telco guys would sit down
there to drink coffee, shoot the bull and hide from their foreman, etc.
Need to make a call to your wife, girlfriend, whoever?  Easy, you've
got a headset and alligator clips; just walk over to the row after
row of wires, clip on somewhere and make your call.

Of course, theft of service the other way around was NOT fair play
in their opinion. I remember back about 1969-70 when phreaks here
discovered a wide-open loop around. It seems anything-9954 was connected
to a device which gave dialtone outbound on 9955. If you waited a couple
seconds, an autodialer came on and dialed '611'. This was intended for
repair guys who were working outside their normal district or central
office. Since in those days 611 was always relative to the central
office *from which the call was dialed in*, if a guy was working outside
his normal location, dialing 611 would get him some other repair clerk
instead of his own. So if he worked in the Wabash CO for example, and
wanted to call the clerk there, he'd dial 922-9954 and that would cause
the loop via 9955 to call *his* 611. What the phreaks discovered was
that your fingers had to be quick and nimble: when 9955 connected and
dial tone was heard, *quickly* dial the number desired before the auto-
dialer had a chance to get on the line. Your call would be honored
instead, and sure, in a couple seconds here would come the auto-dialer
doing 611, but by that time it was too late ... the phreak had already
given the equipment the seven (more often than not, ten!) digits needed
to complete a call. The auto-dialer with its feeble 611 would then be
ignored.

Well, telco being the way it is, they even bill themselves for calls
made on company lines. I suppose they don't actually pay the bill, but
department supervisors do audit the billings on the phones in their
area and approve them for the purpose of write off each month. Someone,
somewhere eventually got copies of the 'phone bill' for 9955, probably
when the accounting department got tired of seeing charges on that
number. The shit hit the fan when some central office foreman started
checking that bill ... calls all over the USA ... and before you know
it, all the 9954/9955 loop-arounds were shut off, but not before pen-
registers had been installed on the most active of the loops and some
investigation done.

As a former aquaintence described it to me, "I came home from school
one day and sitting on the front porch of our house was a telephone
company security guy and a Chicago police officer. The telephone guy
said to me, 'hello <name>, as you know, the tariff requires 24 hour
notice before we disconnect service for reasons other than non-payment
and I am here to tell you that 24 hours from now your phone is going
to be turned off. I hope you are never able to get it turned back on.'

"I asked him what was wrong, and he looked at me with a grin on his
face and said, 'if I were to use the phrase '9954/9955' would you know
what I was talking about?' ... " He told me at that point he guessed
it was pointless to argue about it, especially since the Chicago cop
was standing there looking very eager to see some action, so he dropped
it. The security guy and the cop left and sure enough the next afternoon
the phone went dead. The business office refused to turn on service to
that address when he called them on several occassions, and he finally
wound up hiring a lawyer -- having to pay him $500 -- to appeal to the
Illinois Commerce Commission. The phone finally got turned back on. He
thought it prudent not to press the matter further once his service
was reconnected. That's the way telco did things in the 1960-70 era.
They showed who was boss; no backtalk permitted.   PAT]

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

From: Clarence Dold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Burned by a 900 Number
Date: 22 Nov 1994 01:21:22 GMT
Organization: a2i network


Joe Portman ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I got a bill from U.S. West with an extra page detailing $234.00 worth
> of calls to a 900 number. Get this, 6 calls within 10 minutes. Each
> call was billed at $39.00! They claim these are direct dialed calls,
> from my lead telephone number.

> 1.  There is no telephone connected to the line, ever.

Your wires may go places you would never suspect.

Two stories, two cities:

1.  A "friend", who had his phone disconnected for non-pay, had the
still-attached phone ring one day.  The caller wanted someone who
didn't live there ...

A little ANI callback revealed the newly connected phone number, which
this friend quietly assumed as his own.  Outbound calls were no
trouble, and the number was passed out judiciously, to people who
would hang up should someone other than himself answer.  This went on
for several months.  One day Pac Bell called, and asked some
questions.  He played dumb, but the line went dead ...

2.  My modem line would go dead whenever it rained.  The short version
of the story is that my line went into the ground about a mile past my
house, where a storage shed had been, and been demolished, before I
moved in.  What was left of the phone line was visible on the ground,
and could easily have been tapped by anyone in the area.


Clarence A Dold - [e-mail]
                - Pope Valley & Napa CA.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh indeed, it is quite common when new
service goes in for the installer to forget to open up the multiples
on the cable, especially the multiple to whoever was last on that pair.
A reader of this Digest once remarked to me several years ago that he
(assumed) he had only one pair in his bedroom. He checked the modular
box one day and found the green and red wires to be hooked to his own
phone as expected. The yellow and black wires of the second pair just
stopped there in the box. As an experiment, he went on that pair, and
viola!  Dialtone!  Hmmm ... he did the ringback test, and let it ring
a few times until it stopped. Quickly lifting his own receiver he
asked what number he had reached. The woman told him, and doing a
check of the name and address associated, he found it to be someone
living down the street and across the alley on his block. Some
installer was not doing his job, or the pair to that woman would have
been opened up on the pole before it reached our reader's house.
So it is true some 900 (and other toll) fraud comes as the result of
an opportunistic person finding service on a pair that supposedly
is not in service. From all appearances, the legitimate subscriber
*must have* made the call; after all it was dialed direct! :)   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 08:11:21 CST
From: Peter Lamasney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Burned by a 900 Number


Writes [e-mail] (Jim Ancona):

> .... (or even fraud on the part of providers) ....

Commented:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Fraud on the part of the IP is
> certainly not unheard of....

Charges appearing on a phone bill without a call cannot, I believe, be
attributed to the IP.  The IP has no access to the billing mechanism.

I recall contacting PacBell (as an IP), to initiate a credit for a
customer.  The rep was absolutely flabergasted, normally spending the
day arguing with IPs about why credits should *not* have been made.
It turns out that there was no way my credit could be done!  Credits,
by definition, were customer-initiated.  There was simply no form she
could fill out, no procedure, no computer transaction, no PF key, no
mechanism existed by which I could refund a customer's money.

[Sidebar: When the customer called to initiate reversal, there was a
forced choice among a variety of negative connotation reasons (DAK,
price not revealed, price not as advertised, etc.).  "Customer and IP
agree" is not acceptable.]

Similarly, there is no mechanism by which charges can be inserted into
the billing system by the IP.  In essence, the TelCo says "Once a
month we'll let you know how it all turns out."  The IP does *not*
submit a billing tape to the TelCo.

[Another sidebar: I once met an IP who claimed he tripled his money
hiring a full-time clerk to cross-match the chargebacks with the
original call detail.  If the chargeback didn't appear (i.e., they
were charging back a call that never was made nor billed), it got
documented and re-reversed.  He claimed he recovered four times the
salary every month.]


Pete    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 08:32:14 GMT


John R. Covert <[e-mail]> writes:

> Dave Reuben <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> *67 will also block "Call*Return" (*69), so even if a call shows up as
>> PRIVATE, you will no longer be able to return the call.

>> I'm not sure why they did this ...

> Because the private number would then be revealed on your next bill,
> if it was from an area to which toll charges apply.

Actually, it wouldn't. When you use call return, the phone number
NEVER shows up on your bill. It just lists area code, prefix, and XXXX
for the last four digits. So you will know what community you called,
but not what number.

This is how it works in areas of California served by Pacific Bell. YMMV.


Andrew Laurence                Oakland, California USA
[e-mail]      Pacific Standard Time (GMT-8)

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

Subject: Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 01:04:40 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (olcay cirit) writes:

>> I'd also like to see them implement Anonymous Call Rejection so we
>> don't have to worry about Call*Returning (*69) PRIVATE calls -- they
>> will all simply be blocked when I chose.

> If you don't want to wait, I have seen CNID devices that recognize
> blocked calls, and play a short message saying something to the effect
> of "We are sorry. This number does not except blocked calls" then
> hangs up.

That box, the Continental Data Technologies "Block-The-Blocker," is
now very difficult to find.  I got both of mine at Sears, but haven't
seen them anywhere else.

I think everyone should have one of these things to torment "privacy
block" enthusiasts. <g>


[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Between 408 and 510...)
Subject: Re: New York Tel Changes Caller-ID Blocking Codes and Options
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 12:47:26 GMT


John R. Covert <[e-mail]> writes:

> Dave Reuben <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> *67 will also block "Call*Return" (*69), so even if a call shows up as
>> PRIVATE, you will no longer be able to return the call.

>> I'm not sure why they did this ...

> Because the private number would then be revealed on your next bill,
> if it was from an area to which toll charges apply.

That's not true. E.g. PacBell prints the toll calls made by *69 as
NNN-****, thereby not revealing the private number but allowing to
verify the correctness of billing.


Leo

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

From: [e-mail] (Kyle Cordes)
Subject: Re: Motorola Complaint and Praise
Date: 22 Nov 1994 07:57:46 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access


[e-mail] (mahboud) writes:

> Now here's a cool story.  I was biking across the Golden Gate Bridge.
> As I crossed over to the Marin side, not over the water anymore, my
> Motorola Advisor pager fell off my belt, bounced on the sidewalk, flew
> towards the road, hit barrier, bounced off and went through the gap
> between the road and the sidewalk.  I went over and looked through the

Motorola pagers (at all of them that I am aware of) are quite robust.
A few stores actually demo this by casually throwing pagers across the
room.

On the other hand, my Memo Express just doesn't feel as solid as my
old Bravo Plus did.  I don't intend to test this by dropping it off of
the Golden Gate Bridge, however!  :-]


Kyle Cordes @ dbX Corporation  *****  [e-mail]  *****

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

From: [e-mail] (David Miller)
Subject: Re: Motorola Complaint and Praise
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 02:36:23 GMT


mahboud ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I could see the ground below, but no pager.  I thought that I
> would go to the bottom and pick up the peices.  I figured the peices
> might be worth something.  I made a mental note of what landmarks were
> directly below.

> I biked down and almost immediately found the pager.  But for some red
> paint on the corners, the pager was in perfect shape!  Not even a
> scratch!  The point of impact is only slightly higher than sea-level.

Mahboud: I wear a Motorola Minitor/II pager for my volunteer fire department.
That pager has been accidentally dropped 15' onto concrete, ended up at the
bottom of my swimming pool -- twice, and generally been abused over its
six years of use.

I can truely state that Motorola makes an "industrial strength" product.


David Miller   [e-mail]    Marysville, WA USA

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

From: [e-mail] (RLockhart)
Subject: Re: Motorola Complaint and Praise
Date: 22 Nov 1994 03:05:10 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


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

> I biked down and almost immediately found the pager.  But for some red
> paint on the corners, the pager was in perfect shape!  Not even a
> scratch!  The point of impact is only slightly higher than sea-level.

But you didn't say if your Advisor still received pages or not <grin>.


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: Tue, 22 Nov 94 12:49:17 +1100
From: [e-mail] (Mehmet Orgun)
Subject: Re: F&S: What ISLIP Stands For


> I remember the discussion but I don't recall anything definite
> being decided - indeed at one point the acronym ISIP came up.

> Originally, "Lucid" was in the title because it was (arguably) the
> first, and for a long time the only, example of Indexical Programming.
> Times have changed - the work of the (now misnamed) 'Lucid Group' has
> broadened out to include spreadsheets, attribute grammars, version
> control, temporal databases, realtime languages etc. Indeed there
> are now examples (eg modal/temporal logic programming systems) produced
> by people entirely outside the Lucid Group.

> Lucid therefore no longer plays such a key role, and I think dropping it
> from the expansion of ISLIP is justified.

No objections. I would like to second Tony's suggestion that ISLIP
meant International Symposium on Languages for Intensional Programming.
I think people working in, say, executable temporal/modal logics,
temporal query languages etc can associate with the term intensional
programming more easily than indexical programming.


Mehmet A Orgun, Department of Computing, Macquarie University
        Sydney,  NSW 2109,  Australia
        Tel: [phone],  Fax: [phone]
        E-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Pat Trimble)
Subject: Re: Can a Customer Choose Their ANI?
Date: 22 Nov 1994 07:34:32 GMT
Organization: Netcom


In <[e-mail]> Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
writes:

> I'm curious to know if a (residential) customer can choose NOT to have
> their ANI reflect a dialable number.  Or put another way, does ANI
> always represent a DN.  If not, how does one go about that?  This is
> not meant to defraud, just to enhance "privacy."

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think ANI is something which
> can be artibtrarily decided or presented. I think it is what it is ...
> and gets delivered in that way. While your right to privacy is
> appreciated and respected, my right to know what telephone calls I am
> obliged to pay for supercedes your privacy right, or at least is equal
> to it.  PAT]

To support the last posting on this issue, think about when ANI
(Automatic Number Identification) is used for an E-911 call for help:
ANI is used to provide a 911 operator with the proper responding
organization: Fire, Police, or Medical -- that is the "E" (enhanced)
in the E-911 system. If ANI was not available, the 911 operator would
have to depend on the caller to provide address information (sometimes
a serious problem), and then the operator would have to look up the
proper responding agency ... that was the improvement provided by E-911
over "plain old" 911 service. It is not acceptable to have the 911
operator fumble to decide which fire station is best able to respond,
while a house is burning down. With ANI, they just push a single
button to transfer the call to the appropriate, and correct, agency.
The address information is automatically delivered -- the trucks roll
out of the fire house, the cars out of the police station, or the
ambulance out of the hospital with a printout of everything they need
to know, NOW!!! -- not a several minutes later.

ANI, in this case, is not a privacy issue. It saves lives, every minute
of every day.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I remember when in the days long before
911 service in Chicago we used POlice-5-1313 and FIre-7-1313 to report
emergencies. Only a little bit of very crude translation was done by
each central office. Each CO took the incoming call to PO-5-1313 and
translated it to <something>-1313 unique to that CO. So at the single
dispatching office downtown, if the call arrived on 427-1313 it meant
it was coming from one section of town and if it arrived on 922-1313
it meant it was coming from another section of town, etc. I think maybe
they had the city divided up five or six ways, with calls going into
the dispatchers on <any of five or six different prefixes>-1313. She
could tell you were on the north side, the south side, the west side
or whatever, but that was all. But fire calls only went two ways:
your call was either translated by some central offices to the central
fire alarm office downtown in City Hall on 332-1313 or it went to
the far south side Englewood Fire Alarm office on a strange translation
of TRIangle-4-0002. Since some street names conflict with 'north' and
'south' versions of the same street, the fire dispatcher had to be
especially careful. Phone rings, dispatcher answers, a hysterical,
screaming and crying woman says 'fire at 2345 Damen Avenue' and slams
the phone down in her haste to get herself and children out to safety.
Now did she mean 2345 *North* Damen or 2345 *South* Damen? Well,
two companies had to be dispatched; one to each address and of course
one came back after a false run and time wasted when maybe the fire
fighters could have been used somewhere else on a real job. Then too,
there were the malicious punks and sick people who get their excitment
in life seeing the lights and hearing the sirens. During the very
disturbing Vietnam era in the late 1960's and early 1970's and the
general discontent of so many people, there were days the Chicago Fire
Department responded to over a hundred malicious false alarms each
day. Some days we would hear the fire engines constantly going around
town, responding to false alarms.

911, and particularly E-911 ended almost all that nonsense. The CFD
still gets 'box alarms' from people who deliberatly pull the handle
on the telegraph-like systems installed by law in schools and
hospitals, but these are generally few and far between. When they
do it, it happens in spurts. Last Sunday I had my scanner on and the
CFD spent a couple hours striking one box alarm after another from
one neighborhood; all false probably by the same children.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 01:47:16 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Rattlesnake Stu)
Subject: Re: Freestanding Fax Modem/Printerless Fax Machine?
Organization: Central Washington University


Upon Tue, 14 Nov 94 8:47:42 GMT, the honorable Anthony E. Siegman
([e-mail]) graced comp.dcom.telecom with:

> Is there such a thing as a "free standing" fax modem with a modest
> amount of memory, or a small fax machine with no scanning or printing
> engine, that can receive (small) faxes and store them until one turns
> on a computer and pulls off the received data?

I believe the new ZyXEL v.34 modems due out later this year or early
next year meet your specs.  You might contact them directly for more
info.

Stuart Whitmore, Systems Analyst/Programmer Apprentice @ CWU
[e-mail]      <-- School/apprenticeship related only!
[e-mail]  <-- Personal, UniNova business, etc.
Stop juvenile crime by holding parents responsible for child's action.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #424
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07333;
          22 Nov 94 18:38 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09431; Tue, 22 Nov 94 12:59:15 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09422; Tue, 22 Nov 94 12:59:11 CST
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 12:59:11 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #425

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 22 Nov 94 12:59:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 425

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    European Research Chief to Address Research Issues & Funding (R. Solomon)
    Re: MCI's Announcement ([e-mail])
    Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe (Alain Fontaine)
    Re: RS449 Info Request (Alain Fontaine)
    Re: Help With PBX Decision (Doug Varney)
    Re: PC-Based Voice Mail Systems ([e-mail])
    Re: Flow Control and OSI Layers (Soren Aalto)
    Re: Flow Control and OSI Layers (Matthew P. Downs)
    Re: AT&T Will Carry Local Toll Calls in NPA 410 (Ernie Holling)
    Re: FTS-2000 Database "A" and "B" (David Esan)
    Details About TAPI ([e-mail])
    How Fast is T1-T3? (David M. Chandler)
    Re: FCC Chairman Speech (A. Padgett Peterson)
    1-800 ATT vs MCI Personally (James E. Bellaire)
    Comm Network in Bandung, Indonesia ([e-mail])
    PBX For Dorms (Daniel Ritsma)
    Telecom Adresses in Germany ([e-mail])
    Urgent Request For Contact (Gerard Carat)
    Last Laugh: Sending Phone Calls Back to Hell (misc.consumers via M Solomon)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. 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, 22 Nov 1994 10:24:47 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Richard Jay Solomon)
Subject: European Research Chief to Address Research Issues & Funding


European Research Chief to Address Research Issues & Funding
Opportunities at MIT Forum.

Roland Hueber, Director of the European Commission's Advanced
Communications, Technologies and Services (ACTS) program will speak on
future European Union funding for international cooperation on basic
research in telecommunications at a public forum on Wednesday,
November 30th, from 4:30 to 6 pm, in Bldg. 9, Room 150, 105
Massachusetts Avenue, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Mass.

A press conference will be held from 6 to 6:30 pm at the same
location, summarizing the ACTS program and introducing the USA
National Host. The USA National Host is a newly formed consortium
consisting of MIT's Research Program on Communications Policy, the
University of Pennsylvania's Distributed Systems Lab, the University
of Illinois' National Center for Supercomputing Applications, and the
National Media Lab. The USA National Host is coordinating proposals in
the United States for the EC's ACTS program.

At the MIT Forum, Dr. Hueber will describe the ACTS effort recently
announced by the EC. ACTS is a $1.5 billion, 4-year program for
pre-competitive research to aid implemention of the global information
infrastructure. This is the first time that projects in an EC research
program are open to third country participation. Where there is mutual
interest in international collaboration, ACTS has the authority to
match funds for work done in EU member countries with funds from
external entities.

Dr. Hueber, who is visiting the U.S. as a member of an EC delegation,
will be meeting next week with Washington officials on coordination
policies -- including arrangements for the forthcoming meeting of the
G7 countries in February on the global information infrastructure.

The MIT Research Program on Communications Policy is hosting the public
forum, open to all interested parties.

Further information call: Julia Malik or Gill Cable-Murphy at 617-253-4138,
or e-mail [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: 22 Nov 1994 16:05:55 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville, Louisville KY USA


I was able to 'attend' the conference. MCI has licensed the software
to produce their own front end for the internet: a web browser,
telnet, and ftp.  They have also implemented a simple encryption
technique to keep credit card information marginally safe when
transmitted through the net.  But aside from adding some additional
high speed links into the net, they have not made any original
changes.  Everything they are doing has been done before, albeit not
under one roof.

Somehow they expect to get credit for the internet ("when you think
internet, think MCI") but currently they are just another service
provider.  I'll wait for something ORIGINAL to come out of MCI before
I "think MCI".

But hey, it's a start.  Maybe I'll even spend a little in the virtual
mall ...

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

From: [e-mail] (Alain Fontaine)
Subject: Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 09:26:00 +0100
Organization: Universite Catholique de Louvain


In article (Dans l'article) <[e-mail]>, mweiss@
interaccess.com (Mitch Weiss) wrote:

> In Europe, they are priced based on something called Metered Pulse.
> How does that work?  Is there a constant price per pulse?  Also, if I
> have a PBX, how does the SMDR represent this information?  Thanks!

In Belgium at least, the price per pulse is constant (FYI: BEF 5 + VAT
20.5%). The rate of the pulses depend on the called number, the time
of the day and sometimes the POM. The customer may ask to receive an
indication of the pulses. The exact format depends on the actual
hardware used.


AF

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

From: [e-mail] (Alain Fontaine)
Subject: Re: RS449 Info Request
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 09:27:46 +0100
Organization: Universite Catholique de Louvain


In article (Dans l'article) <[e-mail]>, dorab@twinsun.
com (Dorab Patel) wrote:

> Could someone please point me to information on RS449 or give me an
> idea of what it entails?

If you can find a copy of the Black Box catalogue, look to the last
pages.


AF


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But, lacking a Black Box catalog, could
*you* or someone please give a brief description?  Thanks.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Help With PBX Decision
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 20:50:18 GMT


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

> My company is about to purchase a new phone system.  Currently we are
> looking at PBXs and all this talk about open phone systems makes the
> decision much harder.  I am fairly new to the telephony stuff but here
> is what we want to do.

> Can anyone tell me where I can find more information on these topics?
> Books?  Magazines?  Internet sites?

I find Computer Telephony magazine very useful in describing the
options for TSAPI apps, CTI links, voice boards, ...

Their phone number is 212-691-1191.

Thanks,

Doug Varney  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bulo)
Subject: Re: PC-Based Voice Mail Systems
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Sector Informatica, Haagse HogeSchool, the NetherLands
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 10:23:25 GMT


Try Active Voice in Holland, it can be purchased by calling +31 70
3605775; this dealer has all the products of Active Voice.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are there any dealers for Active Voice
in the USA?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Soren Aalto)
Subject: Re: Flow Control and OSI Layers
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 15:35:08
Organization: Linkdata


In article <[e-mail]> Daniel Joha <[e-mail].
tu-berlin.d400.de> writes:

> At which OSI layer would one implement flow control?

> - Data Link Layer (2)
> - Transport Layer (4)

All of them.  Network layer as well, except for CLNP.

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
Subject: Re: Flow Control and OSI Layers
Date: 22 Nov 1994 13:31:49 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


Daniel Joha <[e-mail]> writes:

> How would one choose a specific protocol for the OSI Data Link LAyer

> I would appreciate any answer.

In most cases you don't get to "choose" a data link protocol.  Most of
the time that protocol is specifed along with the physical and network
layers.  But if you do get to select one, take a look at the advantages
cetain protocols provide and compare it to your requirements.  That's
the only real way to choose a protocol, does it match your requirements.

I don't mean to sound like I am making fun of the question, it's very
good.  It's just if you want some help, describe what your requirements are
and MANY people will give you their opinion about what is best in that
case.


Matt

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

Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ernie Holling)
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 09:55:28
Subject: Re: AT&T Will Carry Local Toll Calls in NPA 410
From: [e-mail] (Ernie Holling)


Pat,

What's wrong with a second PIC code to select a intraLATA carrier?

It beats the socks off dialing in 10xxx or soon to be 101xxxx or using
a dialer.

The LATA transport by IXCs will give all the LECs an argument for
their entry into InterLATA.  Between CAPS, intraLATA providers, and
second dialtone providers BellSouth is expecting a 40% income downturn.

Imagine the fun when second dial-tone providers aggressively take off.
Choice of dialtone provider, intra-lata provider, inter-lata provider.

Eventually, the LATA will have no meaning.


Ernie Holling     The InTech Group, Inc.   Telecommunications Consultants

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

From: [e-mail] (David Esan)
Subject: Re: FTS-2000 Database "A" and "B"
Date: 22 Nov 94 15:25:08 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY


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

> [e-mail] (Prime perf), writes:

>> 1. Is such a database available in the public domain?
>> 2. How does one become a subscriber?

> FTS-2000 is the internal long distance telephone network for U.S.
> federal government agencies.  The network is split among two carriers,
> the "A" carrier being AT&T and the "B" carrier being Sprint.

FTS-2000 by ATT is described, in excruiating detail, in ATT FCC #16,
available everywhere fine tariffs are sold.

Sprint refuses to tariff their rates.  They refuse to publish their
rates.  They refuse to release their rates.  They claim the rates are
a security issue.  I have yet to understand that.

Now that the elections are over, I am going to contact my congress
critters (who surprisingly were among the few re-elected) and find out
why SPRINT does not tariff FTS-2000 and why they consider it a security
issue, and explain how it affects our business of producing Telephone Cost
Management Systems.


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 1994 21:36:07 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Details About TAPI


> Does anybody know anything about how extensively TAPI (the new
> telephony API standard developed by Microsoft and Intel) has been used
> to date.

Because TAPI will ship with Windows 95, it has attracted enormous
interest The SDK has been downloaded by over 10,000 developers, making
it the most popular Windows SDK to date.

All the major switch vendors (Northern, AT&T, Siemens, Rolm, Octel..
many others) have written TAPI service providers for their hardware.
Also Microsoft has written a service provider for standard (Hayes
type) modems.  Sierra Semiconductor (modem chipset manufacturer) has
done their own since the Microsoft one is not very capable.  Rhetorex
demonstrated their SP at Comdex, many software vendors demonstrated
their applications running on IBM's Mwave chipset which has one of the
most advanced telephony feature sets of the general purpose (sound,
fax, data) DSP boards, and also one of the better TAPI service
providers (disclaimer: this provider was written by my company).

> What are its limitatations?

It is somewhat complicated, because it was written with input from
numerous hardware manufacturers, who each had a special feature they
wanted.  It has also been criticized because it ostensibly lacks
support for third party call control, but the original architect,
Herman d'Hooge of Intel claims that when people explain what they
intend to do with third party call control he can always show them a
way to do it in TAPI as it currently exists.  Even so, Microsoft
claims that third party call control is a priority for future
revisions of TAPI.

> Is it reliable?

Depends on the service provider, which normally has a lot more code in
it than the Windows system component, and which does most of the work.
Depends also on the hardware and system architecture.

> I believe there is also a telephony services API called TSAPI (a Novell/
> AT&T partnership).

Yes.  This is the platform of choice for network oriented
applications.  It does boast third party call control.  However in a
sense it does not compete with TAPI.  Because TAPI is a part of
Windows, most Windows hosted telephony applications (in other words
most applications) will be written to TAPI.  On the other hand, most
network hosted CTI (Computer Telephone Integration) systems will run
on Netware and have servers running TSAPI.  The key to coexistence is
a translation layer called TMAP to be provided free of charge by
Northern Telecom and Intel, which will let a TAPI application run on a
TSAPI host.  This way telephony software vendors won't have to bother
with writing two versions of their applications.

> Microsoft recommend using the Windows SDK in conjunction with the
> Telephony SDK for developing Windows telephony applications.  Has
> anybody any experience of developing applications in this manner, or
> would it be better to use something like Visual Basic/C++ instead of
> the Windows SDK?

If you use Visual Basic or C++ you still have to use the TAPI SDK,
unless you use something like Visual Voice from Stylus Innovations
which is a VBX control library.  Visual Voice sits on top of TAPI, so
even in this case you are using TAPI, just not the SDK.  It is
rumoured that Microsoft is also developing a VBX wrapper (or more
likely OCX) for TAPI.

> Is there a version of the Telephony SDK available for NT, or will
> there be? (The version I know about is for Windows 3.1.)

There will be a TAPI SDK for Windows NT.  In fact there may be one
already, but I have not installed the Windows NT SDK CD ROMS on my
system yet.  In February Toby Nixon, Microsoft's chief architect for
TAPI said that the NT TAPI SDK would be released some time in 1994.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: How Fast is T1-T3?
Date: 22 Nov 1994 05:09:22 GMT
Organization: INS Info Services, Des Moines, IA USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


How many Mbits/sec. are T1, T2, T3?  Please advise if there is an FAQ
somewhere, too -- I looked in news.answers and found none, but I'm sure
this is a commonly asked question.


TIA

David M. Chandler

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

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 94 20:22:17 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: FCC Chairman Speech


> You might have thought in years past that the FCC was not sufficiently
> sensitive to the exigencies of the duty to protect consumers from
> monopolies. I can assure you that the 1992 Cable Act has given us an
> exquisite sensitivity to the demands and difficulties of this task.

Does this mean that pretty soon I won't have to pay a "per outlet"
surcharge even though all the cable company line "sees" is my
distribution amplifier? They got away from "per line" charges in the
TELCO industry years ago but Cablevision Industries still charges me
two bucks extra every month.

Of course the $25/month for 40 channels is still cheaper than every
other alternative including the new RCA/GM/Hughes one so I'll just
keep on paying ... (just wish they would bring back Crusader Rabbit).


Warmly,

Padgett

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

Date: 21 Nov 94 19:33:09 EST
From: James E Bellaire <[e-mail]>
Subject: 1-800 ATT vs MCI Personally


    Five years ago I set up an MCI personal 800 number to my home.
When I sold my house and had the local line moved to my parents house,
as a outward dial modem line with local call forwarding set to my
parents number.  I have been using this setup to call home with the
bill being combined with my outward calls from that number.  All on
one nice LD bill with package discounts applied to all calls.  (MCI
also offered to add my cell phone to this too; shame I don't have
one.)

    My parents like the idea of having a personal 800 so they just
got an ATT TIES number.  (The representative offered to give them
1-800+ their home number which may explain where AT&T bases their
'reserved for a customer' 800 portability refusals.)  BUT, AT&T
refuses to combine this service with the home 1+ service under True
USA Savings.  Each bill is treated as an individual customer, so the
'spend $25, get 20% off' is NOT given if there are $24 in 1+ and $24
in 1-800 calls.

    My parents will not leave AT&T, so don't suggest it.  I have suggested
they threaten AT&T and explain the MCI option but they don't want to.  I would!
No way would I take a 10% discount on $48 in calls when the True USA Savings
claims 20%.  Hopefully AT&T will wake up and see the competition HAS a better
plan.
    BTW, my line is on metered service ($.04 per local call) and
my parents is unlimited service ($.00 per local call) both in the same
house served by GTE North.  I guess they don't mind since the lines
are billed in different names.


James E Bellaire


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Part of AT&T's billing curiosities come from
their use of local telcos do do much/most of their billing for them. The
local telcos have all sorts of different software in place and AT&T claims
an inability to get the local telcos to all do things the same way. Part
of what you are experiencing with trying to get the discount may have to
do with your local telco's (acting as billing/collection agent for AT&T)
software. They can't/won't do it, so AT&T cannot 'offer' it to you. That
used to happen a lot -- maybe still does -- with some of AT&T's plans for
international calling such as Reach Out World.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (davidp on BIX)
Subject: Comm Network in Bandung Indonesia
Date: 22 Nov 94 05:53:20 GMT
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


Besides local PDN: SKDP (Sistem Komunikasi Data Paket), are there any
other communication network with local access available in Bandung, Indonesia?


Michael (davidp@.BIX.com)

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

From: Daniel Ritsma <[e-mail]>
Subject: PBX For Dorms
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 02:45:18 -0500
Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences


I am the student representative in a committee that will decide whether
the dorms here need to have a PBX or not.

We have some 800 to 900 rooms divided over three dorms (two next to each
other; one across the street).

The problem is that I am not that knowledgable about PBXs and telecommunica-
tion in general.  I might have a fax in my room, and be a programmer, but
that is the closest I get to PBXs.

Please help me out here, what do I need to read to learn more about
this, what should I investigate as most students live out of state,
and therefore we would like to safe on long distance (I heard about
direct connections with long distance carriers, like T-1s).

Thanks for all your help.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, what are the dorms doing for telecom
now? Is each person on his own; either he gets a phone installed in the
room or he goes to a pay phone? Is the idea to have a not-for-profit PBX
maintained as part of the school or is there some telecom company making
a pitch to get the business at a profit from the students?  Who brought
up this idea?  Who got the bee in their bonnet to do it?  That would have
some bearing on a decision I might make if I were asked for one.

A PBX usually requires attendants; is this factored into the budget? Is
there a security problem (unauthorized people coming and going) where
the services of a front desk/PBX attendant might be helpful (thus, the
employee payroll cost could be partially charged to some other department
to help offset the expense, etc) ? ... Organizations don't usually get
a PBX just for the fun of it. You are talking big money and the need for
one or more relatively sophisticated people to install/program it and
train the operators. Tell us more about WHY this idea came up in the
first place and what real thought has gone into it. Don't concern yourself
for the moment with the trivial details of which carrier routings to use,
etc.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bulo)
Subject: Telecom Addresses in Germany
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Sector Informatica, Haagse HogeSchool, the NetherLands
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 10:30:02 GMT


Who can provide me telecom or telefunk adresses of entire Germany? I
can provide the information about Holland. Mail me, or call me at +31
652700310.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Exactly what do you mean by 'addresses
of entire Germany ...'?   Do you mean the administrative addresses of
the people who operate telecom there?  Are you looking for city codes
in Germany?  What exactly do you want?   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 14:07:36 +0000
From: Gerard CARAT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Urgent Request For Contact


I am urgently trying to contact the creator of Mosaic to invite him to
speak at a conference.  Would you know:

1/ His name;
2/ His email address;
3/ his phone number;
4/ If you don't, would you refer me to anyone who knows?

Thanks for your help.


Gerard CARAT <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 08:09:28 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sending Phone Calls Back to Hell


FYA:  From misc.consumers

 From: [e-mail] (Patrick Jost)
 Newsgroups: misc.consumers
 Subject: Sending Phone Calls Back to Hell

Usually, I tell people I'm not interested, hang up on them, or tell
them to send me something in writing.

For the persistent, I have two techniques that have served me well ...

1) Act really strange ... sample dialogue ...

    caller: This is Fred Smith from Ripoff Telesales!

    me: Fred! How are you! Have you seen Martha's new hairdo?

    caller: Huh?

    me: Fred Smith, right? We met at the Sheraton last week ...

    caller: No, that wasn't me ...

    me: Never mind that. Do you like to skydive?

    caller: er....

    me: I thought so! Meet me at the airport tomorrow at noon!

    caller: (click)

2) Be unreasonable in a rational way, be irrational in a reasonable way ...
   sample dialogue ...

    caller: We'll have basement inspectors in your area tomorrow!

    me: Great ... but there's just one thing ...

    caller: What?

    me: Tell the inspector he has to bring a turnip.

    caller: Huh?

    me: A turnip. I need one for dinner.

    caller: Why don't you go to the market?

    me: No, if you want to inspect, you bring a turnip!

    caller: (click)

or ...

    caller: We're selling vinyl siding ...

    me: Great, my house looks like crap!

    caller: We'll have Fred out next Monday.

    me: I have a question ...

    caller: Sure.

    me: This siding ... I'll need it with pickles ...

    caller: Pickles?

    me: Yes, you know, the green things.

    caller: Sir, this is vinyl siding ... it doesn't come with pickles!

    me: And why not?

    caller: Well, it just doesn't.

    me: Well, forget it then.

    caller: I'll get the supervisor.

    caller's boss: Can I help you?

    me: Yes, I want siding with pickles!

    caller's boss: Siding with pickles?!

    me: Very good, you can repeat...yes, siding with pickles.

    caller's boss: Sorry, we don't do that.

    me: Well, sounds like a problem ...


I started doing this about a year ago ... I hardly ever get any calls ...
I think I'm on the "nut" list, but I don't care.


PJ

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #425
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08746;
          22 Nov 94 20:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA12208; Tue, 22 Nov 94 14:30:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA12201; Tue, 22 Nov 94 14:30:04 CST
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 14:30:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #426

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 22 Nov 94 14:30:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 426

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecommunications Public Interest Newsletter-November 1994 ([e-mail])
    Bell Atlantic Cuts Rates in Pennsylvania (Phillip Dampier)
    New Caller ID Deluxe in Maryland (Phillip Dampier)
    Rochelle Caller IDd Interface Wanted (Marc Allard)
    Old TAS - How Did It Work? (Lester Hiraki)
    Bad Phone Lines (Greg Martin)
    The Blackbox Company Catalog is Now On Line (Doug Luce)
    Pilgrim Telephone's 1-800-COLLEKT (Jeffrey McKeough)

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 America
On Line. 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, 22 Nov 94 13:41:32
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telecommunications Public Interest Newsletter - November 1994


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This time around, I turn over the
podium to some points of view that are not -- ahem! -- quite the
same as my own. I don't find myself in agreement with very much
of what the UCC has to say; but I am presenting it here to provide
some thoughtful commentary and possibly stir up some discussion on
the topics raised. If you are interested in subscribing to this
newsletter, see the information given at the conclusion.   PAT]


Office of Communication                   United Church of Christ

        * TELECOMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC INTEREST NEWSLETTER *

November 1994                                     Cleveland, Ohio

HOW WILL THE GOP LANDSLIDE AFFECT THE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY?
MINORITY, WOMEN EMPLOYMENT IN BROADCASTING; CABLE STILL LOW ...
COMMERCE DEPARTMENT ANNOUNCES INQUIRY ON UNIVERSAL SERVICE ...
TPIN WELCOMES OUR READERS!

                   ------------------------------
HOW WILL THE GOP LANDSLIDE AFFECT THE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY?

The Republican sweep in the United States Senate and House of
Representatives may be bad news for citizens who want to use the
information superhighway as a tool for participatory democracy.

"The majority's anti-government philosophy is not likely to favor
a strong Federal role to reserve a lane on the information
superhighway for electronic democracy," says Beverly J. Chain,
director of the Office of Communication, United Church of Christ.
"There's a serious danger that citizen access to new information
services will be limited to interactive home shopping and pay-
per-view movie channels. That's simply not acceptable to the
public interest, and it's not healthy for democracy."

Guaranteed space for the nonprofit sector was a key provision in S.
1822, the information superhighway bill that Democrats and Republicans
supported in the 103rd Congress. Although the bill assured the right
of private corporations to develop the information superhighway for
profit, it also reserved a small "public lane" -- a total of five
percent of the new communication and information networks -- for
schools, libraries, hospitals, community organizations and other
noncommercial users.

But Republican Sen. Robert Dole of Kansas -- who will be Senate
Majority Leader in the 104th Congress -- denounced plans to
guarantee nonprofit access as "outlandish" and "unconstitutional."

Dole's non-negotiable demands killed S.  1822 a few weeks before the
election. "Like the airwaves, the information highway is a public
space to which both private companies and individual citizens should
have access," says Chain. "Key elements of the highway -- like the
Internet -- were developed by the Federal Government at public expense.
But the mood of the 104th Congress will probably be hostile to the
government regulation needed to assure universal access or reserved
space for nonprofits."

Andrew Blau of the Benton Foundation says that public-interest
and consumer groups should not expect any favors from a Republican-
dominated Congress.

Instead, says Blau, advocates of universal service and electronic
democracy should focus their energies on state governments.
Statehouses -- even those controlled by Republicans -- may be more
receptive than the new Congress to citizen access. Many states
already are funding programs to expand access to the Internet
through public libraries and schools.

Jamie Love of the Taxpayer Assets Project agrees that the public-
interest focus in 1995 should shift from Washington towards the
"grassroots." "We should define the big issues and take them
directly to citizens. We need to show how the emerging national
information infrastructure can empower them and change their
lives for the better. The potential already exists: People are
fascinated with the information superhighway, and it's rare to
find so much popular interest for any public-policy issue."

Love says that public-interest organizations will have to use the
Internet more creatively to get their message across. "It's the
only way we can afford to reach people around the country. You
can communicate with a lot of people very cheaply. It's a brand
new tool for organizing, and national groups are just beginning
to use it."

The next few years will be an opportunity for public-interest groups
to discover whether there really is a grassroots constituency "who
want power to become senders of information and not just receivers,
who will insist on using the information superhighway to participate
in debates and influence government, and therefore will refuse to be
forced by the new technology into the role of passive information
consumers," Love says.

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

MINORITY, WOMEN EMPLOYMENT IN BROADCASTING, CABLE STILL LOW

Employment of women and minorities in the broadcasting and cable
industries is still below national employment averages for the two
groups, says a report released Oct. 5 by the Federal Communications
Commission.

The report is a response to the 1992 Cable Act, which said that steps
to increase the number of women and minorities in broadcast and cable
management "advances the nation's policy favoring diversity in the
expression of views in the electronic media."

"Rigorous enforcement of equal employment opportunity rules and
regulations is required in order to effectively deter racial and
gender discrimination," Congress said.

The report argues that modest increases in female and minority
employment show that equal employment opportunity (EEO)
regulations are effective. But some public-interest groups
believe the report exposes weaknesses in EEO enforcement.

Tony Pharr of the Office of Communication, United Church of
Christ (UCC), says that the FCC's strategy -- to reward "efforts"
to hire more women and minorities rather than results -- "has been
a failure."  Since 1981, minority and female employment in the
broadcast industry has grown only by a few percentage points and
still lags behind employment of minorities in the national
economy, he says.

"EEO isn't working because the FCC is reluctant to impose financial
penalties on stations that violate the policies," Pharr says. "The FCC
has fined 46 stations -- a tiny fraction of the 13,000 regulated by
the commission. But financial forfeitures, when the FCC bothers to use
them, are effective: the small number of stations fined have acted
promptly to improve their EEO record."

The FCC report says that between 1986 and 1993, the number of women in
the broadcast industry grew from 37.4 to 39.6 percent -- an increase of
2.2 percent. Employment of women in broadcast management grew slowly
from 29.2 to 32.8 percent. During the same period, the percentage of
women employed nationwide increased from 44.5 to 45.6 percent.

The picture is similar for minorities. Minority percentage of
broadcast employment between 1986 and 1993 increased from 16 to 18.2
 -- also a gain of 2.2 percent. In broadcast management, the percentage
of minorities grew from 13.7 to 16.1 -- an increase of 2.4 percent. In
the general economy, the percentage increase for minorities during the
same period was from 20.5 to 22.6 -- a gain of 2.1 percent.

In the cable industry, the percentage of women increased from 40.4 to
41.6 percent -- a gain of 1.2 percent. Minority employment grew from
18.5 to 25.3 percent -- an increase of 6.8 percent.  Upper-management
employment grew from 24.5 to 30.9 percent for women and 15.4 to 20.1
percent for minorities.

EEO regulation of the broadcast industry dates back to 1968, when the
UCC Office of Communication petitioned the FCC to deny operating
licenses to stations that practiced racial or ethnic discrimination.
The FCC's adoption of equal employment policies for broadcasters later
that year was followed by rules protecting women and expansion of EEO
regulation to the cable industry.

The FCC report says that EEO policies should be broadened to
incorporate the telecommunications revolution that will "profoundly
change our modes of communication, the communications marketplace, and
the telecommunications workplace" by the year 2000. The Federal
Government may need to expand oversight of equal employment practices
to cover new types of telecommunication companies that do not neatly
fit the categories of "broadcasting" or "cable."

The report announces that the FCC will consult with the public "to
analyze whether we should redesign ... our EEO policies to reflect
the communications revolution and bring those policies into the 21st
Century."

In less than ten years, the report says, employment in the
telecommunications and information sector will grow by nearly one
million workers -- from 3.6 million to 4.5 million. The FCC licenses
2,300 cable firms and 13,000 radio and television stations.

The FCC says it will post the report later this month in the
commission's gopher at the Internet <fcc.gov> domain. To obtain a
printed copy for $20, call [phone] or write to:

Federal Communications Commission
2100 M Street, N.W., Suite 140
Washington, D.C. 20037

Ask for FCC No. 94-255, MM Docket 94-34.

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

COMMERCE ANNOUNCES INQUIRY ON UNIVERSAL SERVICE, OPEN ACCESS

Here's a chance for citizens to influence government policy on
universal access to the national information superhighway.

The Commerce Department is asking for comments before proposing new
universal access policies to Congress and the Executive Branch.

The deadline for comments is Dec. 14.

Since telephones first became an important means of communication in
the first decade of this century, the Federal Government has tried to
assure that affordable telephone service would be available to all
citizens.

But in a few years, telephones may no longer be the basic means of
communication in American households. New digital technologies will
combine computers, television programming, "voice mail" and
"electronic mail."

The UCC Office of Communication believes that new services should be
broadly available to the general public, not only to households in
wealthier neighborhoods. Among other issues, the Commerce Department
will consider whether services that benefit private businesses should
be charged a higher rate to reduce the cost of services provided to
ordinary citizens.

Public access to the information highway is not a luxury, the Commerce
Department says in its call for comments. "In 1991, U.S. companies for
the first time spent more money on computer and communications
equipment than on industrial, mining, farm and manufacturing machinery
 -- dramatic evidence of the nation's transition from the Industrial
Age to the Information Age.  [A]n individual's ability to acquire,
develop and sustain marketable job skills ... will depend on how
well he or she can access, analyze and assimilate information"
through new telecommunication technologies.

Two documents available from the Department of Commerce will
frame the issue for citizens who may wish to file their comments.
One is the "Notice of Inquiry; Request for Comments." The
second is "America Speaks Out," a summary of public comment in
five regional hearings organized by the department earlier this
year. Both are available from James McConnaughey or Cynthia Nila,
Office of Policy Analysis and Development, [phone].

Comments can be filed as Internet e-mail to the following
address:

<[e-mail]>.

Or they can be mailed to:

Office of Policy Analysis and Development
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
U.S. Department of Commerce
14th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Room 4725
Washington, D.C. 20230

Mailed comments should include seven print copies and one copy on
diskette in WordPerfect or any other DOS-compatible format.

The UCC Office of Communication plans to file comments along with
other public-interest groups. Churches interested in joining the UCC
comments should contact Anthony Pharr at this Internet address:

[e-mail]

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

TPIN WELCOMES OUR READERS!

This is the third issue of "TPIN: Telecommunications Public
Interest Newsletter," an information source for telecommunications
activists published by the Office of Communication, United Church of
Christ. The contents are not copyrighted and may be freely reproduced
in any form. Please be sure to credit the Office of Communication,
United Church of Christ. We encourage our readers to submit news to
our Internet address: <[e-mail]>.

                     Office of Communication
                     United Church of Christ

                     Director, Beverly Chain
                     Editor, Andrew G. Lang

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

Andrew G. Lang                  [phone]    office
United Church of Christ         [phone]      home
Office of Communication         [phone]       fax
700 Prospect Avenue East             ANDY LANG    EcuNet
Cleveland, Ohio 44115-1100       [e-mail]  Internet

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 12:59:12
Subject: Bell Atlantic Cuts Rates in Pennsylvania


      BELL ATLANTIC PROPOSES $5.9 MILLION RATE REDUCTION

PHILADELPHIA, PA -- Bell Atlantic plans to cut rates by $5.9 million
for residence and business customers in Pennsylvania, thanks to low
inflation rates and changes recently approved by the Public Utility
Commission (PUC) in the way the company is regulated.

"This is the first opportunity for us to demonstrate how freedom from
certain regulations can benefit our Pennsylvania customers," said
Daniel J. Whelan, Bell Atlantic vice president of regulatory and
governmental relations.  "Since the rate of inflation was low for the
past 12 months, we are passing along a savings to our customers," said
Whelan.  With PUC approval, customers can expect to see an adjustment
in their monthly bills beginning January 1, 1995.

Under the Bell Atlantic proposal filed today with the PUC, rates will
be decreased for Unlimited Usage packages for residence customers,
Touch Tone for business customers, and certain toll calls for both
residence and business customers.  The company proposed a five to ten
cent decrease, per month, in rates for Unlimited Usage packages for
residence customers; ten cents per line, per month, for Touch Tone
service for business customers; and one to six cent decreases in
certain toll call rates for residence and business customers.  The
reductions vary due to the time of day and the distance of each
telephone call.

The rate reductions result from a June 28, 1994 PUC order that changed
the way Bell Atlantic is regulated.  The order created a new
regulatory environment in Pennsylvania, in which the company's
revenues are determined by a price formula rather than traditional
rate base/rate of return regulation principles.

The adjustment in rates proposed by Bell Atlantic was calculated by
using a formula approved by the PUC.  The formula consists of an
inflation index called the Gross Domestic Product Price Index (GDP-PI)
as calculated by the U. S. Department of Commerce, that is reduced by
a productivity factor of 2.93%

Bell Atlantic Corporation, based in Philadelphia, is the parent of
companies which provide a full array of local exchange
telecommunications services in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware,
Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia and Washington, D.C.  The
corporation is at the forefront of developing a variety of new
products, including video, entertainment and information services.

Bell Atlantic also is the parent of one of the nation's largest
cellular carriers and has an ownership position in cellular properties
internationally.  In addition, Bell Atlantic owns an interest in
Telecom Corporation of New Zealand and is the parent of companies that
provide business systems services for customer-based information
technology throughout the U.S. and internationally.

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 13:02:37
Subject: New Caller ID Deluxe in Maryland


          BELL ATLANTIC LAUNCHES CALLER ID DELUXE IN MARYLAND
        Now you can see the phone number and name of the caller

BALTIMORE -- Bell Atlantic telephone customers in Maryland will soon
have the ability to see the name of a caller before answering the
telephone.

Beginning December 1, Bell Atlantic will offer throughout the state
Caller ID Deluxe, an enhanced version of Caller ID, that allows
customers to see the name as well as the telephone number of incoming
callers.  The offering follows a successful trial earlier this year in
Virginia.

Caller ID Deluxe displays the name as it appears on a customer's
telephone account, up to 15 characters, with the last name appearing
first.  For example, a call from the John Doe household might show
"Doe John."  The Doe's telephone number would also appear.  If no one
is home when the call comes in, the Doe's name and number could be
held in memory to be accessed later.

Bell Atlantic will continue to offer its standard Caller ID service,
which displays only the telephone number of the incoming call.  The
cost of that service is $6.50 a month.  Caller ID Deluxe costs just a
dollar more.

Existing Caller ID customers who wish to subscribe to Caller ID Deluxe
may need to upgrade their display units to accommodate alphabetical
messages.  The units may be purchased from a Bell Atlantic affiliate
or a host of other vendors.  To determine if a display unit is
compatible with Caller ID Deluxe, customers should call their Bell
Atlantic business office.

Those who do not want their name or phone number revealed on a Caller
ID device can elect, at no charge, to have that information blocked to
the called party.  To activate Per Call Blocking, customers dial *67
on a Touch-Tone phone or 1167 on a rotary phone prior to placing each
call.

Those who do not want to receive calls from people who have activated
Per Call Blocking may elect to use Anonymous Call Rejection.
Anonymous Call Rejection is available automatically to all Caller ID
and Caller ID Deluxe customers at no charge.  Other customers may
subscribe at a monthly charge of $3.

To activate Anonymous Call Rejection, Touch-Tone users dial *77 (1177
on rotary phones).  The service is deactivated by dialing *87 (1187
for rotary users).

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Allard)
Subject: Rochelle Caller-ID Interface Wanted
Date: 22 Nov 1994 16:56:47 GMT
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal


Does anyone have a Rochelle interface for six lines? I am looking for
a window based program to control this interface.


Thanks,

Marc Allard

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

Subject: Old TAS - How Did It Work?
From: [e-mail] (Lester Hiraki)
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 21:11:00 -0500
Organization: CRS Online  (Toronto, Ontario)


Back in the 70's my mother had a telephone answering _service_ for her
business.  Calls after normal hours were taken by this answering
service.  She did _not_ have to advise the TAS at the end of each day,
nor did she activate any call forwarding procedure.  When someone did
call after hours, you would hear the phone ring maybe two or three
times and then stop.  Presumably the answering service took the call.
I didn't try this myself, but I think you could go off-hook at this
point and listen to the answering service operator taking the message;
the TAS was like an extension phone on the same line.  Also, if my
mother went out for lunch, she could call the TAS and tell them to
take her calls in her absence.

Can anyone explain to me from a technical point of view how these
answering services worked?  (How did the call get to the TAS?  Was
there parallel wiring or was this some 70's software?  How did the TAS
activate receiving of calls for lunch? etc.)

As the TAS NXX was different from my mother's NXX, I gather that they
were served from different COs.

How did the TAS operator know to answer with "ABC Enterprises" or
whatever?  She must have answered for hundreds of firms.  (Was DID
sent to the TAS, etc?)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The old answering services were hooked
up to their clients with extension phones. Literally. The wire pair
which served your mother's business was bridged over to the answering
service as well. Consider it like an extension phone in your house; it
rings and you wait for the person downstairs to answer; after a few
rings you decide they are not going to answer so you take the call
instead.

At the old answering services, they had cord style switchboards just
like telephone operators. Each plug on the board was the termination
of a wire pair from a client, and little strips of paper over the plugs
told the name of the client so that the answering service operator could
use the proper answer phrase when picking up the call. In very small
answering services, instead of a switchboard there might instead be
dozens of actual telephones sitting around. For example when I had my
office downtown in the 1970's the building had an answering service for
tenants. It was a privately operated 'secretarial service', which was
a very common thing in those days. Almost all large office buildings
had an office for a public stenographer, a paid-by-the-page typist who
would do your correspondence and someone to answer 'your' phone. At
the one in my building, the woman had about a hundred wall telephones
mounted on one wall by her desk. To identify one ringing bell from
another -- and sometimes the place went crazy with half a dozen or
more ringing at one time -- each of the wall phones (none of them had
dials, they were all 'answer-only' instruments) had an associated
'bee-hive lamp', a little neon bulb in an oval plastic shell which
flashed with the ringing cadence. She'd hear a ring, look up at the
row after row of wall phones, see the one with the flashing bee-hive
lamp, pick it up with the appropriate answer phrase and take a message.

But the bigger services with hundreds of clients or even perhaps a
thousand clients used switchboards. The smaller answering services
generally only accepted clients on the same common central office
as themselves, although a central office might include many prefixes.
When you signed up with the service, the service put in an order with
telco to have your line in the CO bridged to one of (usually hundreds)
of pairs coming to their service. Your phone would ring, their phone
would ring (or your appearance on their board would illuminate or
whatever.) The bigger services accepted clients from other central
offices as well, since they had what were known as 'concentrators'
between central offices. It was the same idea with the service simply
being an 'off premise extension' to the phone at your business.

The two most common ways of regulating when the service answered and
when it did not answer (you took your own calls) were by instruction
to the service or a mechanical switch. With the former, you told the
service something like 'always answer after three rings' or 'answer
beginning at 5 PM and quit answering at 9 AM'. With the latter, a
switch in a little box was mounted usually by the front door of the
business. When you went out, you flipped the switch; when you came in
you flipped it the other way. This was a little more expensive since
it required an extra pair to your premises. Instead of your phone
being wired in parallel to the answering service at the central office
your phone came to you exclusively as always, then it went back out on
the second pair via the little switch on the wall and back to the CO
and onward to the answering service from there. When you used this 'wired
in series' method, the service never even 'saw' your calls at all when the
exclusion switch was on.  Without that switch, the service always saw your
calls; it was just by mutual agreement when they would or would not
respond to them. With the exclusion key method, if they saw your call
they answered it. If the service did answer and they heard you on the
line -- having answered as well -- they would always just hang up on
their end.

In downtown Chicago in the 1940-70 era, there were three major answering
services. Rogers Telephone Answering Service was the biggest, with
several additional features such as mobile service in your car. General
Telephone Company had a big service also but I don't remember much about
them. Annex Answering Service was the other biggie; they were in the
Chicago Temple Building and I used that one since they were the first
ones to have 'pager' service. In fact the other answering services that
wanted to offer paging to their clients had to broker it from Annex; all
the other answering services had a tie-line to Annex's transmitter and
tower which at the time was on the roof of the Chicago Temple Building,
23 stories in the air. Finally General Telephone also started a paging
service about 1975 or so; their tower was on top of the Lawson YMCA
building, a 23 story building on the near north side which is also
where the police station in that district had their tower at the time.

Answering *machines* were available in limited numbers beginning in
the middle 1960's, but they were big, bulky, heavy and very expensive.
I bought one in 1967 for a mere five hundred dollars. By comparison,
most answering services in those days charged $15-30 per montn with
some small fee per message taken.  The machines I used in my telephone
information service from 1972-1975 weighed about a hundred pounds each;
they belonged to telco (you either rented answering machines from telco
or you bought your own with 'protective couplers' attached). With
the increasing availability of answering machines and their decrease in
cost the answering services began to suffer financially. I remember
when, in the early 1970's if you even mentioned the phrase 'answering
machine' to the proprietor of a service, you got them very angry with
you. Add call forwarding and voicemail to the competition, and that
pretty much caused the answering services to close their doors.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Martin)
Subject: Bad Phone Lines
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 07:01:09
Organization: ETS


I just moved into my sister's old house and the phonelines are
terrible.  I'm trying to use VINES Dial-in to connect to my work LAN
and the software drops 70-90% of the packets.  How can I trouble shoot
the source of this trash?  I check the block in the basement and
there are five lines connected to it.  Three have phones connected that I
know of.  I loosened and tightened the screws to make sure the
connections are good.  The bottom line is that I want to eliminate the
internal lines as a source of noise before calling Bell Atlantic.


TIA,
Greg Martin                  Just a turtle trying to cross
[e-mail]             the Information Interstate


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I love your .signature, Greg. Yes,
a lot of us feel like we are going to get squashed in the traffic,
and probably some of us will.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Luce)
Subject: The Blackbox Company Catalog is Now Online
Date: 22 Nov 1994 08:20:43 -0500
Organization: Telerama Public Access Internet, Pittsburgh, PA USA


BlackBox is a local company for me.  While their prices are a bit on
the high side (sometimes QUITE a bit), their service is unmatched, and
they have a few "hard-to-find" items (like V.35 to RS-232 converters).

A couple of weeks back, I went to a meeting of the Pittsburgh High
Technology Council, where BlackBox was giving a presentation.  During
this, they announced that they were soon to be on the Internet.  And
here they are:

  http://www.blackbox.com

A full catalog appears to be there.


Doug Luce   Telerama Public Access Internet


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's really good news. I encourage
readers not familiar with the company to check out their catalog as
soon as possible. They are a great source of unusual parts.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 01:18:45 -0500
From: [e-mail] (jwm)
Subject: Pilgrim Telephone's 1-800-COLLEKT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst


Through the miracle of misdialing, I happened upon this number,
provided by Pilgrim Telephone.  Pilgrim is better known for its hot
chat lines.  The caller is greeted with "Thank you for choosing
Pilgrim Telephone," then asked for the number to be called and to
record their name.

I tested 1-800-COLLEKT out by calling myself on a line with call
waiting.  The called party hears the following message: "This is
Pilgrim Telephone.  You have a collect call from <name>.  This call
will cost $1 per minute (!)."  The recipient is instructed to press 1
to accept, or hang up to decline.

My take on their revealing the price is this:  Many people are very
likely to accept a collect call thinking it might be an emergency.
Having revealed the absurd fee for the call in advance, Pilgrim is
given some degree of protection against accepting parties who claim
they were unaware of the charges when they authorized the call.

One important note: The line on which I conducted the above
experiment, as well as another line I tried, are both listed in the
Billed Number Screening database.  Pilgrim completed both calls.  Not
being any sort of real telephone company, they have apparently chosen
not to operate like one.


Jeffrey McKeough    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #426
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20813;
          23 Nov 94 18:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06701; Wed, 23 Nov 94 11:24:49 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06692; Wed, 23 Nov 94 11:24:47 CST
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 94 11:24:47 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #427

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 23 Nov 94 11:25:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 427

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Telecom Digest/Usenet/InternetMCI Questions (Vinton G. Cerf)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Eric N. Florack)
    Re: MCI's Announcement ([e-mail])
    Interstate 976 (Stan Schwartz)
    Re: RS449 Info Request (Alain Fontaine)
    Re: How Fast is T1-T3? (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: How Fast is T1-T3? ([e-mail])
    Re: How Fast is T1-T3? (Wallace A. Ritchie)
    Re: Details About TAPI (Marc Saegesser)
    Re: Flow Control and OSI Layers (Ray Ward)
    Re: Rochester Telephone's Open Market Plan (Prakash Hariramani)
    Re: Rochester Telephone's Open Market Plan (Alan Boritz)
    Re: DSU/CSU For T1 ([e-mail])
    Re: Burned by a 900 Number (Alan Boritz)
    Re: PCS Slips Into GATT (Jill Arnson)

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 America
On Line. 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, 22 Nov 94 19:26 EST
From: Vinton G. Cerf <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecom Digest/Usenet/InternetMCI Questions


> Patrick asks:

> No mention was made of one substantial component of the Internet, that
> of Usenet and the several mailing lists or e-journals which circulate
> on the net.  Numerous questions were allowed and there was such a
> backlog of questions that many went unasked as the time allotted for
> the conference began to run short.

> I was in the queue for questions, but was not called upon. My question
> was to be addressed to Mr. Cerf and was simply this: what relationship
> will exist, if any, between 'Internet MCI' and the several information
> providers currently serving the net with e-journals such as this Digest
> (to name but one, but the list could go on to include for example the
> Airwaves Journal, the Computer Underground Digest, RISKS, and many others).

> As a long time participant in the net, Mr. Cerf will surely recall how
> ten years ago -- about the time I was first getting involved in Usenet
> and the Internet in 1983 -- the task of 'moderator' was quite an easy
> one.  As the oldest mailing list on the Internet, TELECOM Digest began
> in 1981 with about two dozen names on the mailing list, and enough
> traffic to publish an issue every two or three days. In large part
> because of the addition of commercial services to the net such as MCI
> and its mail service along with others like Compuserve and America
> OnLine, all the mailing lists have grown tremendously. This e-journal
> alone has a mailing list of several thousand entries, and others with
> more popular or general interest topics are larger still. If I were
> physically able to do so, I'd love to publish everything that comes
> in, but this is impossible unless I spend eight hours per day doing
> the Digest, and I am not yet quite ready to make that plunge.

> So my question to the conference, unasked, was to be what will happen
> with Usenet and the various newsgroups. Let's forget for a minute the
> task of defining the quality of the various 'news' groups and simply
> talk in general terms. Where do they fit into the scheme of Internet MCI
> as we move to the end of the decade and the millenium?  At the conference
> they talked extensively about the new shopping mall they are going to
> begin and some other aspects of the net, but not a single word about
> Usenet and its place in the scheme of things.

First, please call me Vint; everyone else does. Second, we believe
many customers will enjoy participating in various news groups and
intend to include a newsgroup capability in the general internetMCI
framework. A newsgroup reader is included in the NetScape product
through which many of the InternetMCI services will be offered.

I wish we had gotten to your question, Patrick, as I am sure many
others would have liked to hear the answer, too.


Vint


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks very much for taking the time
in your busy day to respond here. I am humbled that you took notice
of my concerns. It is good news to hear that 'news' won't be forgotten
about, and that your customers will be able to participate as they
choose to do so. Despite the several technical problems this past
year interfacing between the mailing lists and MCI Mail -- problems
sufficiently difficult at times, and problems particularly obnoxious
to some moderators, i.e. Lauren Weinstein who chose to drop his
distribution to subscribers at mcimail.com -- I continued to 'hang
in' and do what I could since it seemed to me, like yourself, that
a tremendous potential existed; a huge number of reader/participants
were there to be serviced and that only good would come to all
concerned when things were finally put together. Based on Monday's
announcement, we seem to be getting very near to that point.

But this simply raises anew the questions implied in my response
Monday afternoon; questions implied if not asked directly: what is
to become of we moderator/editor/e-journal publishers in the future?
None of us expect to become rich and famous; all of us do what we
do as a labor of love more than anything else, but it has gotten to
the point that this labor of love has become a lot more labor than
any of us from years ago might have reasonably anticipated. If you
want to have even a halfway decent publication these days -- and not
just a collection of reader comments tossed together and redistributed --
much time needs to be spent on editing, researching some details at
least, and making things look nice. Our workload has increased as a
direct result of the several commercial connections to the Internet.
I've enough *good* material coming in I could publish this Digest
several times per day, day in and day out, and still not run out of
material.

Please give favorable consideration to my request -- and I hope I
speak in behalf of other moderator/editors on the net who by default
will become information providers in your new service -- that MCI
enter some contractual relationship, however humble it might be,
with us. You say 'a news reader will be provided' ... and that is
all well and good ... I for one praise your decision to include
news ... but if you intend to include the Digests, I trust you
understand the additional workload you will be giving us, and that
MCI will recognize our contributions in some way or another.

Again, my sincere thanks for taking the time to participate today,
and my best wishes for a happy Thanksgiving Day.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 06:22:22 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement


Re: All the wailing about the commercialization of INternet:

I find it interesting that so many should be suspicious of commercial
ventires who want to gather what profits they can from anything.
That's simply smart business.  But why should such be a problem for
the average Internet user? I can't help but wonder if some of what we
read isn't driven by folks who considered the net more or less their
private domain, and are now seeing it invaded by a somewhat lower
class of computer user. Of course, some of it, too, is being driven by
the fact that bashing the private sector is a quite popular thing to
do on the Internet ... which has been funded by the government for so
long.

Yes, the net stmbled along for quite a while on government funds, and
little else. But our national budget makes it clear we can no longer
afford such largess. If the net is to continue to exist, let alone
grow, an infusion of private sector money, and direction is needed.

Is MCI's involvement by itself the answer? I personally tend to think
not, though I doubt it'll hurt.

Like Padgett, I'd like to see a fixed price structure. (Having a good
solid local dial-up access in real time here in Rochester, would help,
as well. Are you listening, MCI? Rotten Tel? NYtel?)

Just a passing thought: One of the fastest ways that cable concerns
can get a foot up on the local telco's for local dialtone customers
would be to offer Internet connectivity for a small premium on the
monthly bill ... listening, Time-Warner?


 /E


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Eric, I don't have a thing against
commercial participation in the net. I think its great to see organizations
like MCI and others put the money into it to keep it going and improve
it. My main concern is that those of us who have over the years helped
to make the net what it is today not be forgotten.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kronos)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 02:02:04 GMT


John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> ... Home shopping? ... Notice the reduction in size of CompuServe's
> "Electronic Shopping Mall" compared to several years ago. Or perhaps
> you have noticed what a rousing success Prodigy has become.
> ... it is unclear just exactly how MCI intends to cash in
> on the Internet usage by the thousands upon thousands of sites already
> live on the net without benefit of MCI's pay-for-play commercialization.

It's easy to see how MCI might be able to turn a profit where its
ersatz bretheren in on-line shopping can't: no overhead!  MCI has an
enormous advantage in that it will have no network expense (that was
the stated reason for Prodigy's abandonment of flat-rate pricing years
ago).  Everyone else (Compuserv, etc) has to pay the same exorbitant
traffic fees to the telcos that we all do.  And with MCI's ratepayers
subsidizing everything else from their payroll to their advertising,
they're sure to turn a profit.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How can you say they won't have any
network expense?  I'm sure they'll have to build more network at
a substantial cost. Did you assume *their* vendors and suppliers
were going to give them things for free?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stan Schwartz)
Subject: Interstate 976
Date: 22 Nov 1994 23:33:37 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


I saw a blurb a few Digests ago about the local telcos and IXC's
blocking interstate (or inter-LATA) access to 976 numbers.  Just FYI,
the 976 numbers in the NY Metro LATA (212,516,718,914) are still
accessable through AT&T direct dial or calling card.  I've checked the
NY Lotto numbers while in Colorado by calling 1-800-321-0288 and
making an AT&T calling card call to 212-976-1234.


Stan


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's interesting ... we here in
Illinois Bell territory sure cannot connect with 976 anywhere else.
And don't even consider using 10222 ... a recorded intercept says
MCI does not complete calls to 976 at this time either.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alain Fontaine)
Subject: Re: RS449 Info Request
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 11:02:18 +0100
Organization: Universite Catholique de Louvain


In article (Dans l'article) <[e-mail]>,

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But, lacking a Black Box catalog, could
> *you* or someone please give a brief description?  Thanks.   PAT]

RS-449, like RS-232, is a standard for a serial datacom interface,
specifying, sometimes by reference to other standards, the mechanical,
electrical, functional and procedural aspects.

Mechanical: a full implementation needs two connectors, one with 37
pins and one with 9 pins. The small connector carries the secondary
channel signals (it is optional). This part of the spec is similar to
ISO4902.  More pins are needed than with RS-232 because some signals
are differential and need two pins, and also because there are more
signals.

Electrical: two types of electrical signals are used. Some are
single-ended, and follow RS-423A (similar to ITU V.10/X.27), and some
are differential, following RS-422A (similar to ITU V.11/X.26).
Differential signalling makes RS-449 capable to operate at higher data
rates and on longer distances than RS-232.

Functional: RS-449 defines many signals (more than RS-232) for a
fuller control of the DCE by the DTE. The signal names and mnenomics
are different, with the intent to better describe their functions.

Procedural: raising this signal does this action, and that signal is raised
to indicate that the action has been taken, etc etc ...

Summary (signals with A/B indication are differential):

Pin   RS-449                     RS-232
      signal                     equivalent

 1    Shield                     Protective Ground
 2    Signaling Rate Indicator   Data Signal Rate Selector DCE
 3
 4    Send Data A                Transmitted Data
 5    Send Timing A              Transmitter Signal Element Timing DCE
 6    Receive Data A             Receive Data
 7    Request To Send A          Request To Send
 8    Receive Timing A           Receiver Signal Element Timing DCE
 9    Clear To Send A            Clear To Send
10    Local Loopback             Local Loopback
11    Data Mode A                Data Set Ready
12    Terminal Ready A           Data Terminal Ready
13    Receiver Ready A           Received Line Signal Detector
14    Remote Loopback            Remote Loopback
15    Incoming Call              Ring Indicator
16    Signaling Rate Selector    Data Signal Rate Selector DTE
17    Terminal Timing A          Transmitter Signal Element Timing DTE
18    Test Mode                  Test Indicator
19    Signal Ground              Signal Ground / Common Return
20    Receive Common             -
21
22    Send Data B                -
23    Send Timing B              -
24    Receive Data B             -
25    Request To Send B          -
26    Receive Timing B           -
27    Clear To Send B            -
28    Terminal In Service        -
29    Data Mode B                -
30    Terminal Ready B           -
31    Receiver Ready B           -
32    Select Standby             -
33    Signal Quality             Signal Quality Detector
34    New Signal                 -
35    Terminal Timing B          -
36    Standby Indicator          -
37    Send Common                -

 1    Shield                     Shield
 2    Secondary Receiver Ready   Secondary Received Line Signal Detector
 3    Secondary Send Data        Secondary Transmitted Data
 4    Secondary Receive Data     Secondary Receive Data
 5    Signal Ground              Signal Ground / Common Return
 6    Receive Common             -
 7    Secondary Request To Send  Secondary Request To Send
 8    Secondary Clear To Send    Secondary Clear To Send
 9    Send Common                -


/AF

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

Date: Wed, 23 Nov 94 06:16:00 GMT
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation
Subject: Re: How Fast is T1-T3?


In {TELECOM Digest} Volume 14 #425, David M. Chandler <[e-mail].
net> wrote (in part):

> How many Mbits/sec. are T1, T2, T3?

According to Bellcore/AT&T-derived tables I have:

T1 =  DS1  =   1 x DS1 =   1.544 Mb/s  =   24 DS0 +      8 kb/s  "framing  "
T1A = DS1C =   2 x DS1 =   3.152 Mb/s  =   48 DS0 +     80 kb/s  "         "
T2  = DS2  =   4 x DS1 =   6.312 Mb/s  =   96 DS0 +    168 kb/s  "  and    "
T3  = DS3  =  28 x DS1 =  44.736 Mb/s  =  672 DS0 +  1.728 Mb/s  "         "
T4  = DS4  = 168 x DS1 = 274.176 Mb/s  = 4032 DS0 + 16.128 Mb/s  "signaling"


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike H3004)
Subject: Re: How Fast is T1-T3?
Date: 22 Nov 1994 20:50:13 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


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

> How many Mbits/sec. are T1, T2, T3?  Please advise if there is an FAQ
> somewhere, too -- I looked in news.answers and found none, but I'm sure
> this is a commonly asked question.

A T1 is 1.54 megabytes per second.  A T3 is 24 T1s.  I don't know if
there is an application for using a T3 without a mux to break it down
to a T1 level.  I don't think that there is a T2.  There is also a
step up from a T3 which is approx. 144 Meg per second (a lot of
'muxing' goin' on).

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

From: [e-mail] (Wallace A. Ritchie)
Subject: Re: How Fast is T1-T3?
Date: 23 Nov 1994 08:37:56 GMT


[e-mail] wrote:

> How many Mbits/sec. are T1, T2, T3?  Please advise if there is an FAQ
> somewhere, too -- I looked in news.answers and found none, but I'm sure
> this is a commonly asked question.

T1, T2, etc refer to transmission systems and DS1, DS2, etc refer to
the digital signals.

The DS1 signal is 1.544 Mb/s and transports 24 DS0 channels.

The DS2 signal is 6.312 Mb/s and transports 4 independantly timed DS1
signals.

The DS3 signal is 44.736 Mb/s and transports 7 independantly timed DS2
signals.

The DS4 signal is 274.176 Mb/s and transports 6 independantly timed DS3
signals.

DS2 signals are relatively rare and most often exists internal to
DS1/DS3 multiplexing equipment.

DS4 signals are relatively rare outside of AT&T having been replaced by FO
equipment which usually multiplexes N x DS3 signals.


W. A. Ritchie   Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc Saegesser)
Subject: Re: Details About TAPI
Date: 22 Nov 1994 18:07:37 -0600
Organization: Another MCSNet Subscriber


[e-mail] wrote:

>> Is there a version of the Telephony SDK available for NT, or will
>> there be? (The version I know about is for Windows 3.1.)

> There will be a TAPI SDK for Windows NT.  In fact there may be one
> already, but I have not installed the Windows NT SDK CD ROMS on my
> system yet.  In February Toby Nixon, Microsoft's chief architect for
> TAPI said that the NT TAPI SDK would be released some time in 1994.

The response I got from [e-mail] on this exact question
is that it is currently in the works.  They wouldn't say when it would
be released but that the announcement would be made in their Compuserve
forum.


Marc Saegesser    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 21:57:54 -0600
From: Ray Ward <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Flow Control and OSI Layers
Organization: Texas Metronet, Internet for the Individual  214-705-2901 (info)


In article <[e-mail]>, Daniel Joha <johaciie@w229zrz.
zrz.tu-berlin.d400.de> wrote:

> At which OSI layer would one implement flow control?

> - Data Link Layer (2)
> - Transport Layer (4)

Yes. ;-)

Flow controls may be implemented at any level, from Application Layer
on down, wherever there is the possibility of a sender sending faster
than a receiver can receive.  (Or more, in the case of Layer 1)


[e-mail]

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

From: Prakash Hariramani <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Rochester Telephone's Open Market Plan
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 22:22:21 -0500
Organization: Information Networking Institute Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


I am looking for an official copy of Rochester Telephone's Open Market
Plan, i.e. the one approved by the P.U.C.  I would appreciate it if
any one could tell me how to get one.


Thanks,

Prakash Hariramani   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Rochester Tel Open Market Plan
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 94 20:12:27 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (Phillip Dampier) writes:

> More than a dozen companies want to be players in Rochester -- many on
> a test case basis.  Rochester Telephone reported that even the German
> PTT is watching the Rochester market closely.

This form of competition was inevitable, in light of the terrible
service provided by Rochester Tel. over the years.  They're one of the
nastiest and most incompetent service organizations with which I've
ever dealt (even GTE, and that take *quite* a bit of effort <g>).

Do you recall if there ever was a followup to the discovery in the
early 80's that Rochester Tel.  had allegedly funneled revenues from
regulated activities, to their unregulated related company, Rotelcom?


[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike H3004)
Subject: Re: DSU/CSU For T1
Date: 22 Nov 1994 20:50:36 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bud Couch)
writes:

>> I'm installing a T1 line and I ordered a 56k DSU/CSU for the line.
>> I'm now concerned, can I use this DSU/CSU with this line or do I need

> A better product than the Kentrox is the ADTRAN T1 CSU/DSU.  Call
> ADTRAN sales at [phone].  Excellent equipment.

Is this T1 fiber or copper?  Where I work, we have found that using a
DSU/CSU on a fiber T1 creates problems.

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

Subject: Re: Burned by a 900 Number
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 94 06:24:35 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (Jim Ancona) writes:

TELECOM Digest Editor had earlier noted:

>> That's not to say *you are guilty*; just that 99
>> percent of the time, the 'innocent victim' is in fact the person who
>> used the service or else some member of their family or circle of
>> friends, etc. Because wire-pair interception from outside the customer's
>> premises is relatively rare compared to the number of times the customer
>> is simply being fraudulent, I trust you'll understand the IP's position
>> when they take a hard line toward those who -- in their phraseology --
>> are 'in denial' ...

> This may be, but I think billing errors (or even fraud on the part of
> providers) may be more common than you think, Pat. Over the summer I
> received a bill for several calls to a 900 sex line on a date/time-of-day
> when no one was home at my house. I called NE Tel (oops, NYNEX), and
> they removed the charges (which were a lot less than Joe's), and added
> a 900 block. Well, last month I was billed for another call to a 900
> Keno line. This time, I called the provider and had the charge removed.
> Since the block was in place, the second occurrence, at least, could
> not have been a case of wiretapping. I've had the phone number for
> years, so it's not a case of delayed billing.  I'd be interested to
> hear others experiences.

Billing errors are VERY common, regardless of service-providers'
claims to the contrary.  Any time I see complaints about spurious
telesleaze billing, I'm reminded of the case of a retired Air Force
Major who was victimized by Southern Bell about eight years ago in
South Carolina.  He caught Southern Bell and AT&T with their
respective pants down, when he filed a PSC complaint, and Senator
Strom Thurmond intervened, after they failed to resolve a fraudulent
billing problem that went on for over a year, with and without
blocking in place (this case involved local and long-distance 976-
calls to area codes all over the country).

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ...
> So one thing you might want to consider is that sometimes telco employees
> like to get off on sex phone calls also ... grin ...   PAT]

That's what we suspected, after we analyzed the calling patterns and
consulted with our colleagues who had worked in central offices.  In
light of the fact that Southern Bell's response was a set-up of
another member of the victim's family for criminal charges, harassment
by local law enforcement officials, and perjury by their chief of
security (at the first trial for alleged theft-of-service), it
appeared that someone was trying VERY hard to discourage the victim
from finding the REAL source of the phone calls.


[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It sounds to me like this is a story
that needs to be told in detail ... how about it?  Please send the
full thing, all the lurid details, etc. I think Digest readers would
relish it ... I'm sure I would.  Thanks.     PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 16:59:17 -0700
From: Jill Arnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PCS Slips Into GATT
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> you write:

> The 103rd Congress is scheduled to return to Washington the week after
> Thanksgiving for a special lame-duck vote on GATT.

    The ORIGINAL date for the GATTvote was two months ago.
Republicans threatened to vote it down unless the vote was put off
until after the elections.  The original vote was NOT for a lame duck
congress.

> The Senate Commerce Committee held hearings Monday on the GATT funding
> mechanism that could give billion-dollar discounts to three companies
> for new wireless telephone licenses.  Both current chair, Senator
> Ernest Hollings (D-South Carolina), and the probable new chair,
> Senator Larry Pressler (R-South Dakota), have criticized the
> administration for slipping the provision into GATT implementing
> legislation.

    What was neglected to be mentioned was the originally the FCC
awarded the Pioneer Preference awards for FREE.  This was way before
they found out that they were worth anything.  On top of that, when
they DID decide to make the companies pay for it was way out of line
with the payment plan that was given to the other bidders.  The FCC
wants the GATT bill to pass or they feel that they will find themselves
in some ugly lawsuits.


jill c arnson    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #427
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07129;
          28 Nov 94 2:57 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA12332; Sun, 27 Nov 94 22:52:04 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA12325; Sun, 27 Nov 94 22:52:00 CST
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 94 22:52:00 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #428

TELECOM Digest     Sun, 27 Nov 94 22:52:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 428

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Hacker Learns Intelligence Secrets (RISKS via Monty Solomon)
    Rockwell Introduces CDPD/Cellular/Data/FAX Modem Chipset (Monty Solomon)
    Problem With 911 Service in Philadelphia (Paul Robinson)
    GATT, Omnipoint, and Herbert Allen (Dale Wharton)
    1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Dispute (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Another Cold War Barrier Falls: Direct Dial to Cuba (Paul Robinson)
    Direct Dial to Cuba From USA Resumed (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    DMS-100 vs 5ESS (Marty Brenneis)
    December Consumer Reports Article About Cordless Phones (Sheldon Hoenig)
    Buffalo NY Crack Down on Pay Phones (Howard Wharton)
    Strange Centrex Intercept (Mark W. Earle)
    Question from "Ask Marilyn" (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 America
On Line. 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, 27 Nov 1994 16:52:03 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hacker Learns Intelligence Secrets


FYI.  Excerpt from RISKS DIGEST 16.58, 26 Nov 1994.

  Date: Thu, 24 Nov 94 09:09:38 GMT
  From: Mathew Lodge <[e-mail]>
  Subject: Hacker learns intelligence secrets

The London "Independent" newspaper of 24-Nov-94 leads with a story
that a "hacker" gained access to a sensitive database of
telecommunications information at British Telecommunications (BT), the
UK's largest (and ex-state owned) carrier. The story was also carried
by all the major television and radio news programmes.

Tim Kelsey, author of the Independent story, reveals that details such
as telephone numbers and addresses for secret installations of the
Ministry of Defence, MI5 (the British intelligence agency responsible
for the UK) and MI6 (like MI5, but handles non-UK affairs).

"Thousands of pages of highly confidential BT records were sent across
the Internet to a young Scottish journalist, Steve Fleming, in July".
Mr Fleming received the information after making a news posting asking
for information on BT and hacking. The informant remained anonymous --
details of how this was achieved are not given.

The hacker also gave details to Mr Fleming about how he too could
access the information. He applied through an employment agency for a
short-term contract at BT as a database designer, clearly stating on
his CV that he was a freelance journalist. He got the job, and was
able to gain access to the information because passwords were just
left lying around the office.

BT is still going through a major staff restructuring programme, and
as a result has a large number of temporary (contract) staff. These
staff need passwords to the system to legitimately carry out their
jobs, but because of the constant flow of people, the passwords are
often written down.

Mr. Fleming learned, among other things,

  *  The location of MI6's training centre ("spy school"), located in a
     non-descript building next to a pub in south London
  *  Information about the bunker in Wiltshire where the Government would go
     in the event of nuclear war
  *  Details of telephone installations at Buckingham Palace and 10 Downing
     Street [the Prime Minister's home], including personal lines to John
     and Norma Major.

The system itself, the "Customer Services System", was designed and
implemented by an American company, Cincinnati Bell. It is supposed to
have internal mechanisms to prevent hacking (!)

So, what are the risks (briefly!)

        1) Allowing temporary staff passwords that allow almost any data to
        be retrieved. It sounds as if the security levels of the database
        were either non-existent, or compromised.
        2) Keeping sensitive information in the same database as
        non-sensitive information.
        3) The age-old chestnut of the uses of passwords.

A BT spokesman, speaking on the "Today" programme on BBC Radio 4
confirmed that a "top level" investigation had been launched, but
refused to confirm or deny that the hack had taken place.

Mathew Lodge, Software Engineer, Schlumberger Technologies, Ferndown,
Dorset, UK, BH21 7PP    [e-mail] (+44) (0)202 893535 x404

   [The *Independent* items are in their entirety (28K) in
   RISKS-16.58BT, courtesy of Brian Randell.  PGN]

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 00:14:05 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Rockwell Introduces CDPD/Cellular/Data/FAX Modem Chipset


FYI.  From comp.newprod

 From: [e-mail] (Stephen [kiwin] PALM)
 Newsgroups: comp.newprod
 Subject: Rockwell Introduces CDPD/Cellular/Data/FAX Modem Chipset
 Date: 8 Nov 1994 17:29:29 -0500
 Organization: Rockwell
 Reply-To: [e-mail]

Rockwell Telecommunications today introduced the newest member of its
wireless products family: the RC32ACC, a cellular digital packet data
(CDPD), V.32bis data modem chipset.  The small form factor RC32ACC
targets the rapidly increasing wireless data marketplace, providing
OEMs with a low-power, cost-effective mobile communications solution.

The two-device RC32ACC forms the engine of a CDPD system, incorporating
CDPD packet switched technology to provide a secure and reliable
digital data link for wireless communications.  The device set offers
a range of connectivity options for mobile computing applications,
enabling end-users to communicate using landline, cellular or digital
packet radio technology.

CDPD, which uses the same cellular network for both voice and data
messages, delivers a broad range of wireless data services to mobile
end-users -- including email and facsimile capability -- in a single
device.  Features include:

Low-cost service -- CDPD sends packets of data in the gaps between
normal voice calls at speeds of up to 19.2 Kbps, invisibly switching
packets from one channel to another to maximize channel capacity
without compromising normal voice service.  End-user costs are lowered
because there is no continuous online cost, transmission times are
shorter and users pay only for delivered packets.

Reliability & Security -- By providing connectionless service with
automatic roaming and hand off, CDPD ensures that no calls are
dropped.  Additional data protection is provided by encrypted
transmission.

Low-cost start-up -- CDPD builds on the strengths of the existing
cellular phone service, allowing manufacturers to provide CDPD systems
to end-users by upgrading their existing AMPs cellular phone systems.
CDPD also utilizes Internet Protocol to send messages across the
network, which guarantees the availability of a wide range of
applications software.

The RC32ACC provides V.32bis data/V.17 fax dial-up modem capability,
and supports Cellular Direct Connection to selected cellular
telephones.  Cellular Switch Cellular can also be used as an
alternative to CDPD packet switch data in areas with no CDPD coverage,
or to provide a cost-effective option for sending long files or faxes.

The RC32ACC is pin-compatible with Rockwell's wireline RC144ACL
data/fax modem, allowing OEMs an easy upgrade path for existing modem
implementations.  The modem supports 14.4 Kbps data and 14.4 Kbps
send/receive Group 3 facsimile, with downward compatibility from 7200
to 75 bps for data and 7200 to 2400 bps for facsimile transmission.
The device set also supports AT commands, V.42, MNP 2-4 error
correction and V.42bis and MNP 5 data compression, EIA/TIA 578 Class 1
fax standard.

The RC32ACC is housed in a two-device PLCC (plastic leaded chip
carrier) or a low-profile, three-device PQFP (plastic quad flat pack).

Samples of the RC32ACC are available December 1994; volume production
begins in January 1995.  Pricing for 10K quantities is $60.  For more
information or technical documentation, call [phone] or fax
[phone].

Inquiries to:
    Digital Communications Division
    4311 Jamboree Rd., M/S 501-300
    Newport Beach, CA  92658-8902
Editorial contacts:
  Julie Seymour
    [phone]
    Internet: [e-mail]
  Eileen Algaze
    [phone]
    Internet: [e-mail]


Stephen [kiwin] Palm                        TEL (Voice mail): [phone]
Rockwell - Digital Communications Division                   COMNET: 930-1564
Japan Engineering Design Center                          FAX: [phone]
  [e-mail]   [e-mail]   [e-mail]   NIHON::PALM

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 15:20:24 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Problem With 911 Service in Philadelphia
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


CNN reported that more than a dozen calls went into the Philadelphia
911 center to report a riot and fighting.  Reports from callers ranged
from civil to frantic as they called to report a serious incident
occurring, while the 911 dispatch operators ranged from uninterested
to downright rude.

A sample of one of the calls reported was something like this:

   Caller:   We need the police at 7100 Ridgeway, there's a group of
             people in a fight...
   Dispatch: (Bored) Is that all?
   Caller:   (Incredulous) IS THAT ALL?   There's a caravan of cars
             coming down here to participate in a damn riot, that's all!

Another caller returned a call reporting a fight verging on a riot in
their area. The 911 dispatcher replied that she didn't know where
they were.

It's that response that I wonder about; aren't most large city 911
systems equipped with name and ID for calls that come in?  Smaller
cities, I can understand may simply use 911 as a substitute for
dialing their emergency number and may not have name/phone lookup
capability.

What got people upset was that, despite over a dozen 911 calls, police
still took 40 minutes to show up, at which point they called the
coroner to handle one dead 14-year-old, killed by some other teenagers
armed with nothing stronger than baseball bats.  (So much for the
claims that gun control would make the streets safer.)

You can have all the high technology in the world and all the latest
equipment, but if you either don't have the people on hand, or the
people you have don't care, the technology can make things worse.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]
Reports on Security Problems: To Subscribe write [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is possible for some reason the system
failed to pass the name and address on the call in particular. That will
happen occassionally due to bugs in the system. If that happened, then
the 911 dispatcher has no choice but to ask the caller his name and where
he is located. As you point out, gun control has never solved anything
and never will. All it does is takes legitimate instruments of self-defense
away from people who wish to obey the law (and turn their guns in or
don't purchase any new ones). Those people who do not wish to obey the
law -- by definition, a large percentage of gun owners -- will continue
to have guns. And to be truthful with you Paul, I am probably as bored
by these accounts as was the dispatcher in question. The violence in
Chicago has gotten so bad where children and young people are concerned
that it has lost most of its shock value. The police here just treat
that sort of thing as routine now days. We are up to 852 murders so far
this year here in Chicago alone, most of which were random and without any
relationship between the victim and the murderer; just 'drive by shootings'
they call them. It looks like another record breaking year for violence here
in the USA, the land of the free and the home of the brave, and criminally
insane.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 14:47:25 EST
From: Dale Wharton <[e-mail]>
Subject: GATT, Omnipoint, and Herbert Allen


This item appeared on Usenet.

Dale Wharton  [e-mail]  M O N T R E A L  Te souviens-tu?

8<------------------------- couper ici ------------------------>8

                            From: Jim Cook <[e-mail]>
GATT-WTO  PROVISIONS        Date: 22 Nov 1994 17:58:19 GMT

The GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) agreement is 22,000
pages long.  Before it can become U.S. law, implementing legislation
must be approved by the Congress.

The GATT implementing legislation is contained in a two-volume, 4004
page document that was distributed only 48 hours prior to the
scheduled vote in the House of Representatives.

The day before the scheduled vote, however, the Administration did not
have enough votes in the House to pass the bill.  Thus, the House
voted to delay action until November 29, 1994 -- that is, after the
election.

Although the fast-track procedures allow 20 hours of debate on GATT,
House Ways and Means Chairman Sam Gibbons of Florida requested that
the debate be curtailed.  Gibbons prevailed -- the GATT debate will be
limited to only four hours.  Opponents, therefore, will have only 120
minutes to make their case against this agreement on November 29.

A number of nongermane and objectionable features exist in the GATT
legislation, including massive federal giveaways to politically
influential corporations and individuals.  Specifically,

  Section 742: Taxpayer Identification Numbers Required at
  Birth.

The title says it all.  The GATT legislation requires that U.S.
parents report the birth of their children to the Internal Revenue
Service and get an IRA taxpayer number.  This is totally nongermane
social legislation hidden away in an international trade agreement.

  Section 745: Modification of Authority to Set Terms and
  Conditions for Savings Bonds

This GATT provision eliminates guaranteed minimum returns on U.S.
savings bonds, a provision enacted during the Reagan Administration to
provide a financial safety net for small investors.  Section 745
destroys that financial safety net.  By paying millions of Americans
less on their U.S. savings bonds, the Clinton Administration will
raise $122 million over five years.  These moneys will be used to pay
for the tariff reductions -- that is, tax cuts -- for foreign
companies exporting into the U.S. market.

  Section 769: Special Funding Rules for Certain Plans

The appropriate title for this GATT provision is "The TWA
Airlines-Carl Icahn Relief Act."  TWA airlines pension plan is
underfunded by more than $1 billion.  One of the conditions imposed on
investor Carl Icahn when he sold TWA to its employees was that he put
$200 million into the company pension fund as a loan.  If the company
were able to meet the federal pension standards and fully fund the
plan over a period of time, Icahn would get back his money.  If not,
the money would stay in the plan.  Section 769 of GATT legislation
exempts the TWA plan from complying with the federal pension
regulations that are imposed on other underfunded plans.  As a
consequence of Section 769, Icahn is more likely to recapture his $200
million, and American taxpayers -- who guarantee the plan -- are more
likely to be forced to pay instead.

  Section 801: Pioneer Preferences

The provision issues next-generation cellular telephone licenses for
Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., and New York City.  Under Section 801,
the federal government will sell the right to use the public airwaves
to three companies for $2 billion less than what taxpayers would
receive at an open auction.  The principal beneficiaries of this
federal giveaway are politically well connected.

The Washington Post Company gets the license for the Washington-Baltimore
area.  The value of the federal giveaway to them is $218 million.

Cox Enterprises gets the license for Los Angeles.  The value of
its federal windfall is $726 million.

The license to provide cellular telephone service to New York City
will go to a private company in Denver, Colorado with fewer than 100
employees, Omnipoint Communications. One of the principal investors in
Omnipoint is Allen and Company, a New York investment banking firm
that is headed by Herbert A. Allen.  USA Today calls Allen the "dean
of entertainment-industry investment bankers." He is also one of the
leading fundraisers for the Democratic Party. Allen is a confidant of
former Vice President Walter Mondale, who currently serves as U.S.
Ambassador to Japan.  Allen is a particularly strong supporter of Bob
Kerrey (D-NE) and Bill Bradley (D-NJ). In the 1994 election cycle,
Allen has provided substantial political contributions to Charles
Robb, Joseph Lieberman, Patrick Moynihan, John Glenn, Charlie Rose,
and Patrick Leahy.

Under Section 801 of the GATT legislation, Omnipoint's federal
windfall is worth $1,049 million.

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 94 21:34:20 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute


About 1200 Bell Atlantic employees in Pennsylvania had a little less
to give thanks for this year. On Wednesday, the day before Thanksgiving,
telco suspended them from duty without pay and sent them home.

Their offense was that they were, as a group in solidarity, wearing
t-shirts that depicted themselves as 'road kill' on the information
superhighway. The workers were demonstrating in protest regards Bell
Atlantic's recent decision to considerably downsize its work force and
rely on lower paid workers to install networking technology for the
company's future 'full service network' that would deliver both video
and phone services.

It is not known when the suspensions will be rescinded and the workers
permitted to return to their jobs. I do not yet have any word on
whether or not the union will grieve in their behalf or file charges
against the telco for committing an unfair labor practice.

Bell Atlantic employees and customers/other insiders who have more
details on this are invited to respond to the Digest.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 15:13:09 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Another Cold War Barrier Falls: Direct Dial to Cuba
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


According to reports on CNN, As of 5:00pm Friday last, for the first
time in over 30 years, people in the United States will now be able to
make direct dialed calls via AT&T (and MCI) to Cuba from the United
States.

I believe the impetus for this was from the #4 Long Distance Company,
Wiltel; the head of the company is either Cuban or has close personal
friends who are, and decided to make the effort to allow direct dial
calls between Cuba and the United States.

Reports are calls will be about $1.50 a minute.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]
Reports on Security Problems: To Subscribe write [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 94 21:43:47 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Direct Dial to Cuba From USA Resumed


For the first time in about thirty years, residents in the United
States are now able to dial direct to Cuba. AT&T and MCI made a joint
announcement at the end of last week saying that service had been
resumed as of 5:00 PM Eastern Standard Time on Friday, November 25.

For as long as most of you can remember, AT&T routed all calls to Cuba
manually via Italy. This has now changed. As readers have occassion to
test the new circuits, reports to the Digest will be welcome.


Patrick Townson

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 94 07:51:38 PST
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Marty Brenneis)
From: [e-mail] (Marty Brenneis)
Subject: DMS-100 vs 5ESS


Recently Pac*Bell has been on a program of swapping switches around in
California so they can concentrate all of the DMS100s in the northern
part of the state and all of the 5ESSs in the southern part. I think
this makes a lot of sense for reasons that have been discussed here in
the past.

My question to the neterati reading this is this; is there a chart
showing the differences in the software between these two machines. I
have found several differences on my own that the tech folks at
Pac*Bell seemed to not know about.

Here are some things I have found since I got cut to a DMS-100:

1. Any line that is not POTS can flash and get stutter dial tone; this
parks the first connection and will ring you back if you hangup. If
there are no features provisioned onto that line that use the flash
function, then dialing anything gets reorder. I found this because my
first line has call forwarding and return call on it, but not three
way calling.

2. THE SPEED DIAL KILLER: When dialing a feature code before a call,
i.e. call forwarding or cancel call waiting, you must pause for the
stutter dialtone to stop after the code before dialing the number. On
the 1ESS I was on I could send 72#258XXXX as one string, on the
DMS-100 I must send 72#P258XXXX. I had to reprogram a friend's modem
setup to add a comma to the dialing string after the 70# to kill the
call waiting.

Are there other differences? Does anybody at Pac*Bell have a clue?  It
would be really cool if Pac*Bell had a list like this available for
the customers who ask to help clear up problems.


Marty "The Droid" Brenneis   [e-mail]
Industrial Magician  462.700 KAE7616  KC6YYP

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 16:07:58 EST
From: Sheldon W. Hoenig <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: December Consumer Reports Article About Cordless Phones


An article about cordless telephones appears in the December, 1994
issue of {Consumer Reports} on page 802.  I will list the names of the
900-MHZ models in the order of CR's estimate of performance and
convience.  Two range figures are provided: clear and usable.  The
Rating table defines "clear" as "how far a conversation could be
carried on before the phone's background noise began to intrude.  The
'usable' figure is the farthest distance which the phone's ringer,
dialing, and speech functions still worked."

Uniden Exp 9100 (digital)          1400/1600
AT&T 9100 (digital)                 900/1200
Tropez 900DL (digital)              900/1200
Sony SPP-ER1                        300/ 700
Cobra CP-900 (digital)              600/1100
Radio Shack ET-900                  700/1100

The prices range from $200 to $300.  Cordless phones in the 46/49 MHZ
range are also rated.

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

From: [e-mail] (Howard Wharton)
Subject: Buffalo NY Crack Down on Pay Phones
Organization: University at Buffalo
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 22:06:00 GMT


Pay Tel Corp. has been found guilty of violating a city ordinance
against the installation of unlicensed pay telephones on city
rights-of-ways.

    The company had illegally installed pay phones at four locations
on the city's east side. Sentencing is set for December 7.

   Earlier this year, the city's Commom Council passed a resolution
barring any installation of unlicensed payphones in response to
concerns that the phones had become makeshift offices for drug
dealers.

  Any unlicensed pay phone found will be removed by the city's
Department of Public Works (DPW) and the owners will be prosecuted
in Housing Court.


Howard S. Wharton   Fire Safety Technician
Office of Environmental Health and Safety
State University of New York at Buffalo


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, so Buffalo has a bunch of idiots
on its city council just like Chicago, eh?  Its good to know my former
town is not unique when it comes to doing ignorant things regarding
telephones. In some parts of town here -- really, vast large sections
of Chicago -- where very poor people live in decrepit housing, they
can't afford telephone service so they rely on the public phones. The
city council's answer: pull all those pay phones out; let the people
walk six blocks down the street to the next pay phone, who cares. The
important thing to remember is the War on Drugs.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 94 20:43:00 EST
From: Mark W. Earle <[e-mail]>
Subject: Strange Centrex Intercept


Recently, I was puzzled when a modem failed to answer. Checking
further, when dialing the number, an intercept came on:

[SIT] We're sorry, that number cannot be dialed from your station. Please
check with the attendant for assistance.

Strange, thinks I; so I check with my attendant. No problems.  Later,
I get the _same_ intercept from my residence phone, which is many
miles from the campus office. Hmmmm.

It turns out, after a few days of checking, that the building where
the modem is located is served by centrex. They had inadvertently
turned off the extension to the modem. However, "everyone" agrees I
should have gotten a "no longer in service" type of announcement. The
problem is very reproducable, and being checked on.

This is Southwestern Bell in Texas. Anyhow, once they turned that
phone back on, I could get through as usual to my modem.

Note: the modem and computer are part of a real time tide data
collection system. It is located at an aquarium and provides real time
information to visitors on a terminal. The modem allows remote data
retrieval and updates to the software as needed.


Mark Earle   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: All that happened was when the line
was turned off by accident, whoever turned if off also managed to
put the intercept pointer to the wrong announcement. There should be
both an internal announcement (for people served by the centrex) and
an external announcement for outsiders.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (K. M. Peterson)
Subject: Question from "Ask Marilyn"
Date: 27 Nov 1994 18:11:39 GMT
Organization: KMPeterson/Boston


 From {Parade Magazine}, 27 November 1994.  The excerpt is from a
question and answer column written by Marilyn Vos Savant, "who is
listed in 'The Guinness Book of World Records' Hall of Fame for
'Highest IQ'".

Q:  My husband and I agree that it would take a genius to figure out
which long-distance phone company offers the most savings.  Can you
help?
                                       --Mollie L., Vero Beach, Fla.

A:  I'm sorry to disappoint you, Mollie, but there are some questions
that are just too darned tough!

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

K. M. Peterson    email: [e-mail]
phone: [phone]  voice  [phone] fax

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #428
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa13536;
          28 Nov 94 15:58 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20325; Mon, 28 Nov 94 09:58:09 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20317; Mon, 28 Nov 94 09:58:06 CST
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 94 09:58:06 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #429

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 28 Nov 94 09:58:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 429

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    What Information Should Bell Atlantic Put on Internet? (J. Modrowsky)
    High Performance Computing - GAO Report (Keith Bonney)
    Internet Security Monthly ([e-mail])
    Record-O-Fone Mystery (Alan Boritz)
    Voice Mail Question (John Pearce)
    Unlimited Long Distance For $295.00/Month (David G. Cantor)
    Reverse Directory for Pay Phone Numbers? ([e-mail])
    Canadian V&H and Rate Tables (Sean O'Connor)
    Yellow Pages on a CDROM? ([e-mail])
    911, CNID, was Re: Problem With 911 Service in Philadelphia (D. Burstein)
    Tehran Changes Emergency Number (TELECOM Digest Editor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (John Modrowsky)
Subject: What Information Should Bell Atlantic Put on Internet?
Date: 27 Nov 1994 09:07:05 -0500
Organization: Center for Networked Multimedia


Internet Users,

    Bell Atlantic would like to use the Internet to better inform its
customers.  We would appreciate a few minutes of your time to help us
in this effort.  If interested, please email your responses for the
following five questions to [e-mail]

1) How interested would you be in getting information from Bell
Atlantic over the Internet? (On a scale from 1 to 5, highest being 5)

2) Specifically, what kinds of information would you like to get from
Bell Atlantic?

3) Where should this information be posted?

4) How long you have been using the Internet?

5) Do you use the Internet for business reasons, for personal reasons
or both?


Thanks,

John Modrowsky


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For starters, how about some forthright
information on the thousand plus employees who were punitively suspended
last week from their duties as a result of their exercise of their
freedom of speech?  Why don't you start by posting some factual details
about that incident on the Internet. This group would be a good place
to put Bell Atlantic's version of what happened. For those who missed
the preliminary report Sunday evening here, on Wednesday, the day before
Thanksgiving, over a thousand Bell Atlantic employees were suspended
for speaking out about the telco's alleged plans to leave them at the
side of the road as the information superhighway is being built. Some
comment from the company on why a mass suspension like this was needed,
on the day before Thanksgiving, would be of interest.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (General Accounting Office)
Subject: High Performance Computing - GAO Report
Date: 28 Nov 1994 08:22:52 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


The U.S. General Accounting Office, the Congressional watchdog agency,
has recently released the following report:

             *** ASCII Full Text Access and Ordering Info Follows ***

TITLE:    High Performance Computing and Communications: New Program Direction
          Would Benefit from a More Focused Effort
          RPTNO: AIMD-95-6                   DOCUMENT DATE: 11/04/94

BACKGROUND:

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the status of the High
Performance Computing and Communications (HPCC) program, focusing on: (1)
the effectiveness of the program's management structure in setting goals
and measuring progress; and (2) how extensively private industry has been
involved in program planning and execution.

FINDINGS:

GAO found that: (1) the Administration is broadening the HPCC role in
developing new technology in support of the National Information
Infrastructure (NII); (2) industry and academic researchers believe
that specific technology areas will need to be targeted to develop
support for NII; (3) a more focused HPCC management approach could
help ensure that program goals are met; (4) a detailed technical
agenda will be needed to identify HPCC priority areas and commit
resources to them; (5) inconsistent budget information has made
tracking HPCC investments difficult, since participating agencies have
diverse methods of identifying and categorizing their HPCC spending;
(6) industry participation in HPCC is more important now that the
Administration has linked HPCC to the planned NII; and (7) industries
that could capitalize on HPCC technologies to create new products and
services for NII should be better represented among HPCC program
participants.

***************************************************************

This report is available both in print and electronically.

***************** ELECTRONIC ORDER INFORMATION ****************

To access the reports as FULL TEXT ASCII electronic files from the
Government Printing Office (GPO) BBS, follow these steps:

1) TELNET to <federal.bbs.gpo.gov> and designate "port 3001"
   or dial 202-512-1387;

(***NOTE*** Depending on how your system accesses the TELNET feature, you may
need to TELNET to this address:

                           <federal.bbs.gpo.gov 3001>
                                        ^^^^^
and hit return a few times after connecting.  You should receive a
greeting screen.  If you receive a prompt for "PASSWORD", something is
wrong.  Either retry or contact GPO at the phone number below.)

2) Log in or register on system (type: "NEW" if first time user);

3) >From the Main Menu, select "Congressional Information - B";

4) Select "GAO - #4";

5) Select file name:

High Performance Computing and Communications: AI95006.TXT

*****************************************************************

Any questions on using the GPO system should be referred to GPO at
202-512-1530.  Please do NOT use this e-mail address for questions
about the GPO system or for ordering reports.

GPO charges a fee to download each file.  Exact costs are listed on
the GPO system.

****************************************************************

              PRINTED COPY ORDER INFORMATION

Printed copies via U.S. Mail are also available by calling
202-512-6000 (TDD number is 301-413-0006), sending a FAX to
301-258-4066, or by writing to:

        P.O. Box 6015, Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015.

Please include the report number and complete postal mailing
information in your request.

Copies may also be picked up at the GAO headquarters at:

        700 - 4th St., NW, Washington, DC.

We are NOT able to accept electronic orders for printed documents at
this time.

The first printed copy is FREE of charge.  Additional copies are
$2.00.

****************************************************************

                      ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON GAO REPORTS

GAO's Daily and Monthly Listing of Reports:

The U.S. General Accounting Office, Congress' Watchdog agency, now has
available a daily electronic posting of released reports.  The "GAO
Daybook" is the daily listing of released GAO reports. The "Reports
and Testimonies Issued in Month/Year", includes abstracts of the items
issued that month, arranged by subject.

To access both the "GAO Daybook" and "Reports and Testimonies
Issued in Month/Year" on the INTERNET simply:

- use the TELNET feature on your system,
- access the site <cap.gwu.edu>,
- log on as "guest" (password: "visitor" - must use LOWER case), and
- type "go gao" at the main menu

(*NOTE* The CapAccess system has been experiencing extremely heavy
loads and may not accept guest logins.  We apologize for any
inconvenience and suggest trying at a later time.)

Ordering information is included in the GAO menu.  Any questions or
comments can be sent to <[e-mail]>.  Please do NOT use this
address for ordering reports.

***************************************************************

                   GAO'S DAYBOOK VIA FAX

GAO's Daybook is available by FAX, also.  The automated voice menu
number is:

                         301-258-4097

You can use a touch tone telephone to access a menu system to request
GAO Daybooks - via FAX - 24 hours a day. You only need your FAX number
and a touch tone telephone for this service.  There is no charge for
this service.

***************************************************************

                       GAO ANNUAL INDEX

GAO Abstracts and Index of Reports and Testimony: Fiscal Year 1993
(GAO/OIMC-94-3A and GAO/OIMC-94-3B)

A two volume set, this valuable reference publication provides an
excellent overview of the U.S. General Accounting Office's (GAO) work
during FY 1993.  The first volume (219 pages) summarizes more than
1,000 reports issued between October 1992 and September 1993.  The
second volume (418 pages) contains comprehensive indexes that allow
the reader to quickly locate documents of interest.

To order a FREE copy, see PRINTED COPY ORDER INFORMATION section above.

***************************************************************

                     SUBSCRIPTION:
     GAO'S MONTHLY CATALOG OF REPORTS & TESTIMONY

Each month, GAO issues a catalog titled "Reports and Testimonies
Issued in Month/Year".  This catalog includes abstracts of the items
issued that month, arranged by subject.  The catalog also includes an
order form and order information.

Subject areas include:

Health, Defense, Environment, Transportation, Education, International Affairs,
Budget, Tax, and many other subject areas involving federal spending.

For a FREE mail subscription to GAO's "Reports and Testimonies Issued
in Month/Year", please send a request via one of the modes described
above in the PRINTED COPY ORDER INFORMATION section.

***************************************************************

               GAO REPORTS CATALOGED ON OCLC

All current GAO reports are cataloged on the OCLC system.

***************************************************************

                   SUGGESTIONS/COMMENTS

GAO is very interested in your feedback on products and services.  We
welcome any suggestions you might have to help improve our services.
Because of the volume of inquiries, we are unable to directly respond
to each suggestion.

However, we can assure you that all comments posted will be read and
passed on to the appropriate GAO office.

Please forward comments and suggestions to:

                  <[e-mail]>

Thank you.

***************************************************************

                      BACKGROUND

The U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) is a nonpartisan agency
within the legislative branch of government.  GAO conducts audits,
surveys, investigations, and evaluations of federal programs.  This
work is either self initiated or done at the request of congressional
committees or members.  GAO's findings and recommendations are
published as reports to congressional members or delivered as
testimony to congressional committees.

*************************************************************

Thank You.

Keith Bonney
Information Services Center
Office of Information Management and Communications
U.S. General Accounting Office
Room 6530
Washington, DC  20548

<[e-mail]>*
202-512-4448 VOICE*
202-512-3373 FAX*

*Note: Please do NOT use this address/number for ordering GAO reports.

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

From: [e-mail] (NSO account)
Subject: Internet Security Monthly
Date: 28 Nov 1994 09:26:46 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of California, Davis


NETWORK NEWS RELEASE
USA - Washington DC

Network Security Observations, leading international research journal
on network security, announces the birth of its sister publication
INTERNET SECURITY MONTHLY.

Internet Security Monthly will serve as the International News
Bulletin for the Security, Safety and Protection of Datacommunications
on the Information Superhighway.  Internet Security Monthly s contents
will be specially composed for the new users of datanetworks linked to
the Internet, as international service providers Prodigy, America
Online, Delphi, PSI Link, CompuServe, and many others.

A mix of news briefs on incidents, accidents and potholes on the
datahighway, and a carefully selected set of essentials of immediate
importance to the network user, fill Internet Security Monthly.
Professional reporting on and senior network experience in network
system security warrant so. Focussing on firewalls, unix security,
cryptography, privacy, legislation, and contributions to the
international debates on how to protect your connections, the security
of the net, integrity of data/messages, risks, and many more vital
topics are covered.

Internet Security Monthly will be published in the English language
and Worldwide distributed.  As with Network Security Observations, the
definitive source for complete technical and research information on
computer network security, Internet Security Monthly is a
not-for-profit initiative, hence it features no advertisement.

Special sponsorship has made it possible to keep the subscription
rates low: including airmail delivery an international subscription
costs US $ 120, in the United States US $ 95.

> The introduction rate (valid until December 31, 1994) for
international subscribers is US $ 100, in the United States US $ 75.

> If you order a subscription to Internet Security Monthly and Network
Security Observations at thesame time, before December 31, 1994 and
pay with your American Express card, you will be enrolled free of
charge for the 1995 personal membership of the Internet Society.

> Overwhelming Worldwide interest prevents to honor requests for
trial-orders,samples and review copies.

For details and subscription ordering contact:

Network Security Observations/Internet Security Monthly
Suite 400, 1825 I (eye) Street NW, Washington DC 20006
United States
Tel.: [phone]   Fax [phone]
Internet:   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Record-O-Fone Mystery
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 94 20:41:22 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


I inherited a Record-O-Fone model 100 answering machine, originally
manufactured by Robosonics.  For readers not as old as Pat Townson ;),
this was the only "approved" answering machine that the BOC's used if
you wanted to rent one from the "phone company."  Ancient key system
fans would be impressed to know this was one of the few machines that
came complete with A1 and A leads.

I ditched one about 15 years ago (wow, I just made myself feel old
<g>), and I thought I remembered that it was a stand-alone unit.
However it does have a two-letter code and an 9-conductor socket in
the rear for an accessory.  I needed an extra machine, but I seem to
have some difficulty getting it to answer the phone.

Exclusion is jumpered-out, and I've got visual confirmation that the
ring signal is getting into the machine (both neon lamps are flashing
with the incoming rings, both with and without yellow and green
jumpered).  Only problem now is that regardless of the setting of the
code switch (Accum, no code, or zero), it still won't answer.  I get
the feeling that I'm missing something rather obvious.  Could anyone
else remember what it takes to make this machine work?  Thanks in
advance.


[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Pearce)
Subject: Voice Mail Question
Date: 28 Nov 1994 08:15:47 -0700
Organization: Rocky Mountain Internet Inc


My employer is interested in installing a voice mail system and I am
on a committee of three people to make the decision.  Our office
currently has a Toshiba electronic key system installed.  Our current
CPE vendor is proposing to the Strata DK96 digital switch and Applied
Voice Technology's CallXpress 3 Model 6 (configured for 4 ports, 16
hours).

The system will have 30 to 40 mailboxes (10 or so are guest
mailboxes).  There are 12 incoming CO lines and there will be one line
for direct access to the voice mail system.  Incoming lines are
answered by an attendant and management wants this to continue.
Incoming calls will go to voice mail only if unanswered for five
rings.  The office is on a four-day week schedule but there are lots
of people who still call on Fridays and leave messages.

Is anyone familiar with the AVT CallXpress product and willing to
comment on it?  Based on the brief outline above, is CallXpress a good
choice?  Will four ports and sixteen hours be adequate?

Replies to either the list or privately will be appreciated.


John Pearce   [e-mail]

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Unlimited Long Distance For $295.00/Month
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 94 18:23:28 -0800
From: David G. Cantor <[e-mail]>


I recently received a postcard making the above offer for calls to
anywhere in the USA from Economy Telephone.  The company's address is
6829 Convey Court, San Diego, CA 92111.

I don't make enough calls to be interested, but is this offer
realistic?  If so, how does it work?


David G. Cantor        Department of Mathematics
[e-mail]    University of California
            Los Angeles, CA 90024


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I know nothing about the company mentioned,
but this sounds a lot like the way outbound WATS lines were billed by
telco in the early days of WATS (Wide Area Telephone Service). You paid
a set fee for all the long distance you wanted. Then telco also had
plans where you paid so much per hour of usage, with as many calls as you
could squeeze into the hour. The idea on the unlimited plan was they
were gambling you would not use that much; you were hoping you would. At
the present rate of $6-7 per hour for long distance (anyone can get it
at that rate if they shop around, and maybe even a little less), you
would be getting 40-50 hours of long distance per month which is quite a
lot for most people and small businesses. I remember how, under the old
plans from telco where we paid by the hour we were told to NOT place
calls to 555-1212 over the WATS lines since they were charged against
our hourly allotments. Since 555-1212 was free in those days, we were
to dial calls to interstate directory assistance from our 'regular'
lines so that the minute or two used would not be counted against our
WATS allotment.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (JimM8021)
Subject: Reverse Directory for Pay Phone Numbers?
Date: 26 Nov 1994 22:45:41 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


I have been receiving annoyance calls from various pay phones in my
area (Brevard County, Florida).  I have Southern Bell/AT&T automatic number
identification which displays the calling number.  I would like to
locate the pay phone by street address and city.  Does anyone know of
a "reverse directory" (such as the Donnelly City Directory) that lists
addresses for pay phone numbers?  Are there other techniques (besides
calling the number back and hoping someone else answers and gives the
location) to identify the location of a pay phone given its number?

Please reply to: [e-mail].


Thanks in advance!

Jim


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Most of the printed directories such
as R.L. Polk, Haines and Donnelly skip payphone numbers unless they
are semi-public payphones listed in a business name. On the other
hand, the Name and Address Service offered by Ameritech *does* have
quite a few public payphones listed with their address. You could
call back and ask where the phone is located, but what good would
that do after the party was gone?  Since you can get Caller-ID you
can also probably get Call Screening, and here is how I would use
it in your application:

When you get such a call, add the number to your call screening list.
That will prevent calls from that number from ever reaching your
phone again. Now you say the person simply will call from another
phone, and this is probably true. Well, you add that phone to the
list also, and you just keep adding numbers for Call Screening from
each phone where he calls. Call Screening only allows for ten
numbers here, but that will be a good start. Most annoyance callers
(in fact most people) are pretty provincial. That is, they follow a
more or less identical route in their travels each day. There are
probably various payphones along the route of travel of this person
and unless he is soon willing to go out of his way to find a payphone
you have not yet screened, he will soon grow tired of his game and
just quit calling. The first time he goes to one of his favorite
spots to call you and finds the phone won't put the call through, you
are going to catch him off guard. He'll try a couple of others and
yes, he will get through but soon enough those phones won't put his
call through either. Unless he is fairly intelligent about this, he
will get confused by it all and possibly assume he is being traced.

If you use up all ten of your Call Screening spots, then take the
oldest one off the list and put a new one in its place. He is going
to have to be very dedicated in going around looking for a payphone
(and remember, most people pretty much just stick to their same route
of travel each day) that allows his call to get through. So much the
better if there are a bank of payphones at one place on his route where
he always is calling from. You find out the number of all five or
six phones there and screen them. That will put a real kink in his
modus operandi. He will soon get tired of going around to find payphones
just to get his call through to you, and he won't know that you have
probably already removed from screening (for lack of space) some of
his earlier spots. He'll *assume* those phones still are off limits
also. <grin> ...  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sean O'Connor)
Subject: Canadian V&H and Rate Tables
Organization: York University
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 1994 16:15:41 -0500


Can anyone recommend a good supplier of Canadian rate tables. I am
interested in having on-line access for one time queries as well as
quarterly updates to load into a relational database telemanagement
system.


Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Yellow Pages on a CDROM?
Date: 28 Nov 1994 14:34:02 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Wichita State University


Hi all,

Are the yellow pages of a telephone directory available on a CDROM? If so
where could I find one?


Thanks for your time.

[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: 911, CNID, was Re: Problem With 911 Service in Philadelphia
Date: 28 Nov 1994 00:36:20 -0500


Pat and all others: Amzaingly enough, most cities do -NOT- have CNID
or other identifiers hooked up to their 911 system. Problem is simply
cost and the required rewiring of a -lot- of old equipment.

If you have a single phone line, then getting CNID or, even better, calling
name and address, is relatively trivial. However, if you have fifty phone
lines coming in via a 1A2 key system, and you're attempting to interconnect
the information directly into the dispatch computer, well, the City Fathers
cringe at the budget impact.

Of course, if you call American Express on their 800 number, your entire
purchase history flashes on the answerer's screen before you even say
hello. But that's Corporate America, where things like efficiency and
good customer service (or at least repeat customers...) matter.

There are some minor technical distinctions between standard CNID and the
Enhanced 911 (E-911) systems being marketed by teh telcos (mostly having
to do with elimination of the "privacy" flag). Ten years ago an E-911
system really did require a major commitment, but since CNID is now a
standard and tariffed offering nationwide (except in California...) the
adaptations are minor.

NYC is scheduled to get E-911 in about another two years and we're paying
a $0.35/month/line surcharge for it. The City Government reached into
this user fee (don't you -dare- call it a tax) to not only bring calling
info to the PSAP, but also to rebuild the entire center and put computer
terminals in the police cars, etc.

Philly, at this time, does not get caller info to the center; all they
have is the approximate area of the City the call came from. No idea on
when or if upgrades are expected.


Take care,

Danny   [e-mail] (or [e-mail])


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We had 911 with the number only for many
years beginning in the middle 1970's. We have had the enhanced version
for a few years now. God knows we have paid enough taxes for it. They
add something like 95 cents per line/month to our phone bills for it.
And that tax, or user fee if you prefer continues to this day since we
not only had to pay to install it but are also paying to maintain it
every month.  Philly probably has the system we used to have here until
about twenty years ago. When you called the police, the telco central
office translated what you dialed into something else and it was that
something else which the police saw broken down by neighborhood and/or
police district.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 27 Nov 94 21:40:50 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Tehran Changes Emergency Number


In Tehran, the emergency number for medical assistance had been for
many years 123.  This is the same as 911 here in the United States.  A
decision was made to change the number a couple months ago after several
instances of emergency lines being jammed by children dialing 123 as
they practiced arithmetric using telephone dials.

According to the manager of emergency telecom services in Tehran,
three or four out of every five calls received were nuissance calls
made by children. The nuisance calls have considerably reduced in
quantity since the emergency phone number was changed to 115 beginning
this past month.


Patrick Townson


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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #429
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29478;
          29 Nov 94 19:29 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26798; Tue, 29 Nov 94 12:47:16 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26788; Tue, 29 Nov 94 12:47:13 CST
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 94 12:47:13 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #430

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 29 Nov 94 12:47:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 430

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: MCI's Announcement (Mike McCrohan)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Travis Russell)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (James E. Bellaire)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Cliff Barney)
    Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe (Mike McCrohan)
    Re: Can a Customer Choose Their ANI? (Gordon Burditt)
    Re: Rochester Telephone's Open Market Plan (Eli Mantel)
    Rochester Telephone and Bad Service? (Phillip Dampier)
    Re: Hacker Learns Intelligence Secrets ([e-mail])
    Re: DSU/CSU For T1 (Michael Todd Lattanzi)
    Re: Pilgrim Telephone's 1-800-COLLEKT (Jonathan D. Loo)
    Re: RS449 Info Request (Erling Kristiansen)
    Re: How Fast is T1-T3? (S. Mike Statton)

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 America
On Line. 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] (Mike McCrohan)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: 29 Nov 1994 11:58:18 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

>> ... Home shopping? ... Notice the reduction in size of CompuServe's
>> "Electronic Shopping Mall" compared to several years ago. Or perhaps
       ...etc

> It's easy to see how MCI might be able to turn a profit where its
> ersatz bretheren in on-line shopping can't: no overhead!  MCI has an
> enormous advantage in that it will have no network expense (that was

Actually, MCI don't have "no network epense", if you'll pardon the
double negative. In discussion with an MCI person very recently on an
entirely different matter, I discovered that a VERY LARGE percentage
of MCI's $12bn or so revenues go to AT&T for line charges, local
access, etc. For this reason, MCI have apparently recently purchased
the 240 mile Digital Lightwave Network from DEC. The DLN, for those of
you who mighn not know is a fibre network installed by Digital to
connect its many MA/NH sites for Voice, Data, Videconferencing, etc.
It connected, amongst other things four (4) DMS-10's, Numerous SL1's
and Rholms and about 40,000 computers.  [Digression end]


Mike McCrohan    [e-mail]
Cloon, Claregalway, Co. Galway, Ireland    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Travis Russell)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: 28 Nov 1994 17:21:52 GMT
Organization: Tekelec, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(A. Padgett Peterson) says:

> Wonderful, YASP (yet another service provider), but missing from the
> announcement was one vital one: CO$T. If by the hour, I'm really not
> interested. If "premium services" are involved, they can keep them
> (would expect a discount to put up with advts etc.).

> Just wonder what they are planning?

I contacted networkMCI in Raleigh to get pricing information for
Internet access. The price I was quoted was $65.00 per month, plus a
per character charge for e-mail (I don't remember the per-character
charge, because it was at this point I stopped listening).

They touted the wonderful FAX feature where I could convert faxes to
e-mail and vice versa, although I am still wondering why I would want
this. If I want to send an e-mail, I use e-mail. When I want to send a
FAX, I use a FAX, and from the same modem!!

Needless to say, MCI will find out soon enough that full Internet
access can be had for $20.00 a month flat rate, using dial-up
SLIP/PPP. For $65.00 per month, I can get my own domain name (through
a local provider)!


Travis Russell  [e-mail]

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

Date: 28 Nov 94 23:32:03 EST
From: James E Bellaire <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement


A call to the 1-800 number listed in the previous Telecom Digest gave
me a 'networkMCI' operator that immediately transfered me to a
technician, Chris.  All I asked was if I could have my own .org or
 .com name! :)

The tech was a bit uninformed but he did provide the following info:

  internetMCI will be available for $19.95 per month;
  Local dial access will be available in 450 medium to large cities;
  1-800 dial access will be available nationwide;
  Dedicated  access will be available by region (Leased Line);
  PPP access will be available (not just their internet interface toys!);
      (Also telnet and frame relay access available.)

  Prices:
      Local Service:   $19.95 includes 7 hrs, additional hrs $3 each
      1-800 Service:   $19.95 includes 3 hrs, additional hrs $7 each
                              (Long distance included in price)
      Dedicated 9.6kbps      $6 per month (+leased line) per port
      Dedicated 4.5mbps $23,000 per month (+leased line) per port

I asked if MCI was considering 950- access and he said that he had not
heard of any plans yet.  Other dedicated line rates are available.  As
noted, the dedicated prices do not include transport costs.

Chris did not know how internetMCI addressing would be handled.  My
question about forming an .org or .com will have to wait. :<


James E. Bellaire, AS               [e-mail]
Indiana Wesleyan University      [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 10:35:15 GMT
From: Cliff Barney <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement


I don't know anything about the MCI plan, but Vint Cerf, more than any
other single person, is responsible for building the protocols upon
which the Internet rests.


cliff barney

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe
Date: 28 Nov 1994 07:51:57 -0800
Organization: Rockwell International - CMC Network Products


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Mitch Weiss) writes:

> In the United States, calls are priced based on time and distance
> using a V&H (vertical and horizontal) coordinate system.  In Europe,
> they are priced based on something called Metered Pulse.  How does
> that work?  Is there a constant price per pulse?  Also, if I have a
> PBX, how does the SMDR represent this information?  Thanks!

In the United States, the telephone company prices each call, and
gives you an itemized invoice. In most European countries, the company
sends you a bill at the end of the month, indicating the total, but
with no substantiation of detail. In fact, the telco often does not
even record the call detail; the bills are based on readings of an
accounting meter, much like your electric bill. This meter is located
at the central office, but for a monthly fee, a second meter running
in parallel, can be installed at the customer premises for
verification.

As calls are routed, the central office will connect the subscriber
line to an appropriate source of metering pulses, spaced to correspond
to the rate for the call. These metering step markers are generally
short bursts of 12 kHz tone. (Modems for European markets need a notch
filter to eliminate the metering frequency.)

Just like in the US, if you want to produce internal billing based on
SMDR, it is up to you to figure out what to bill, based on published
tariffs. For the near area, you will need to track prefixes; for
longer distances, such as international calls, you need to determine
the country code, and keep track of rates per country and know the
discount time slots. The PBX typically does NOT receive or interpret
billing pulses.


Lars Poulsen          Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
Rockwell Network Systems  Phone:        [phone]
7402 Hollister Avenue       Telefax:      [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93105      Internets: designed and built while you wait

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike McCrohan)
Subject: Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe
Date: 29 Nov 1994 00:30:31 -0000
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Alain Fontaine) wrote:

> In article (Dans l'article) <[e-mail]>, mweiss@
> interaccess.com (Mitch Weiss) wrote:

>> In Europe, they are priced based on something called Metered Pulse.
>> How does that work?  Is there a constant price per pulse?  Also, if I
>> have a PBX, how does the SMDR represent this information?  Thanks!

> In Belgium at least, the price per pulse is constant (FYI: BEF 5 + VAT
> 20.5%). The rate of the pulses depend on the called number, the time
> of the day and sometimes the POM. The customer may ask to receive an
> indication of the pulses. The exact format depends on the actual
> hardware used.

In Ireland you are charged by the "unit". I suspect one pulse = 1
unit.  All units are uniformly priced at IR0.11 approx Incl VAT.

A local call is tarriffed at 3minutes/unit.  Long Dist, < 56km is 66.7
sec/unit Long Dist, > 56km is 25 sec/unit UK is 19 sec/unit NorAM is
8.28 sec/unit ...... and so on. These are for business hours. There are
offpeak rates as well and they vary depending on call destination.


Mike McCrohan          [e-mail]
Cloon, Claregalway,
Co. Galway, Ireland    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: Can a Customer Choose Their ANI?
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organi[sz]ation
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 1994 12:09:03 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I do not think ANI is something which can
> be artibtrarily decided or presented. I think it is what it is ... and
> gets delivered in that way. While your right to privacy is appreciated
> and respected, my right to know what telephone calls I am obliged to
> pay for supercedes your privacy right, or at least is equal to it.  PAT]

Related question: Given that I have several lines billed together (on
the same bill) and the restrictions on all the lines are the same
(e.g. either all of them have 900 blocking or none do), can I have the
ANI on all the lines be the same, and equal to the numbers of one of
the lines?  (Said line will probably be answered by a modem.)  Or is
that what usually happens when you have several lines billed together
on one number?


Gordon L. Burditt   sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think -- am not certain -- that the
ANI given to the other end is whatever it is. Regards all being billed
under one 'master number', that would be done in the billing office.
Now I think this varies from one account to the next for reasons
unexplained to me. I have had instances where Caller-ID for example
delivered the same number (main listed number) to me when calls came
 from behind a PBX regardless of which actual line was used for the
call. I've had other cases where the number sent via Caller-ID for
calls from behind a PBX was totally irrelevant to anything; that is,
it was just whatever number happened to be used for the outgoing call.
As a case in point, consider the hospital where I was at during my
recent illness: Although administrative phones there are of the form
708-933-xxxx where 'x' is any number from 3000 through 6999, when a
call originates there it shows up on my Caller-ID as 677-xxxx where
'x' is some number in the nine-thousand range. It varies from one call
to the next. Their main listed number is 708-677-9600. Caller-ID --
admittedly not entirely the same thing as ANI -- from my three lines
shows up as whatever line I am using, yet when I get called by a
friend who works at a nearby store with several lines, Caller-ID
always shows the main number, regardless of what line he calls me on,
and there is no PBX there, just a few lines on multi-line phone sets.
What is the logic or reasoning? .. beats me. However the business
office sets it up I guess or the techs when the service goes in.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eli Mantel)
Subject: Re: Rochester Telephone's Open Market Plan
Date: 29 Nov 1994 06:52:34 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service


In article <[e-mail]> Prakash Hariramani <ph2k+@andrew.
cmu.edu> writes:

> I am looking for an official copy of Rochester Telephone's Open Market
> Plan, i.e. the one approved by the P.U.C.  I would appreciate it if
> any one could tell me how to get one.

Isn't this the plan where Rochester Telephone proposed that everybody
would still get their dial tone from them, but there would be resellers
(aggregators) competing to sell that product?

I suppose under this plan, customers would be offered a greater
variety of calling plans, some perhaps would be message unit plans
with a low monthly fee, others would be flat rates, perhaps some would
have extended calling areas, maybe even with special deals for
selecting their preferred IXC.

How does adding another layer of organization (and profit) serve the
public interest?  Do aggregators "add value" to the product?  If
Rochester Tel is responsible for turning on service and for resolving
service problems, where is the opportunity for improved service?

Maybe somebody can tell me that I have no clue as to what this Open
Market Plan is about.  I hope so!


Eli Mantel ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 1994 17:56:15
Subject: Rochester Telephone and Bad Service?


drharry![e-mail] wrote:

> This form of competition was inevitable, in light of the
> terrible service provided by Rochester Tel. over the years.
> They're one of the nastiest and most incompetent service
> organizations with which I've ever dealt (even GTE, and that
> take *quite* a bit of effort <g>).

I disagree with this.

Having seen NYNEX's operation all around us, I'd have to say that I'm
very pleased to have Rochester Telephone.  Our local calling area is
very large, our phone rates are often up to $15 less per month for
flat rate service than that charged in Buffalo, Syracuse, or Binghamton.
Installation charges are $32 here, up to $85 in NYNEX territory, and
service has been generally top notch.  They've installed nearly a
dozen buried lines here, and then spent two weeks digging a multi-hundred
yard 4' trench and buried 100-pair cable here to consolidate everything,
including the installation of an outside terminal comparable to what
you'd find in small malls -- all at no charge to me.

There isn't nearly the level of bureaucracy that I have found with
NYNEX.  Installing a phone line in Grand Island (near Buffalo), cost
me $86, and where my flat rate residential phone bill in Rochester was
$21, the same service in Grand Island cost nearly $40.  It took nearly
a dozen calls to get the work done properly.

Now, I will say that in Rochester Tel's endeavor to get "competitive,"
their experienced, older employees have left in droves, either to take
advantage of a nice retirement option or have been told to leave.
This has left a lot of under-experienced 20-something, underpaid,
droids to pick up the slack.  Because of the slashing of qualified
employees, service has dropped considerably this year, but I'm hoping
that has mostly been from a short term retirement increase.

The nearest GTE operation to us is in Dalton, New York, which is still
on an ancient switch and "choosing a long distance company" translates
into placing a long distance phone call or not placing one.  It's the
last ancient switch in the LATA.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Hacker Learns Intelligence Secrets
Organization: !NET-CRE
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 09:18:09 GMT


> The London "Independent" newspaper of 24-Nov-94 leads with a story
> that a "hacker" gained access to a sensitive database of
> telecommunications information at British Telecommunications (BT), the
> UK's largest (and ex-state owned) carrier. [...]

> "Thousands of pages of highly confidential BT records were sent across
> the Internet to a young Scottish journalist, Steve Fleming, in July".
> Mr. Fleming received the information after making a news posting asking
> for information on BT and hacking. The informant remained anonymous --
> details of how this was achieved are not given.

As it turns out, there was no anonymous "Internet" informant. Mr. Fleming
obtained the information himself while contracting for three months at
BT.

BT are of course to blame for lax internal security (passwords on
post-it notes, temps using permanent employees passwords, sensitive
information stored in "publically" accessible database, ...), however I
don't beleive this case involved any hacking or use of the "Internet".

Unless of course you count typing in a passord you found on a notice
board as a hack.


Tim

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Todd Lattanzi)
Subject: Re: DSU/CSU For T1
Date: 29 Nov 1994 01:08:40 GMT
Organization: Mississippi State University


Mike H3004 ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Is this T1 fiber or copper?  Where I work, we have found that using a
> DSU/CSU on a fiber T1 creates problems.

Copper.


Todd Lattanzi   [e-mail]

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

From: Jonathan D Loo <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 16:08:51 -0500
Subject: Re: Pilgrim Telephone's 1-800-COLLEKT


Jeffrey McKeough writes:

I tested 1-800-COLLEKT out by calling myself on a line with call
waiting.  The called party hears the following message: "This is
Pilgrim Telephone.  You have a collect call from <name>.  This call
will cost $1 per minute (!)."  The recipient is instructed to press 1
to accept, or hang up to decline.

Have you also tried 1-800-DUCK-ATT?  That number also spells 1-800-*UCK-ATT.
I checked with AT&T several months ago and actually AT&T was the carrier,
but I checked again today and Pilgrim Telephone is the carrier.  This
number, like 1-800-COLLEKT, also does $1/minute collect calls. Actually a
good rate as long as you talk for one minute or less.  Also, when you
dial the 1-800-DUCK-ATT number you hear a "quack" sound.

Thought that it might interest Digest readers.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did try it out, and it does indeed
respond with a duck quacking several times followed by a voice saying
'welcome to Pilgrim Telecom' or something like that. They ask you to
enter the number you are calling, then speak your name. You are then
put on hold and hear nothing for the next several seconds up to a
minute while the call is placed (and in my case rejected, as I don't
pay for collect calls!  grin) ...    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Erling Kristiansen)
Subject: Re: RS449 Info Request
Date: 29 Nov 1994 07:35:09 GMT
Organization: ESA/Estec/WMS, Noordwijk, The Netherlands
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But, lacking a Black Box catalog, could
> *you* or someone please give a brief description?  Thanks.   PAT]

RS 449 is the physical and electrical interface underlying RS 422 and RS 423.

Both RS 422 and 423 are, in a sense, a "high speed" version of RS 232.
The functionality of all three are very similar, although there are
some subtle differences. But from an everyday practical point of view,
they are pretty much functionally equivalent.

RS 232 uses a common ground for all signals.

RS 423 uses a pair of wires for each signal (maybe some control signals
have common ground - I don't really know). At the transmit side, only
one wire is driven, the other is grounded ("single-ended" drive). At
the receive side, a differential receiver is used for each wire pair.
This reduces the noise immunity, since any noise which appears on both
wires of the pair is cancelled out.

RS 422 is similar to RS 423, but uses a balanced drive, i.e. one wire
of the pair is driven positive, the other negative. The receiver is,
again, differential.

For both RS 423 and 422, the use of dual wires and differential
receivers allow to go to higher data rates than RS 232.

Conversion between the three is reasonably straightforward in most
cases. Some conversions only require a "funny" cable, others need
line drivers with the implication that the converter needs a
power supply.

This is all quoted from memory, but I think it is reasonably accurate
as a brief description.

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

From: S Mike Statton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How Fast is T1-T3?
Date: 29 Nov 1994 09:53:34 GMT
Organization: a2i network


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

> How many Mbits/sec. are T1, T2, T3?  Please advise if there is an FAQ
> somewhere, too -- I looked in news.answers and found none, but I'm sure
> this is a commonly asked question.

In the United States:

DS0         64 kbps (sometimes 56)
DS1     (T1)      24 * DS0 (1.5 Mbps)
        (T1C)      2 * T1 (3.1 Mbps)
DS2     (T2)      4 * DS1 (6 Mbps)
DS3     (T3)      7 * DS2 (45 Mbps)


Scott Statton - N1GAK - Mountain View, CA - [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #430
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11910;
          30 Nov 94 18:09 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22819; Wed, 30 Nov 94 11:31:56 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22812; Wed, 30 Nov 94 11:31:53 CST
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 94 11:31:53 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #431

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 30 Nov 94 11:31:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 431

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: MCI's Announcement (John Higdon)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: MCI's Announcement ([e-mail])
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Barry Margolin)
    Re: MCI's Announcement ([e-mail])
    Re: Pilgrim Telephone's 1-800-COLLEKT (Benjamin P. Carter)
    1-800-*UCK-ATT (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Buffalo NY Crack Down on Pay Phones ([e-mail])
    Re: Unlimited Long Distance For $295.00/Month (Aaron Woolfson)
    Re: Wanted: Packet Radio Help (Kenneth Seymour)
    Re: Flow Control and OSI Layers (Jan Lucenius)
    Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe (Peter Campbell Smith)
    Re: PBX For Dorms (Jack Pestaner)

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 America
On Line. 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, 30 Nov 1994 01:55:29 -0800
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement


[e-mail] writes:

> Re: All the wailing about the commercialization of INternet:

> Like Padgett, I'd like to see a fixed price structure. (Having a good
> solid local dial-up access in real time here in Rochester, would help,
> as well. Are you listening, MCI? Rotten Tel? NYtel?)

But this is WHY we wail about things such as MCI's vision for the
Internet.  The commercializers (such as MCI or telcos) see the
Internet as segments of minutes or bytes upon which meters can be
placed and bills generated and sent. Why would telcos, who are leaving
the concept of "flat-rate service" in droves suddenly get religion in
the Church of Fixed Rate? Why would MCI, a company that virtually
knows no other way to charge than by-the-minute suddenly be interested
in giving you unlimited dialup access?

The Internet has several, distinctive traditions. One is the concept
of, as you put it, fixed rate access. Need to download a couple of
megabytes of material? Fine. How fast the transfer takes place is
related to how much bandwidth you are paying for, but the transfer
itself does not result in an extra charge. Another tradition is the
topology itself. The Internet is described as thousands upon thousands
of computers connected in a peer-to-peer configuration.

The commercializers would like to begin charging you for each and
every item you download or utilize. As carriers, they would do this by
metering the technical highway.

But what is more sinister involves a redefinition of the Internet
structure from peer-to-peer to client/server. The commercializers see
the Internet as a collection of computer systems (which they control)
dispensing data (which they furnish) over circuits (which they own) to
customers' computers running software (which the commercializers
furnish) which limits the customer's access to whatever the
commercializer deems necessary.

Anyone who now contributes to the net, from people who post articles
to Usenet or publications such as this one, to those who make
available vast libraries of material available via FTP, will be in
competition with the commercializers who now want to sell this same
material to the unwashed masses. If the commercializers are calling
the tune, they will want to remove these traditional net contributors
from the equation.

The origins and evolution of the Internet contain traditions and
structures that are not compatible with any entity that seeks to
install a tollgate.  And the only way these merchandisers know how to
make money is with such a device. If it is necessary to kill the
Internet in order to save it by turning it into a gigantic Prodigy or
CompuServe, then the era is at an end. The great Information
Superhighway that we have been looking forward to will be nothing more
than 500 cable channels and a dozen shopping channels.

You have some knowledge and wisdom that you want to contribute to
users of the "new Internet"? All you need to do is contact
MarketplaceMCI and they will be happy to set you up as a registered
merchandiser. Bring your checkbook or your ATM card.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Eric, I don't have a thing against
> commercial participation in the net. I think its great to see organizations
> like MCI and others put the money into it to keep it going and improve
> it. My main concern is that those of us who have over the years helped
> to make the net what it is today not be forgotten.   PAT]

And that concern is well-founded, given what companies such as MCI are
going to want to see as a return from their investment.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: 30 Nov 1994 02:16:41 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


It appears that they dumped an ad on The Internet over about 20
news groups. When you replied to it the mail bounced. Maybe it
caused their who system to go up in bytes.


-=- Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS
             Home of GBBS/LLUCE support
[phone] 12/24/14.4 V32/V42bis

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

From: [e-mail] (Kronos)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 00:22:19 GMT


[e-mail] (Kronos) writes:

> [MCI] will have no network expense ...

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How can you say they won't have any
> network expense?

You miss the point.  Compuserv, for example, pays some telco for the
cost of handling the traffic from the various cities to their
equipment.  MCI will not have this expense since it's their network
that is handling the calls.  Of course, there is an intrinsic expense.
But it isn't material in nature.

Look at it this way.  You have ABC, Inc., and you decide to have an 800
number to handle calls from customers.  Whenever you field such a call,
you pay some telco (or IEC, most likely) say .10/minute for the call.
Now MCI comes along and decides to compete against you.  It starts an 800
line for its customers too.  Will MCI end up paying .10/minute outside of
itself for the calls?  Of course not.

Since internet access is solely over-the-phone, these traffic expenses
become a major part of an access provider's overhead, as opposed to
the miniscule example above.  In other words, MCI will continue to
charge other access providers its usual rate for lines and/or traffic
(as will AT&T, Sprint or Wiltel).  But it will get these same services
for its own competing service essentially for free.

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

From: Barry Margolin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: 30 Nov 1994 16:18:36 -0500
Organization: NEARnet, Cambridge, MA


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

> It's easy to see how MCI might be able to turn a profit where its
> ersatz bretheren in on-line shopping can't: no overhead!  MCI has an
> enormous advantage in that it will have no network expense

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How can you say they won't have any
> network expense?  I'm sure they'll have to build more network at
> a substantial cost. Did you assume *their* vendors and suppliers
> were going to give them things for free?   PAT]

MCI would have to build more network anyway -- their network is the
backbone that connects most of the regional networks.  So if the
customers who might have connected directly to MCI instead went to
regionals, much of their traffic would still end up on MCI's network
eventually.  So they'll need the capacity either way.

For basic Internet connections, it seems like MCI should be able to
undercut many regionals.  Regionals have to pay MCI for their backbone
connections, and then pass that cost plus a markup on to their
customers.  Getting a direct MCI connection would be like shopping at
a factory outlet, since you avoid the reseller markup.

On another topic, Vint's response to PAT's message about the announcement
mentioned that NetScape includes netnews support.  Will InternetMCI
service include access to an NNTP server?  If that becomes a popular
service, I wonder what platform will be able to provide NNTP service
to hundreds or thousands of clients.


Barry Margolin
BBN Internet Services Corp.
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 94 18:19:25 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Mike McCrohan <[e-mail]> writes:

> Actually, MCI don't have "no network epense", if you'll pardon the
> double negative. In discussion with an MCI person very recently on an
> entirely different matter, I discovered that a VERY LARGE percentage
> of MCI's $12bn or so revenues go to AT&T for line charges, local
> access, etc. For this reason, MCI have apparently recently purchased
> the 240 mile Digital Lightwave Network from DEC. The DLN, for those of
> you who mighn not know is a fibre network installed by Digital to
> connect its many MA/NH sites for Voice, Data, Videconferencing, etc.

Where the heck did that come from?  Sorry my friend but that is incorrect.
MCI does pay about $5 billion a year to LEC's (Local Exchange Carriers) for
line charges, local access, etc. but NOT to AT&T.  I think where the
confusion comes from is that AT&T at one time owned the LEC's, but that has
not been the case for some time.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin P. Carter)
Subject: Re: Pilgrim Telephone's 1-800-COLLEKT
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 21:18:36 GMT


Jeffrey McKeough writes:

> I tested 1-800-COLLEKT out by calling myself on a line with call
> waiting.  The called party hears the following message: "This is
> Pilgrim Telephone.  You have a collect call from <name>.  This call
> will cost $1 per minute (!)."  The recipient is instructed to press 1
> to accept, or hang up to decline.

My answering machine got a "collekt" call and, fortunately, rejected
it.  It is scary, though, imagining what might happen when two
machines interact, each behaving as if the other were human.

Shouldn't there be a law against machines that make phone calls
and then play recorded messages?

Here in California we are getting smart about cigarettes, but we
remain stupid about caller ID.  The majority here apparently believe
that the privacy of the caller is more important than the privacy of
the answerer.  Whose privacy is being invaded by junk phone calls at
mealtimes?  Duh.


Ben Carter    internet address: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 01:07:26 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Subject: 1-800-*UCK-ATT
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA


About the phone call to "1-800-DUCK-ATT": I have it on good authority
that there was an employee who worked for either AT&T or a former Bell
company who was told to change his vanity license plate.

His car's license plate read: NUKE MCI

His superiors felt that it was in bad taste.


Paul Robinson - [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Very interesting. I have in my waiting
mail now a couple replies to the article earlier this week about Bell
Atlantic's suspension of all those workers, and like your comment, it
may hinge around issues involving free speech and what you can say on
or off the job. I'll run those articles later today.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Buffalo NY Crack Down on Pay Phones
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 94 13:32:26 PDT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, so Buffalo has a bunch of idiots
> on its city council just like Chicago, eh?  Its good to know my former
> town is not unique when it comes to doing ignorant things regarding
> telephones. In some parts of town here -- really, vast large sections
> of Chicago -- where very poor people live in decrepit housing, they
> can't afford telephone service so they rely on the public phones. The
> city council's answer: pull all those pay phones out; let the people
> walk six blocks down the street to the next pay phone, who cares. The
> important thing to remember is the War on Drugs.   PAT]

Although I hate to interject here, this choice in limiting payphones
around housing projects in some ways dovetails recent post office
decisions to stop mail delivery altogether to residents in certain
'high risk' housing projects.  While much talk has been made of
'fair/equal access' to be provided with newer telecommunication
services in the future, my skepticsm grows when I see basic and
existing services removed.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So does mine. I mean, really, can't you
just see hundreds or thousands of residents in public 'housing' in the
USA rushing out to sign up with MCI for access to the Internet? They can't
even get a working payphone at the corner cut rate liquor store and lottery
agent any longer ... as far as the postal 'service' is concerned, that's
another big joke in the USA. In Chicago, investigators are at the tip of
an iceberg checking out mail carriers who have dumped their work wholesale
rather than make delivery. They have thus far found several carriers with
basements full of mail accumulated over the years which went undelivered
because the carrier did not feel like doing a full day's work.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Aaron Woolfson)
Subject: Re: Unlimited Long Distance For $295.00/Month
Date: 29 Nov 1994 10:46:12 -0800
Organization: University of the Pacific


For $295.00 per month, a company offering unlimited long distance
telephone calls is pretty impressive.  However, I am assuming that
they are placing their bets on the fact that most people will not use
that much long distance per month and that the law of averages is on
their side.

They have their own tariff on file with the California Public
Utilities Commission, as they are CPUC approved.  I would be
interested in seeing the actual tariff containing the calling plan.
If one does not exist, then it is simply illegal for them to be doing
this sort of marketing.

I remember a company named "Flat Rate Communications" which was in
business during the late eighties which offered a similar plan.  The
catch was that they would charge you to place a dialer on your
telephone line and then they also had a tone which would emit after
ten minutes and cut you off.  I suppose a technically oriented person
could circumvent that, though ...

IF the $295.00 per month for unlimited long distance were true, then I
wonder why another long distance carrier wouldn't consider utilizing
it as a method of subsidizing their own long distance traffic.  IT IS
certainly much cheaper than obtaining a Feature Group D line to the
Tandem at the local end and then running a T1 to a long haul carrier.

I suppose that if the $295.00 for unlimited long distance was true, than
they would be out of business very quickly if there were many people
like me out there.


Sincerely,

Aaron Woolfson
CEO, TelSwitch, Inc.
dba Delta Telecommunications
California Public Utility U-5410-C

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

From: [e-mail] (Kenneth Seymour)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Packet Radio Help
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 1994 19:06:02 GMT


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

> Please I need as soon as posible info about radio-packets.

> I dont want programs, I want technical information about HW and the
> description byte per byte of the info contained inside radio-packets.
> If you know something about this topic please answer. If you know how
> can I can get information please answer too.

This document is available from the TAPR list server:

ax25.doc - Docs AX.25 Amateur Packet Radio Link Layer Protocol

You may find this document interesting.  It is available from the TAPR
list server.  To get it, send email to [e-mail] with the following
line in the message body:

get tapr/packet ax25.doc

The list server will email the document to you.

Good Luck!


Ken Seymour   KN6QC   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Lucenius)
Subject: Re: Flow Control and OSI Layers
Date: 30 Nov 1994 07:10:08 GMT
Organization: Technical Research Centre of Finland
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jan.Lucenius)


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, Daniel Joha <johaciie@w229zrz.
> zrz.tu-berlin.d400.de> wrote:

>> At which OSI layer would one implement flow control?

>> - Data Link Layer (2)
>> - Transport Layer (4)

> Yes. ;-)

> Flow controls may be implemented at any level, from Application Layer
> on down, wherever there is the possibility of a sender sending faster
> than a receiver can receive.  (Or more, in the case of Layer 1)

> [e-mail]

Depends on what kind of flow control you mean? Flow control, which
prevent the other party from sending, or asks it to resend a data unit
would mostly be implemented on layer 2 (data link control). If layer 2
lacks flow control, then it is usually in the transport layer (layer
4). In addition to that, there may be a more global synchronisation in
the session layer with its synch points and resynchronise functions,
which, however, many application layer protocols do not make use of.

In addition to the ones mentioned, of course every place in the
implementation where there is a fixed buffer, where one entity writes
data and another reads it, needs to have its own internal flow
control, semaphore mechanism or something to guarantee synchronising.
Here, Murphy's law must be kept in mind!


Jan Lucenius    phone [phone]  fax   [phone]
VTT  Information technology  PB 1202, 02044 VTT, Finland

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Campbell Smith)
Subject: Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe
Organization: Logica
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 08:18:14 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Mitch
Weiss) writes:

> In the United States, calls are priced based on time and distance
> using a V&H (vertical and horizontal) coordinate system.  In Europe,
> they are priced based on something called Metered Pulse.  How does
> that work?  Is there a constant price per pulse?

In the UK, BT (the main carrier) charges by the 'unit'.  A unit is
always the same price but buys varying amounts of time for a call,
depending on distance, time of day, day of the week and so on.
'Distance' in this context is divided into zones of which only two now
remain for domestic calls - local and long distance.  International
calls are divided into a dozen or so zones, and there are also some
pseudo-zones for calls to mobile phones or to premium-rate services
(like the US 976 prefix).

The meter pulses go back to when this system was introduced and most
of the equipment was electromechanical.  The routing equipment
generated a signal pulse every 1/10 of the time that the particular
call cost per unit.  So if a call was to be charged at 30secs per
unit, there would be a pulse every 3sec.  Associated with every
customer's line was a physical meter which incremented by 1 when the
call was answered and then by 1 for every 10 pulses it received. Every
3 months someone read the meter and sent you a bill for the meter
reading minus the previous reading - just like an electricity meter,
though the phone ones were in the exchange building.

Payphones also counted the pulses and demanded more money at
appropriate times, and I believe it is still possible to get a line
with meter pulses if you have a privately-owned payphone that works
that way.

Nowadays it's all done by computers of course, but they still emulate
the old system in some respects, such as the bill still having the
'meter' readings on it, though I imagine the physical meters have
disappeared.  But the other carriers make a virtue of charging by the
second, and BT has announced that it will do so too, though I haven't
seen a date.

Other countries in Europe also charge by the unit, but whether they
use or used the meter pulse method I can't say.


Peter Campbell Smith, Logica, London, UK +++ tel:[phone]
fax:[phone] +++ mailto:[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Pestaner)
Subject: Re: PBX For Dorms
Date: 30 Nov 1994 02:48:03 GMT
Organization: Oregon Grad. Inst. Computer Science and Eng., Beaverton


Actually, my company is in this business as a system manager for a
couple of schools, and we run a large shared tenant service for
businesses and an apartment complex.  it is true that there is a big
initial cost, although it is falling all the time.  Particularly in
the student application, a blend of used and new equipment could be
used to substantially reduce the initial cost.  There are many
reputable used PBX dealers, some even certified by the OEM.

Some advantages to student resale:

1.  Integration with academic PBX, sharing of resources and 4 digit
dialing between students, faculty, and staff.

2.  Better use of flat rate local trunks.  Used by College during the day,
students at night--really nice blend.

3.  Great LD programs available from MCI for colleges and universities,
less than $0.10 per minute (through T1).

4.  "Profit" from operation can be used to fund initial purchase and wiring.

5.  Rewiring of dorms can include 10BaseT and voice so the dorms are data
ready to connect to campus net.

6.  Independent companies will manage billing and collections for school
for per minute rate.

If your school uses the local telco, you are wasting money, but this
is not trivial to implement.  You should have several people look at
the plan, and have a non-interested professional review the final plan
before implementation.


Good luck,

Jack

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #431
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14137;
          30 Nov 94 22:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00487; Wed, 30 Nov 94 15:35:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00479; Wed, 30 Nov 94 15:35:04 CST
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 94 15:35:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #432

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 30 Nov 94 15:35:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 432

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Tracking Incoming Numbers (Jeff Murphy)
    Regulation About Microwave Usage in the US? (Juergen Ziegler)
    Havana's Direct Dial Code (Greg Monti)
    LDDS Announces Service to Cuba (Fred Bauer)
    Network Planners Wanted - Motorola Midwest Area ([e-mail])
    New Telecom Events Calendar (David Cordeiro)
    Faxes, Data, Voice All in One Package. How? (David Stevenson)
    Open Letter to Telecom Industry re: Standards (Wallace A. Ritchie)
    Bell Atlantic Suspensions (Larry Ludwick)
    Free Speech or Not (was Re: What Information) (Dennis G. Rears)
    Philadelphia 911 Tragedy (Carl Moore)
    Re: 911, CNID, was Re: Problem With 911 Service in Philadelphia (M. Healy)
    Prodigy Now Has Newsgroups (Stan Schwartz)
    Help With Oki 892 ESN (Marc B. Grant)
    Automatic Callback (Alain Arnaud)
    MCI Conference Call (Brian Brown)
    DTMF to Serial Port Help Wanted (Egan F. Ford)
    Re: Tehran Changes Emergency Number (Thomas Diessel)
    Last Laugh! Ameritech the Beautiful  (Robert A. Virzi)
    Still More Last Laugh! No Need For Type-Ahead (Alan E. Asper)

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 America
On Line. 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 Murphy)
Subject: Tracking Incoming Numbers
Organization: UB
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 02:37:30 GMT


We'd like to take a "poll" of what numbers are calling into our modems
so that we can determine what percentage of calls are coming from on-
campus. All we need is the exchange part of each number.

Currently, the only way we see is to hook up a thirty button set to a
spread of 30 lines (out of 180) and use that as a representative set.

This info is going to help us decide whether or not it would be worthwhile
to offer direct connectivity at the dorm room level to our campus network
versus having dorming students dial into the string.

Does anyone have experience with this sort of thing, or can anyone offer
a better solution? Apparently NYNEX has told us that they don't track that
sort of activity, so can't provide us with the statistics.


Thanks in advance,

jeff
[e-mail]    sunyab cit oss  lead programmer analyst
standard disclaimers apply   http://lurch.cit.buffalo.edu/~jcmurphy/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why don't you get Caller-ID on those
lines if it is available in your community,  and have the data from all
the lines feed into a PC where the incoming line, time of call and
source can be recorded. It wouldn't be a bad idea to have this data
around anyway, given all the phreaks who like to call in and cause
hassles. For your purposes, it would provide very precise data on who
is doing what where your modems are concerned, and if at some time in
the future it is helpful to have available a record showing a call from
telephone 'x' was received at a certain time and connected to modem 'z'
and onward into your network, so much the better. Of course an opening
message when your terminal servers answer announcing this would be a
courteous gesture to users. Something like: 'For the protection of our
users, and to assist in planning our network facilities in the future,
all incoming calls are logged with the records available for examination
by authorized persons. These records are confidential. If you block your
telephone identification when calling in, we must decline to service
you or connect you with the modem bank.'

Have the computer check for 'private' on incoming calls and when seen
send a signal back to the terminal server to disconnect the call. Doing
this, you get twice as much for your money: not only the traffic analysis
you are seeking but a handle on possible security problems as well. And
time and again we have found that when your users know that *you know* who
they are, the ones inclined to create problems simply stay away. When
you are in a position to call someone on the phone and say, "yesterday
at 7:00 PM we noticed this phone dialed into our modem bank and connected
via telnet to site 'x'. Site 'x' has complained about it to us and we
were wondering what was going on ..."   <grin> ... Well, when you are in
a position to do that and your users know you can do it, the phreaks
tend to stay away. Phreaks don't like spotlights or diligent record-
keeping; they prefer darkness, confusion and anomynity.   And don't let
the privacy freaks lay a guilt trip on you with their whines about how
their freedom is being chilled or denied by someone having knowledge of
when they call or how long they were connected, etc. You are not interested
in any of that anyway. All you want is some idea how to configure things
and some clues to use in detecting very outrageous abuse, etc.   PAT]

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

Subject: Regulation about Microwave Usage in the US?
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 22:09:15 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Juergen Ziegler)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


While travelling in the US, I recognized a large number of microwave
links.  Mostly to be operated by several telecommunications carriers
like local or long-distance companies.

But it seems to me, that "private" operators had their own links. Such as
one factory plant to be linke to another.

What is the regulation about such microwave links in the US?

Who is entitled to apply for the neccessary frequencies?


Juergen Ziegler * Obervogt-Haefelinstr. 48 * 77815 Buehl (Baden) * Germany
[e-mail] ********************************* Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 11:53:26 EST
From: Greg Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Havana's Direct Dial Code


Now that direct dial service to Cuba is being offered by several long
distance carriers, an article in {Communications Daily} notes that the
country code for Cuba is 53 and the area code for Havana is 7.


Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    [phone]
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      [phone]
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 94 13:54 EST
From: Fred Bauer <[e-mail]>
Subject: LDDS Announces Service to Cuba


Since there has been mention of ATT/MCI direct dial access to
Cuba, I thought readers of the digest would be interested in the
LDDS press release.  (Note that in the greater than 50% claim,
LDDS is including the capacity of IDB and WILTEL, since all the
trunks are connected to the same (IDB) switch).

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

23-NOV-1994 16:11 LDDS Communications, the first long distance
company to offer direct-dial calls to Cuba starting Nov. 25 at
5:00 p.m.

    MIAMI--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Nov. 23, 1994--LDDS Communications, one of
the four largest long distance companies in the United States, announced
Wednesday that it will offer direct dialing to Cuba beginning Friday,
Nov. 25 at 5:00 p.m.

    Direct calls to Cuba have been approved by the U.S. and the Cuban
governments.  "We are very proud to announce that LDDS will offer
direct-dial calls to Cuba before any other long distance carrier,"
said Mark Welton, vice president of marketing for LDDS.

    In fact, "LDDS will have more than 50% of the circuits available
to Cuba, and is thereby uniquely positioned to offer more access and
fewer busy signals via direct-dial calls than any other long distance
carrier."

    LDDS also announced that its per-minute rates will be extremely
competitive, at a flat $1.42 per minute for peak-period and $1.13 per
minute for off-peak calls to Cuba.

    In addition to very affordable rates, LDDS will provide a complete
line of services including international direct dialing to more than
220 countries and will offer competitive rates to Latin America;
bilingual operator assistance and customer service; the innovative
OnLine(sm) calling card, Home Advantage(sm) and Homebound 800(sm)
residential services; an attractive collection of prepaid calling
cards; and other long distance services to facilitate calling to Cuba.

    Those without the LDDS long distance services can still call Cuba
and Latin America with all LDDS calling cards and LDDS debit cards
available at select area retailers.

    "Current LDDS customers will be the first to be able to use
direct-dial calling services to Cuba on November 25, when the service
begins," said Welton.  "We encourage those who wish to be among the
first to call Cuba to contact us immediately at 1-800-HABLAME, our
Spanish-language center, to sign up for service with LDDS."

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


Fred Bauer              [e-mail]
Principal Engineer      voice: +1.301.212.7067
IDB Worldcom            fax:   [phone]



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually Fred, I think all the carriers
began their Cuba service at 5:00 PM EST last Friday. It is very nice
that LDDS is offering the service also, but their customers were merely
*among the first*, not the first. I wonder who the first subscriber (of
some carrier) was to actually make a call?  Does anyone yet have any
reports on the amount of traffic during this first week of operation?
Is the service widely known yet?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Network Planners Wanted, Motorola Midwest Area
Date: 30 Nov 1994 17:11:54 GMT
Organization: MCSNet Services


Our continuing global expansion allows us to offer unparalleled growth
opportunities to talented engineers. We currently require Network
Planners to assist clients with the development of land mobile
telephony and digital networks. Strict requirements include a minimum
of a BSEE, 5+ yrs of public telecommunications network experience
(US), 2+ yrs experience in an interexchange carrier environment,
Network design, transmission engineering and traffic engineering
experience is also required.

As a world leader, we offer a competitive compensation package.  For
immediate consideration, please send your resume and cover letter to
e-mail address: [e-mail].  (Name subject header: NET1929.)  In
your cover letter, you must include years of public telecommunications
network experience and salary history. Thank you for your interest. EOE.

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

Date: Tue, 29 Nov 94 15:25:50 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: New Telecom Events Calendar


The Telecom Library and WilTel are proud to announce:

****  The Telecommunications Event Calendar  ****

    http://www.wiltel.com/library/events.html

We have placed a new section in the Telecom Library to keep track of
the many conferences, trade shows and other events that are of
interest to the Telecommunications Industry.

If you are involved with such an event, please send your information to
[e-mail].  We will keep this list of events current and
available to everyone on the Internet.

The Telecom Library (http://www.wiltel.com/library/library.html) is the
home of:

Telecom Glossary     -- 800+ Telecom Terms and growing
RITIM             -- Collection of Working Papers
               and RITIM-L archive
Insight Research     -- Report summaries and Telecom Marketing Research
Telecomreg        -- Archive of the Telecomreg mailing list
Telecom Digest        -- Hypertext articles from the Digest Archives
Long Distance Digest    -- Newsletter for Telecom Resellers

For more information contact:

David Cordeiro
WilTel Network Services
Data, Voice and Video
918-588-5214
http://www.wiltel.com

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

From: [e-mail] (David Stevenson)
Subject: Faxes, Data, Voice All in One Package. How?
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David Stevenson)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 04:47:32 GMT


Hello friends,

I am posting a message for a pal who does not have net connections
like me (snicker, snork).

What I think he wants is a way of receiving faxes, data, voice on one
phone line.

Here is the description that  he sent me:

Here is what I am looking for:

A software product or a modem and software combination which would
enable me to receive a data file unattended, or receive a fax file or
a voice mail message and record them to a hard disk.

I have an external Hayes Optima 14.4 (data+fax) but the software I
have can't receive voice and can only receive data if the data program
is loaded and can only receive faxes if the fax program is loaded.

Obviously, it would be good to have some sort of security so that no
files could be downloaded or deleted or viewed, etc.; a limit ot file
sizes or mail boxes etc, like voice mail. I am not very interested in
running a bulletin board, just being able to receive a data file from
one caller and then a fax from the next caller and perhaps a voice
message from the next caller, without having to manually switch
programs.

Prometheus seems to have a system called "Ultima Home Office"
available for both Mac and PC, but I can't find out if you can receive
a data file unattended like you can a voice or fax message. Compaq has
the voice and fax concurrent capability in their new systems but they
won't receive data without a separate program which can't share the
modem with voice/fax.

I realize you can run a phone line on two calls concurrently. I just
want software to switch capabilities on successive calls.

I travel far and wide within the nebula and often can't remember where
I have been. Would you please cc any replies back to me.


Thank you,

Dave Stevenson    |  WordWise
Ottawa, Ont.    |  Desktop Publishing/Editing
ph 233-7385     |  ph 237-9802  fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wallace A. Ritchie)
Subject: Open Letter to Telecom Industry re: Standards
Date: 30 Nov 1994 05:15:36 GMT


This open letter is addressed to the attention of ANSI, ISO, Bellcore,
the LEC's, ESA, T1, TIA, EIA, IEEE, UL and any other organization in the
world that promulgates standards related to the Telecom Industry.

This letter is occasioned by my recent discovery that the ITU has
resumed internet availability of its standards (gopher://info.itu.ch).
Having made the bold move a year or two ago, the ITU unexpectedly
withdrew access. Whatever individuals or forces have caused this restoral
are to be applauded.

It is true that I won't spend my usual few thousand dollars with them this
year for standards information that I absolutely must have. (Maybe I will
splurge with the savings and buy a Bellcore document or two that I can't
immediately and directly justify economically). While the ITU will loose
my check and many other like it, the loss will be more than offset by the
tremendous furthering of its objectives. Tens of thousands of engineers
and engineering students, those that don't work for AT&T, NT, IBM, or
other companies that can afford a $million (literally) standards library,
will draw on this public resource. The level of misinformation about
Public Telephone Networks, due in large part to information starvation,
will decline. Increased knowledge will eventually lead to more products
in the market, lower prices, and a larger industry. Thank you ITU.

Now to all the other organizations, please see the light. Value based
pricing of standards (called extortion by some) is wholly inappropriate.
Just throw the stuff out on ftp. Forget the argument that the fair price
($1 per page or more) covers the high cost of producing the standards.
The world has changed. This argument is now X$&**!!. The internet allows a
much more efficient standards process without the high travel budgets.
The travel savings should cover the cost of producing the file (which is
electronic in any case). As to access, don't worry about the cost. If you
can't justify the access, the internet community will surely mirror the
documents around the world. Standards documents should not be a profit
center.

To Ameritech, who alone (to my knowledge) among the Bells provides free
standards, please take the next step and put them online. You are to be
applauded for your policy. You can save money now with the internet.

To all engineers associated with the standards bodies or companies,
please lobby your management to make these documents freely available on the
net.

To everyone else, please refrain from flaming any of the organizations.
Let's see if the grass roots that read this open letter WITHIN the
organizations can have the desired impact.


Thanks,

W. A. Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 15:38:51 -0500
From: C.L.Ludwick:tmpa:gtfl
Subject: Bell Atlantic Suspensions


Pat,

Your assumption appears to be that no matter what happened Bell
Atlantic is the bad player.  As for freedom of speech -- does it
include the right to publicly insult and denigrate your employer on
company time?


Larry


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No it does not include that 'right'.
See the next article in this issue for further elaboration on this
by Dennis Rears.  PAT]

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

From: Dennis G. Rears <[e-mail]>
Subject: Free Speech or Not (was Re: What Information)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: U.S Army ARDEC, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 19:28:15 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For starters, how about some forthright
> information on the thousand plus employees who were punitively suspended
> last week from their duties as a result of their exercise of their
> freedom of speech?  Why don't you start by posting some factual details
> about that incident on the Internet. This group would be a good place
> to put Bell Atlantic's version of what happened. For those who missed
> the preliminary report Sunday evening here, on Wednesday, the day before
> Thanksgiving, over a thousand Bell Atlantic employees were suspended
> for speaking out about the telco's alleged plans to leave them at the
> side of the road as the information superhighway is being built. Some
> comment from the company on why a mass suspension like this was needed,
> on the day before Thanksgiving, would be of interest.  PAT]

  I must disagree with Pat on this topic.  In this particular instance
workers wore t-shirt describing themselves as road kill on the
information super highway at work.  They were told repeatly that the
t-shirt was defaming the company and not to wear it at work.  They
were told the final time to either change the shirt or wear it inside
out.  They refused and were sent home suspended without pay for two
days.  My source is the Phildelphia Inquirer.  The issue was the
wearing of the T-shirts for not for speech.

  There is no freedom of speech in the workplace on work time.
Freedom of speech is between the government(s) and the individual not
employer and employee.

  The basic problem is that because of technology Bell Atlantic does
not need all the employees they have and wants to lay at least a
thousand.  The issue basically comes down to does Bell Atlantic owe it
current workers a job even though there is no need for them.


dennis


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For those who are not familiar with him,
Dennis was the founder of the Telecom Privacy journal, a very popular
e-journal which was started as an offshoot of TELECOM Digest several
years ago. Thanks very much Dennis for providing the additional background
on this, and yes, I quite agree with you on the constitutional provisions
relating to speech: the constitution discusses what the *government* can
and cannot do to individuals, not what individuals may choose to do with
each other or with reference to their employment, etc. Still it seems to
me like things must be sort of out of control at B-A where employee dis-
content is concerned if the company felt it necessary to strike back in
such a draconian way against so many employees all on the same day.

As Larry points out in the article just before yours, employees do not have
the right to insult their employer on company time, nor in my estimation is
it a prudent thing to do on their private time either ... but still, there
must be a lot of unhappieness among the workers there; a lot of grievances
the company would do well to resolve before they get worse. For every worker
who spoke openly and defiantly last Wednesday and got suspended, my hunch
is there are two or three others who are in the closet but feeling much the
same way. I can see both sides of this issue. Downsizing is always very
painful and if it must be done, then do it with compassion and as much
assistance as possible.

In 1975, when Amoco announced that the credit card billing office was
going to relocate in Des Moines, Iowa, there were about 2000 workers in
the Chicago office who were not going to be relocating. Amoco announced
their plans two full years ahead of time and made what I think was a most
honorable gesture to the workers left behind without a job: if they agreed
to stay on the job until the day and the hour on which they were told their
(individual) services were no longer required, that upon their departure
the company would automatically -- in addition to severance pay, all
accrued benefits, etc -- hand them each an additional check for one
thousand dollars. But, said Amoco, if you screw up, if you bad mouth us
and sabatoge us, steal from us or whatever and get caught, then out you
go -- on your ass! -- with just what the law says we have to give you and
no more. No need to have a union get involved; the union knows the law and
so do we ... A few workers tested them on that, and even up to the week
before the mass layoffs involved in closing the credit card billing office
the persons involved were discharged from the company in disgrace. On the
final two days of the Chicago operation, as employees went through the
Personnel Office enmasse collecting their final paychecks and signing off
on insurance papers, etc they were met individually by a vice-president
of Amoco who shook their hand and said "Mary Sue (or Pete, or Tom) I want
to personally thank you so much for the way you have helped the company and
supported us during the transition ..." and as promised each was handed
a check for one thousand dollars over and above what they otherwise had
coming to them.

Now were they so noble of their own volition, or because they were scared
there might be a repeat of the scene in 1968 when Diners Club moved their
processing offices to Denver?  In 1968, Diner's (then in Manhattan) secretly
set up a new processing office in Denver and hired several hundred new
workers without telling anyone. Then on the day before Thanksgiving in
1968 as they were handing out turkeys to the workers in Manhattan, they
announced ever so casually, "Have a happy Thanksgiving (it was a two day
holiday covering Thursday and Friday) and by the way, don't bother to come
back to work on Monday because we won't be here ..."  Shocked employees
(at the time, Diner's had about 3000 employees; they were only partially
converted to computer from manual record keeping) went on a rampage. They
rioted, literally smashing the offices to pieces. They broke into the
computer room and destroyed some billing tapes which had not yet been
backed up. The billing tapes were tossed out the window on the fifth
floor shredded like confetti down to Columbus Circle and the ground below.
As a result of the employee vandalism, Diners had to write off close to two
million dollars in credit card receivables they were unable to reconstruct
 from other sources.

Now in 1975 when Amoco relocated to Des Moines, they like Diners were
accused of moving primarily to get rid of all the 'lazy black workers'
who had been hired in recent years. Denver, like Des Moines had lots of
white people, the sons and daughters and wives of farmers; people still
imbued with the Protestant Work Ethic; people who would work for a lot
less per hour than the 'lazy black workers' in the inner city demanded,
and would do a better job at that. Skeptics said Amoco did not want to
have 'another Diners Club mess' on their hands so they allowed the workers
to 'blackmail' them in the final year of the Chicago operation. I think
not. I think they knew if you treat people honestly and with decency,
you'll get the same thing in return.

So as downsizing continues in the telecommunications industry over the
next several years -- and it must, it is bound to happen, especially in
the bloated and swollen local telco operations -- it is absolutely
essential that the telcos adopt a 'more than fair' attitude. One wag
said to me, "the telcos are going to have to bend over backwards on this;
not ask the workers to bend over foreward ..."  <grin>.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 29 Nov 94 13:54:36 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Philadelphia 911 Tragedy


The beating victim (who died) was 16, not 14, and his name was Eddie
Polec.  The mayor of Philadelphia has recommended disciplinary action
against seven operators in the 911 system; the union is fighting it.
The crime site, if I heard correctly, is near the boundary of two
police districts, and there were several police available (according
to KYW news-radio), but they were not notified and/or dispatched until
it was too late.

Five teens have been charged in connection with the incident.

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew D. Healy)
Subject: Re: 911, CNID, was Re: Problem With 911 Service in Philadelphia
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 18:14:29 -0500
Organization: Yale U.--Genetics & Medical Informatics


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (danny
burstein) wrote:

> Pat and all others: Amzaingly enough, most cities do -NOT- have CNID
> or other identifiers hooked up to their 911 system. Problem is simply
> cost and the required rewiring of a -lot- of old equipment.

Well, 911 service at my apartment in Hamden, CT, certainly _does_
have caller-ID, and very efficient operators as well.

Several serious car crashes have happened at the corner near my
apartment building.  In every case the sequence has been roughly as
follows:

   *CRASH* sound from outside.  My wife and I look out
    the window to see what appears to be a nasty accident.

   We call 911.  Operator says, "Oh,yes, I see you are
   calling from Whitney and Putnam.  We've already gotten
   several calls about that accident; they're on the way."

   About 90 seconds after the initial crash we hear the
   first sirens.  Within about five minutes there are two
   patrol cars, a fire engine, a paramedic van, and a
   couple of ambulances at the scene.

I hear they can be a little slower in New Haven, because they are much
busier down there.

I see in today's newspaper that some people have been fired over the
Philadelphia incident, in which a person was beaten to death while
many people called 911 over an extended period of time.



Matthew D. Healy               [e-mail]
Postdoc,Yale School of Medicine, Genetics & Medical Informatics,
SHM I-148, 333 Cedar St, New Haven, CT 06510

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

From: [e-mail] (STAN SCHWARTZ)
Subject: Prodigy Now Has Newsgroups
Date: 30 Nov 1994 05:12:53 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY


Not that I'm a shill for Prodigy, but they've added Usenet newsgroups
to their "Plus" service level.  I recommend it if it's the only
dial-up IP that one has access to, but in many places there are
cheaper alternatives.

Prodigy users on the Internet are the old-men-in-hats on the Information
Highway.


STAN SCHWARTZ  [e-mail]
email accepted at --> [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Stan, that's a terrible thing to say!
There is a place on the information highway for everyone, including
old men in hats. Look at me: I sit here everyday doing my thing, although
where its getting me, I don't know.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc B. Grant)
Subject: Help With Oki 892 ESN
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 1994 22:19:25 GMT
Organization: Texas Metronet, Internet for the Individual


I have an OKI 892 that I need to change the ESN on.  Anyone know where
I can get this info?  OKI service refused to give it out, and the
local service center is numb.  This is for legal use, but I can't find
someone who pass this info to me.  Anyone have any ideas??


Marc B. Grant        | Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]  | Pager: 214-246-1150
Amateur Radio N5MEI  |

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

From: [e-mail] (alain arnaud)
Subject: Automatic Callback
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 18:00:16 GMT


I need to set up an automatic callback system. In more details,
someone calls the system, let it ring once or twice and hangs up.  The
system calls him back and provides a dial tone.

Who would make boards that would provide that function, preferably for
ISA bus.


Thanks,

Alain

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Brown)
Subject: MCI Conference Call
Date: 30 Nov 1994 18:07:16 GMT
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.


I was just wondering what (if anything) people who called the MCI
1-800 number and entered the 7777 passcode thought of that conference
playback service. Was it easy to use, did it sound okay, were instructions
clear, etc...???  If you had no problems with it and did not need to
give the DTMF interface any thought, I'd like to hear that, too.


Thanks,

BB

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

From: [e-mail] (Egan F. Ford)
Subject: DTMF to Serial Port Help Wanted
Date: 30 Nov 1994 18:51:43 GMT
Organization: Call Business Systems
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I need a box that will allow me to dial in to it with a touch tone
phone and after the box answers I press some tones and the box
converts them to numbers and pumps them out the serial port to a
program I have waiting to receive them.

I know there is such a box, but where can I find it.

E-mail please.


Thanks,

Egan F. Ford    [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Diessel)
Subject: Re: Tehran Changes Emergency Number
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 1994 08:58:57 +0100
Organization: University of the Federal Armed Forces Munich


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (TELECOM
Digest Editor) wrote:

> According to the manager of emergency telecom services in Tehran,
> three or four out of every five calls received were nuissance calls
> made by children. The nuisance calls have considerably reduced in
> quantity since the emergency phone number was changed to 115 beginning
> this past month.

Do you know why they selected 115? Why didn't they stick to the European
standard emergency number 112?


Thomas Diessel
University of the Federal Armed Forces Munich
Computer Science Department - D-85577 Neubiberg, Germany


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have no idea how/why they do things
the way they do them there.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 30 Nov 1994 14:09:09 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Robert A. Virzi)
Subject: Last Laugh! Ameritech the Beautiful


I really enjoyed this.  Hope you do to.
BV


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, okay, here we go, with apologies
to Katherine Lee Bates.  PAT]

  Posted to rec.humor or some related group:

  In article <3at2qh$[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob Allison) wrote:

Ameritech the Beautiful
by Laura Robbins
November 11, 1993

(Sung to the tune of America the Beautiful)

Ah! beautiful for telephones
At work, in home and car,
They beep and blink, they
   buzz and ring,
No matter where you are.

Chorus:

Ameritech, Ameritech,
 From sea to shining sea,
With microchips and optic strands,
Invades our privacy.

Oh! marvelous technology,
Results in awesome things,
Recordings answer every call,
No need for human beings.

Chorus:

Ameritech, Ameritech,
Press 1 through 10 and then,
There's no one there (to help or care)
So press them all again.

Oh! satellites magnificent,
Above the fruited plain,
You feed us TV's old reruns,
A monumental gain!

Chorus:

Ameritech, Ameritech,
God mend thine every flaw,
Until VoiceMail and cordless phones,
Are all against the law.


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

[e-mail]             Think Globally. ===
[phone]                            === Act Locally!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And that's not all!  One final dig
at Ameritech to close this issue follows immediatly.    PAT]

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

From: Alan E. Asper <[e-mail]>
Date: 30 Nov 94 13:42:22 CST
Subject: Re: Ameritech the Beautiful


Keeping in the whole pop-culture vein, I prefer envisioning sneering,
grey-suited and bandolier-clad Ameritech executives/banditos:

"Type-ahead? Our residential voice mail don' need no steenkeen
type-ahead!"


A (new and bewildered) customer,

Alan Asper    Andersen Consulting


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If I expect to get this issue of the
Digest distributed in the normal way on Ameritech news groups, I think
I better quit while I am ahead. Gee Dennis, talk about making insulting
and denigrating remarks toward telcos ... Its a good thing I don't
work for them; I'd be on the unemployment line starting tomorrow!   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #432
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10886;
          2 Dec 94 19:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23837; Fri, 2 Dec 94 12:35:12 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23829; Fri, 2 Dec 94 12:35:07 CST
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 12:35:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #433

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 2 Dec 94 12:35:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 433

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Freakers and Fraudulent Billing on "Chat" Lines (Douglas W. Martin)
    Rochester Telephone buys Americcan Sharecom (Steve C. Whalen)
    Regulation About Microwave Usage in the US? (Paul A. Lee)
    Alert: FCC Wireless Rules (Rolf Brauchler via Michael Chui)
    Pager Testing Procedures (Don Hiatt)
    Pager Advice Wanted (Russell Brunelle)
    POCSAG Standard for Pager (Laurence Si)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Eric N. Florack)
    Re: MCI's Announcement ([e-mail])
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Brian Mcgroarty)

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 America
On Line. 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, 02 Dec 94 06:15:20 PST
From: [e-mail] (Douglas W. Martin)
Subject: Freakers and Fraudulent Billing on "Chat" Lines


     I've recently had some extremely strange interactions with
chat/party/phone-sex lines, and would like some factual info.  Lots of
people propose ways they think they can call these things for free.

     Of course, the most common thing is to exchange stolen calling
card numbers among a small group of callers.  The stolen numbers
usually work for a few days, and since the number receives thousands
of calls, there's really no way for the phone company to collect.
Other callers claim they can set up 800 numbers, so the people with
the special 800 number can call free.  I think the 800 number is,
however, billed to some third party without their knowledge.  The
third party has usually been another chat line caller's house, with
some freaker getting the caller-id and somehow setting up the
fraudlent 800 number.

     The latest scheme I've heard discussed claims to use third-party
billing to a defunct exchange.  For example, one group of callers were
apparently billing calls to (416)465-xxxx where the 465 exchange used
to be part of metro Toronto and is now only dialable with 905.

     My questions: can calls be thiird-party billed to numbers where
permissive dialing has expired?  Can a freaker with the right
info/codes/passwords etc actually get an 800 number to bill to my
house?  I once dialed one of the 800 numbers and was connected to the
chat line, and it was obviously billed to someone.  The 800 number
supposedly worked for three or four days, and about a day later a new
800 number was given to the chosen few.  In general, how is this done?
I'm not a freaker and obviously don't want specifics, I just wonder
wonder how vulnerable are chat line callers to such fraud.  I asked
at&t to put a third-party block on my phone numbers, and I asked them
to insure me that no 800 number could be assigned by anyone to my
numbers.  However, they told me that they couldn't stop some small
telco in central Nevada from doing these things.

     The freaker I talked to also mentioned "diverters", which he
defined to me as numbers that would give a new dial tone such that the
subsequent call couldn't be traced.  Can it all be that simple if you
want to defraud a person or phone company?

     I thought I was somewhat knowledgeable about telecom issues; e.g.
I knew about 2600 Hz tones when in-band signaling was still around,
but never was very interested in ripping anyone off.  What is the
state of the art today for an amateur freaker regarding fraudlent
connections to numbers that receive thousands of calls per day?


Doug Martin  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was unaware that calls to 900 numbers
could be billed to telco calling cards. Such billing cannot be done
around here; maybe it can elsewhere. Around here 900/976 can be called
only by direct dial from a private phone. You cannot call from a payphone
and use coins, you cannot do third party billing, etc. As far as billing
to what you term 'defunct exchanges' is concerned, there might be some
window of time between an exchange being moved from one area code to
another and the long distance carrier's records of same being updated
to reflect this, but surely it would get caught in the accounting and
the charges sent to the investigative or adjustments area to be reviewed
and properly billed.

Now 'diverters' are a different matter entirely. Most people with call
diverters are smart enough to (a) keep them secure with passwords and
(b) have the outgoing side of the line pretty well restricted as to
what it can and cannot reach. Actually, the correct term would be
'WATS extender' (named for how, years ago companies using them had a
local dial in number where employees could call and then access the
outgoing WATS lines of the company). On the other hand, a 'call diverter'
was an old-fashioned type of call forwarding device. You called into
it and it automatically outdialed to a set location and passed your
call though; the caller had little or no control over where it sent
calls. So whether it is a call diverter or a WATS extender, if the
owner is not smart enough to keep it very secure against tampering or
misuse, then that is his problem. He might as well install an extension
of his phone on a street corner and hang a sign saying 'this phone is
for use by anyone to call anywhere ...'      PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (steve c. whalen)
Subject: Rochester Telephone Buys American Sharecom
Date: 2 Dec 1994 05:04:27 GMT
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


It was announced today that RTC had aquired American Sharecom Long
Distance, a Minneapolis MN Long Distance carrier with operations in
the Midwest, Northwest and California.  This action combined with the
recent purchase of WTC of California will compliment RTC's Long
Distance network and make it a nationwide network. With these
additions RTC's Long Distance operation becomes the seventh largest
Long Distance company in the nation.

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

Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 11:46:52 -0500
Subject: Regulation about Microwave Usage in the US?
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


In {TELECOM Digest} Volume 14 #432, Juergen Ziegler wrote:

> While travelling in the US, I recognized a large number of microwave
> links.  Mostly to be operated by several telecommunications carriers
> like local or long-distance companies.

> But it seems to me, that "private" operators had their own links. Such as
> one factory plant to be linke to another.

> What is the regulation about such microwave links in the US?

> Who is entitled to apply for the neccessary frequencies?

I can't quote chapter and verse from the regulations, but based on my
looks at microwave options over the years, I'm aware of the following:

Microwave licensing, frequency assignment, and path assignment are
regulated in the U.S. by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has jurisdiction over
antenna and tower location and configuration, and obstruction lighting
on structures taller than 45 feet (approximately 14 metres) above the
average elevation of the surrounding terrain.

Also, antenna/tower structure placement and configuration is often
subject to local government zoning, land use, and structural
ordinances. However, the FCC and FAA requirements can override local
ones.

Common carrier microwave relay in the U.S. operates in several
frequency ranges that are typically referred to as 2 GHz, 6 GHz, 8
GHz, 10 GHz, and 18 GHz, although the actual frequency ranges bracket
the nominal frequencies. Except for the 2 GHz band, these frequency
ranges are also used by many utility, transportation, and pipeline
companies for their private relay systems.

Currently, the 2 GHz band is in the process of being reassigned from
common carrier microwave to Personal Communications Device services.
The FCC is administering a controversial plan to reimburse the
carriers for the expense they incur in shifting frequencies or
changing to alternative transmission media.

The 18 GHz band, and a smattering of frequencies nominally referred to
as 22 GHz, 23 GHz, and 25 GHz, are used primarily for private links.
In practice, many of these "private" links are installed and
maintained by carriers or by turnkey service providers. These bands
are for relatively short range, typically one-hop uses. Virtually
anyone is eligible to apply for use of these frequencies, but the
licensing requirements are complex enough to require several
specialists -- from engineers to lawyers -- to get FCC/FAA approval
and licensing.

The 18 and 22 GHZ bands are widely used for alternate access to
carriers, for television and radio studio-to-transmitter links (STLs),
for private and municipal network interconnection, and for cellular
interconnection. Their range of service is generally under 15 miles
(25 km), and frequency and path allocations in the metropolitan areas
where they are commonly used keep the actual link length under seven
miles (12 km).

The 23 GHz band has seen a lot of campus and intra-city, inter-building
use for data, voice or mixed traffic over ranges up to 10 miles (16
km). Typical hardware for 23 GHz service is relatively compact and
inexpensive and carries four T1/E1 signals, or two business-quality
video with audio and telemetry, or one broadcast-quality video with
audio and telemetry.

The 25 GHz band is a relatively recent addition to private microwave
service.  I'm not too familiar with it, but it seems to use significantly
different equipment from the other private service bands. I believe it
may offer some multi-point capabilities for metropolitan-area network
(MAN) service.

If someone tells me I'm wrong, I'll blame it on the sales reps and
trade articles I've paid attention to over the last 15 years.


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

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

Subject: Alert: FCC Wireless Rules
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 1994 11:58:35 -0500
From: Michael Chui <[e-mail]>


     ------- Forwarded Message
From: Rolf Brauchler <[e-mail]>

               WIRELESS OPPORTUNITIES COALITION
   URGENT: IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUESTED, PLEASE POST WIDELY

     The Wireless Opportunities Coalition was just formed to protect
and promote the opportunities presented by unlicensed wireless
telecommunications products and services.  Among the products and
services you may be familiar with that use this technology are local
and wide area wireless computer communications networks, digital
cordless telephones, remote meter reading, security and alarm devices,
wireless PBX systems, and wireless headphones, speakers and video.

     What has prompted us to organize and, with this posting, ask for
your help, is an immediate threat to producers, consumers and users of
these products and services posed by rules about to be implemented by
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

     A complete description of the issues is available at our internet
site.  You can gopher to <wireless.policy.net> or WWW to
<http://wireless.policy.net/wireless/wireless.html>.

     The Coalition is currently made up of companies that produce
products that qualify under "Part 15" of the FCC's rules to be
marketed without a license but which nonetheless use part of the
public airwaves in the 902-928 Mhz frequency band.  Those involved in
producing Part 15 products are typically highly innovative,
entrepreneurial companies.  While some larger companies produce Part
15 products, much of the excitement in the industry is from the
innovations of various start-up providers of new educational and
internet related services.

     The FCC is about to adopt rules that will authorize an expanded
use of the spectrum shared by the Part 15 products and services by
those offering broadband "automatic vehicle monitoring" (AVM)
services.  This expansion, backed primarily by AirTouch, Inc., will
likely result in technical conflicts that make the development and
growth of Part 15 products and services very difficult.

     We are seeking an FCC rule that requires all commercial users
sharing the band to use compatible technologies that would permit the
largest number of uses of that spectrum. However, AirTouch and other
providers of broadband AVM claim a preference in the spectrum and want
to expand their services in a way that would raise serious problems
for Part 15 users.

     At this point, we are asking your help to simply slow down the
process at the FCC in order to allow the issue to be more fully aired
and discussed among those in the public who might be most affected.
In our view, that includes users of the internet who might be able to
get cheaper and easier access through wireless technologies, teachers
and educators whose classrooms could more easily be wired and
connected with this technology, and consumers who stand to benefit
from new, more powerful wireless products.

     You can help by contacting the FCC to let them know that you
share a concern about the development of this technology.  Here is
how:

     1.  Contact the FCC with a message urging them not to act on the
Part 15/AVM rulemaking without further opportunity for the public to
comment and participate in the proceeding.  Note that you were unaware
of the issue until just recently and believe that there are public
interest issues that need to be more fully aired before a final
decision is made.

     A direct message to the FCC Chairman with a copy to each
Commissioner and two hard copies -- as per the FCC's rules -- to the
Secretary IMMEDIATELY is what is most urgently needed.

     The Chairman and Commissioners e-mail addresses are as follows:

     Chairman Reed Hundt              [e-mail]
     Commissioner James Quello          [e-mail]
     Commissioner Andrew Barrett       [e-mail]
     Commissioner Susan Ness           [e-mail]
     Commissioner Rachelle Chong       [e-mail]

     The Snail Mail address for the Chairman and Commissioners is
Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street, Washington, D.C.
20554.

     Two hard copies to the Secretary should be mailed to William
Caton, Secretary, Federal Communications Commission, 1919 M Street,
NW, Washington, D.C.  20554.

     A sample letter is provided at our gopher and WWW sites.  If you
have WWW access and you would like to use the sample letter, we can,
with your authorization, have it e-mailed and FAXED for you.

     2.  After you have an opportunity to review the materials
available at our internet site, please consider lending your support
to our effort by joining the Coalition.  A copy of our Statement of
Principles and a membership form can be found at our Internet site.
We will put you on the mailing list so you are kept up to date on
events.  We will also add your name to our materials as they are
distributed.  Finally, you will be asked periodically to participate
in efforts to raise our voices to gain the attention of the decision
makers and bureaucrats in Washington.


Sincerely,


Rolf Brauchler                      [e-mail]
Wireless Opportunities Coalition    1875 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Suite 645  Washington, D.C.  20009  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Hiatt)
Subject: Pager Testing Procedures
Date: 2 Dec 1994 10:09:59 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Subscriber Account


Hi!

  Does anyone know of a formal(?) testing procedure for paging
systems?  I do not mean whether or not the pager meets FCC guidelines,
but more like some sort of standardized method to insure that a local
paging system meets specifications (ie group pages sent to whole
group, alarms trigger properly and page correct pager).

  Any help would be greatly appreciated (even if the methods pertain
to different devices, at least I could have a starting place).


Thank you very much,


Don Hiatt: <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Russell Brunelle)
Subject: Pager Advice Wanted
Date: 2 Dec 1994 07:56:50 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


Hi.  I'm not very well versed in modern telephone technology, but I have
decided to buy my girlfriend a beeper (or are they called pagers now?)
for Christmas.   We live in the Seattle area.

It would have to have a monthly fee that's very low (I don't mind if
the unit is expensive to buy, because I'm paying for that, but she
will be paying the monthly fee so that should be QUITE low), a display
that can light up so you can read it when it's dark, the ability to
vibrate (or do something quietly) instead of beep so it doesn't bug
people, and the ability to store a few numbers in case several people
call in a row.

I would also like (and perhaps here is where some advice would come
in) the ability to send some sort of message with the phone number.
This could be as simple as the pager allowing me to type more than
seven digits so the first seven digits would be the phone number she
should call and the rest are a code indicating generally what the call
is about and how urgent it is (i.e. 44 for it's just to chat, 77 for
the cat died, etc.).  Is there some way to type a space or dash
character so the person can tell where the phone number ends and the
code begins?

Also, wasn't there a book published recently with three digit codes
for various messages?  Does anyone know what this was called or where
I could find something like this?

What sort of pager should I get, and where could I get it the most
inexpensively?  Is there some neat new feature I should look for in a
pager?

Any help I could get would be greatly appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail] (Laurence Si)
Subject: POCSAG Standard for Pager
Date: 2 Dec 1994 10:07:56 GMT
Organization: Hitachi Semiconductor Penang


I am looking for informations on POCSAG format standard (CCIR code#1).

Please respond by email to [e-mail].


Thank you.

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

Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 10:01:54 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement;TELECOM Digest V14 #431


In #431, John Higdon writes:

>> Like Padgett, I'd like to see a fixed price structure. (Having a good
>> solid local dial-up access in real time here in Rochester, would help,
>> as well. Are you listening, MCI? Rotten Tel? NYtel?)

> But this is WHY we wail about things such as MCI's vision for the
> Internet.  The commercializers (such as MCI or telcos) see the
> Internet as segments of minutes or bytes upon which meters can be
> placed and bills generated and sent. Why would telcos, who are leaving
> the concept of "flat-rate service" in droves suddenly get religion in
> the Church of Fixed Rate? Why would MCI, a company that virtually
> knows no other way to charge than by-the-minute suddenly be interested
> in giving you unlimited dialup access?

Simple: Survival. And, I don't mind paying a flat hourly fee, either,
provided it's a reasonable one. Consider what I suggested: the only
way that the net is ever groing to grow is with the influx of private
sector cash. How, other than charges which reflect useage, will such
cash ever be available?

> But what is more sinister involves a redefinition of the Internet
> structure from peer-to-peer to client/server. The commercializers see
> the Internet as a collection of computer systems (which they control)
> dispensing data (which they furnish) over circuits (which they own) to
> customers' computers running software (which the commercializers
> furnish) which limits the customer's access to whatever the
> commercializer deems necessary.

While the commercializers will own a substantial number of servers, I
have reason to doubt that it will ever get tot he point where they
control all, or even most of them.  Consider the situation with
individual BBS's with only dial-ups, on FIDO or GTnet and so on.
You'll recall how the effort to control that area has failed.

Off the cuff remark: Your discription sounds rather like PRODIGY,
doesn't it?

> Anyone who now contributes to the net, from people who post articles
> to Usenet or publications such as this one, to those who make
> available vast libraries of material available via FTP, will be in
> competition with the commercializers who now want to sell this same
> material to the unwashed masses. If the commercializers are calling
> the tune, they will want to remove these traditional net contributors
> from the equation.

If the dial-ups are any indication, that won't happen. The way the
commercial ventures will get out front, if they do, will be to provide
a quality of service that is simply unavailable elsewhere. There are
commerical services that, indeed, do this now. It's how they survive,
now.

Barry Margolin writes, in the same issue:

> MCI would have to build more network anyway -- their network is the
> backbone that connects most of the regional networks.  So if the
> customers who might have connected directly to MCI instead went to
> regionals, much of their traffic would still end up on MCI's network
> eventually.  So they'll need the capacity either way.

I doubt that'll be much of a strain. Let's recall the extra capacity
they gathered by dumping PCP, shall we?

                             -=-=-=

And with this note, I say my goodbyes for a time.  My job is changing,
and I'm moving. I may not have access to this list from my new
position.  To Pat, I say, thank you for everything, and it does my
heart good to see you've recovered from your recent problems.
(Unintended pun, I assure you... but I'm to lazy to edit it now! ;->)
With any luck, I'll be causing high BP in here again soon enough.

To the rest: Smile. It makes the Government nervous.

/E


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well gosh ... the responses you made on
the subject of MCI are overshadowed by your final paragraph mentioning
your departure from the net. I extend my best wishes to you and hope
you will indeed be back in touch with us soon, even if through one of
the commercial services if you are no longer able to participate from
your work place.  PAT]


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

From: [e-mail] (SethB777)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: 1 Dec 1994 17:04:33 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


Indeed, all IXCs must pay fairly substantial "local access" orthe like
charges; that is, I believe, one of the main reasons MCI for example
is moving to offer it's own local services in major cities in the near
future.

But it raises the qeustion, how can a new phone company justify the
infrastructure expense of trying to compete with embedded networks of
LECs by installing their own network?  Or can they only "win" in
metropolitan areas where fiber is cheaper to install and garner
massive amounts of business customers?  Any thoughts?

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Mcgroarty)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 1994 11:12:56 GMT
Organization: HR! (soft)


> Needless to say, MCI will find out soon enough that full Internet
> access can be had for $20.00 a month flat rate, using dial-up
> SLIP/PPP. For $65.00 per month, I can get my own domain name (through
> a local provider)!

There's still not a general Internet service provider in Rockford,
Illinois (Illinois' second largest city.)  Next year we're supposed to
finally get FreeNet which, per the current proposal, imposes time
limits, doesn't support telnet or IRC during certain hours and doesn't
support FTP at all.

I would suspect that many areas are in the same situation and that the
number will grow as schools lose their free/subsidized feeds.


Brian V. McGroarty -- [e-mail] -- FAX [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #433
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11522;
          2 Dec 94 20:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26873; Fri, 2 Dec 94 13:32:35 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26866; Fri, 2 Dec 94 13:32:31 CST
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 94 13:32:31 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #434

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 2 Dec 94 13:32:30 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 434

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    WilTel Ignores *67 For Caller ID; Also Incorrect Billing (Doug Reuben)
    Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors (Dave Niebuhr)
    Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Greg Monti)
    Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU (Dennis E. Miyoshi)
    Call Diverter Wanted (Darren Smith)
    GTE Switch Still Buggy (Ron Schnell)
    Direct Inward Dialing on Voice Mail Card; Other PC Card? (K. van den Hout)
    White Mountain's "DSP Summit" on the WWW (DSPnet Administrator)
    Looking for E1 Vendors (Ernest Brouwer)
    Looking for 1-900-Number Service Providers (M. L. Huang)
    Looking for MNP Protocol Specs (Chris Kalisiak)
    911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (Larry Schwarcz)
    What's Up With DCA? (Stefan Schulte-Strathaus)
    T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP? (Mark Silbernagel)
    Exchange Voice Mail (Kristoff Bonne)

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 America
On Line. 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] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: WilTel Ignores *67 For Caller ID, Also Incorrect Billing
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 1994 04:24:52 PST


I just noticed that WilTel has turned on Caller ID signaling from CT
to points outward, such as New York and New Jersey.

They have been doing this for years (OK, maybe two :) ) from NY, and
it ALWAYS responded to the blocking code, namely, *67 (1167 from a
rotary phone). So if you called a number in Boston with a WilTel
account in New York, and that number had Caller ID, your number would
show up since you went through WilTel, unless you had Per-Line
blocking. If you dialed *67 and then called the same number in Boston,
the Caller ID box would show PRIVATE.  In general, calls over WilTel
responded to Caller ID control code(s) the very same way that a local
call would.

Until recently, this worked from many areas, except Connecticut.  CT
customers could dial out with WilTel, but the receiving end would get
"Out Of Area" all the time. There was no variation to this pattern
depending on what trunk you went out on -- it just never ID'ed, period.

However, WilTel apparently just started sending Caller ID information
from Connecticut to other states (CT is mainly one LATA, so Inter-LATA
means generally out-of-state, and the local Telco here, SNET, "handles"
traffic to the little section of the NY Metro LATA in Greenwich, CT).
Although I take this as a positive step, they are IGNORING customer
requested PER-LINE blocking, as well as the *67 toggle!

This means that you can have a line where you EXPECT that your number
will not be displayed, by either ordering Per-line blocking or
pre-pending *67 (1167) to each call, and yet no matter what you do
your number WILL show up on the receiving end. (As an aside, my *67
works fine for SNET-handled calls, as well as calls over other
carriers which do provide Caller ID info on their networks -- it will
just not work for WilTel! :( )

I called up WilTel's center in Tulsa(?) and a very nice guy there said
he would pass the issue along and give it priority, but in the meantime,
be warned that your *67 MAY not do anything if you use WilTel.

Also, note that WilTel BILLS for incomplete calls made from non-presubscribed
(1+) lines.  So if you want to try out this Caller ID thing by dialing
10555 then 1+ area code + number and see if the number appears on the
distant end, be prepared to get a bill from USBI (WilTel's billing
co?) for a lot of one minute calls, which will be billed EVEN IF THE
NUMBER DOESN'T ANSWER!.

Don't try arguing with USBI, they are totally rude and will more or
less tell you to get lost. I called WilTel about this and sent e-mail
to a number of people, but as of last month this is STILL happening.

In any event, hopefully they will be able to take care of this *67
problem in CT soon. I believe that the FCC (as well as state agencies
in states with multiple LATAs) *requires* that *67 block the display
of your number, which if true, indicates that WilTel is not in
compliance with the regulations on this issue. Perhaps it is something
simple like stripping the "privacy bit" generated by a *67 which they
can easily correct (hey, it works from everywhere else!), but if they
can't perhaps a call to the FCC may do the trick (at least in an ideal
world :) ).


Doug  //  [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 02 Dec 1994 11:25:35 EST
From: Dave Niebuhr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors


{Newsday} on 11/30/94 had this article in its business section:

"Cellular One has temporarily suspended a service that allows
out-of-town visitors to use their phones in the New York City area
because cellular bandits have been stealing their phone numbers."

much text deleted ... dwn

"Fraud in New York has reach the point that thieves stole codes of
phones used by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and Police Commissioner William
Bratton earlier this year."

"Cellular One customers who live in the Washington, D.C. area (one of
those affected) will be unable to receive calls on their cellular
phones while in New York City and parts of northern New Jersey.  Calls
will either be automatically forwarded to subscribers' voice mail, or
 -- if they don't have voice mail -- a recording will tell the caller
that the recipient no longer is in Cellular One's coverage area.

"Subscribers will be able to place calls from and within the New York
City area, but they will be operator-assisted and nearly three times
more expensive."


Dave Niebuhr      Internet: [e-mail]
                            [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]

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

Date: Fri, 02 Dec 1994 13:10:46 EST
From: Greg Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended


I am a Cellular One Washington-Baltimore customer (system owned by
Southwestern Bell).  I just got an oversized yellow postcard in the
mail.  Verbatim:

***Important news for Cellular One customers!!

Cellular Fraud on the Increase!

As users of Cellular One's service, you know how valuable and useful a
cellular phone has become.  Unfortunately, so do numerous criminals
who want to steal your cellular phone and electronic serial numbers,
either physically or electronically.  These stolen numbers are then
sold on the street.  Hundreds or even thousands of dollars in local
and long-distance calls are made before being discovered by our
customers on their bills.  Even New York City's mayor and chief of
police have had their cellular numbers stolen and used six times
already this yeaer.  To detect and prevent this type of fraud,
Cellular One has recently installed a new fraud management system.

Since implementing the fraud management system, we have monitored an
extremely high amount of fraud originating from the New York City
metro area (including northern New Jersey).  To protect our customers
from becoming victims of fraud and to deny criminals use of stolen
cellular phone numbers, we are TEMPORARILY SUSPENDING AUTOMATIC
ROAMING AND CALL DELIVERY TO THE NEW YORK CITY AREA.  [emphasis
theirs]

New Roaming Procedures for New York City:

What does this mean to you?  If you are roaming in the New York City
area, incoming calls to your cellular number will not be delivered to
your phone.  Instead, callers will be forwarded to your Message Plus
voice mailbox or be advised by a recording that you are out of the
coverage area.  Outgoing calls may still be made.  However, they will
be intercepted by an operator who will request your credit card
information for billing purposes.  Call set-up charges and per minute
rates will be significantly higher than todays' standard roaming
rates.  Emergency calls to 911 will continue to be free.

YOUR ROAMING SERVICE STILL WORKS ACROSS THE NATION

With the temporary exception of the New York City area, your Cellular
One roaming and call delivery services will not be affected in other
parts of the nation.  Again, we apologize for any inconvenience this
may cause, especially during the holiday season.  We are hopeful this
situation can be resolved in a short period of time.  We will keep you
informed on the New York City roaming situation through bill inserts
and the {On the Move} newsletter.

If you have any questions, please call out Customer Relations Department
at 1-800-CELL-ONE.

Cellular One.  Clearly Better.

[end of quoted material]

Note that it doesn't say what happens if a caller dials 212 847-7626
(the New York A-carrier roamer port), receives a dial tone and dials
your ten-digit cellular number.  I tried that and got an immediate fast
busy after dialing my own ten-digit cellular number.  But this may not
have been a good test since my phone was in the Washington-Baltimore
area at the time -- and turned off.

This appears to apply only to Washington-Baltimore Cellular One
customers roaming in the A-carrier system (now owned by AT&T) in New
York.


Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    [phone]
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      [phone]
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dennis E. Miyoshi)
Subject: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU
Date: 01 Dec 1994 22:46:30 GMT
Organization: USDA-Soil Conservation Service


Hello.  I hate to ask such a simple question but, I am to the point of
total confusion.  I am in the process of connecting two TyLink ONS150
CSUs.  After several attempts at getting the CSUs to sync I was
successful.  However, my routers seem to be confused.  The last
setting that I have is the LBO.  The manuals state that this must be
specified by the carrier.

My two questions are:

1.  What is the meaning of the LBO?
2.  What would the results be if the LBO is set to the wrong dB level?

Thanks for the help in advance.


          Dennis E. Miyoshi, PE
       Computer Engineer/LAN Manager
    ARPA Internet:  [e-mail]
    ARPA Internet:  [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 02 Dec 1994 06:51:56 EST
From: Darren Smith <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call Diverter Wanted


I am trying to get a hold of a call diverter.  Ideally what I'd really
like is for the device to pick up the line and give me another line's
dial tone (security would be important).  But I'll settle for
something that can forward me to a preprogrammed number.

I'm in an area that does NOT have the call forwarding from teleco.
I've been searching quite a bit, ie Hello Direct but haven't found
anything.  I guess the best thing would be something I could make, but
doesn't have to be.  Anyone have any ideas?  Is what I want even
legal?


Darren Smith   University of South Florida (Tampa)
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Tampa area does not yet have call
forwarding (or, I assume, the other basic ESS features?  That is
amazing. Yes, call diverters are perfectly legal. I have one here I
got many years ago from Radio Shack (part 43-155), known as 'Duofone
CFS-200'. You dial into it on one line and it picks up a second line
and dials out to whatever has been programmed in it. You can change
the forwarding remotely (or turn the device off and on) by dialing
into the second line and entering a passcode and other instructions.
I thought Hello Direct also had them available, but you say not. It
could be call forwarding has become so prevalent that none of the
companies making these devices see any profit in them any longer. PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 01 Dec 94 18:20:45 EST
From: Ron Schnell <[e-mail]>
Subject: GTE Switch Still Buggy


Well, I moved out of the GTE California area for six years, and
decided to try and move back, but nothing has changed, unfortunately.
I am back in the same area, where they have their 5ESS equivalent
(complete with some CLASS services), but, the same bugs that were
there before are still there.

The worst one is the half-duplex three-way calling.  When you make a
three-way call, all of the connections become half-duplex; that is,
only one person can talk at a time.  This is particularly bad if you
happen to be talking to someone else in the room while the remote
phone is ringing.  You will never hear if the other person answers.

I don't understand why can still charge as much as PacBell for a
service that is clearly substandard.

Of course, I can't get call-waiting during three-way calling, but I
shouldn't complain about that, since many Baby Bells don't allow
it either, but it is especially annoying coming from one that did.

Half of the time I press the switchhook to answer a call waiting or
initiate three-way calling and it doesn't work; I need to wait until
the third person answers on three-way calling before flashing again;
if I accidentally flash the switchhook while at a dialtone, the line
goes into some sort of mode where it will only accept pulse, even
after I hang up several times, and about 100 other problems.

Can't the PUC demand an equal level of service between PacBell and
GTE?  It's not fair that because I live two blocks west I have to deal
with these problems!

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

From: [e-mail] (Koos van den Hout)
Subject: Direct Inward Dialing on Voice Mail Card; Other PC Card?
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 1994 12:20:00 GMT
Organization: HIN / BBS Koos z'n Doos


I was approached by someone who is interesting in providing a system
where people use direct inward dialing to select information items.

Something like:

Allocating block 555-xxxx. When someone dials 555-1234, the number 1234 is
used as selection of information.

Somehow the selection 1234 would have to be passed to the voicemail
system.

All of this on the Dutch phone system.

Can this be done?


TIA,

Grtx. KH
Koos van den Hout ----------------------------------------------- Sysop --\
AtHome:[e-mail]       BBS Koos z'n Doos ([phone] 14400)
AtWork:[e-mail]                   V32b V42b       ([phone] 28800)
URL: http://www.hvu.nl | PGP key by finger | Still looking for a license
/users/koos            |  [e-mail]   | plate with 'RFC 822'.

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

From: dspnet!dspadmin@@uunet.uu.net (DSPnet Administrator)
Subject: White Mountain's "DSP Summit" on the WWW
Date: 2 Dec 1994 00:01:54 GMT
Organization: DSPnet, Inc., Waltham MA, USA


White Mountain's "DSP Summit" Fall Newsletter can now be accessed on
the world wide web via DSPnet.  This is the second issue of this
Newsletter to appear on the WWW.

The issue features the following information:

- C5x Development System
- DSP hits the Internet
- JTAG Emulation Principles
- PC vs. Sun Environment

To access this newsletter with a WWW browser go to URL:
http://www.dspnet.com Access with a common terminal: telnet dspnet.com
(and login as lynx) DSPnet is free (you just have to register once
when you login for the first time.)

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

From: [e-mail] (Ernest Brouwer)
Subject: Looking for E1 Vendors
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 1994 18:29:27 GMT


I am looking for E1 DSU/CSU vendors.  Every one I've called here in
the States has 'firm plans for E1 next year sometime' but nothing more
than that.

Any info/pointers/etc are appreciated.


Ernie Brouwer

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

From: [e-mail] (M. L. Huang)
Subject: Looking For 1-900-Number Service Providers
Organization: NMRI
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 08:47:14 GMT


Hi, all:

   I'm looking for 1-900- service providers and info on how it works.
Please send reply to:

E-mail: [e-mail]


Thanks!

Mark Huang

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Kalisiak)
Subject: Looking For MNP Protocol Specs
Organization: UB
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 13:31:48 GMT


Hello all,

    I am looking for the MNP protocol specs from Microcom. If
anyone knows where I can find them on the 'net, please let me know.


Thanks,

Chris Kalisiak       [e-mail]
[e-mail]    Tel:[phone]

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

Subject: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 94 15:39:45 -0800
From: Larry Schwarcz <[e-mail]>


I'm trying to see if it's possible to have a cellular phone that is
NOT activated with any carrier and still use it to call 911 in
emergencies.  This would be for those who are not interested in having
a cellular phone for day-to-day use, but, want the comfort of one
while traveling (emergencies ONLY).

I called my two local carriers (CellularOne and GTE Mobilnet in the
San Francisco/Bay Area) and got mixed answers.  CellularOne says that
it *might* work.  Depending on what cell you're in, you may or may not
get through.  GTE Mobilnet says yes.  You'll always get through.

Are there any laws concerning this?  Could someone buy a phone with
that in mind and truly count on it?


Thanks!

Lawrence R. Schwarcz, Software Design Engr/IND      Internet:  [e-mail]
Hewlett Packard Company                               Direct:  [phone]
19420 Homestead Road MS 43UK                            Main:  [phone]
Cupertino, CA 95014                                      Fax:  [phone]
Internal-only WWW: http://hpisrhw.cup.hp.com/~lrs/homepage.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You probably could do it, but you must
bear in mind that to purchase an unactivated cell phone in most places
you will wind up paying $200-400 more for the phone than if you have it
turned on to some carrier. You'll pay that additional money and have
nothing to show for it but the phone. Now on the other hand, there are
many promotional packages available at cellular phone dealers where you
can get a phone for free -- or always, nearly free! -- if you sign up
with the carrier. You can get very low-cost monthly service packages
which amount to more or less what you want (no monthly allotment of time,
pay a relatively high rate per minute when used) and 911 included for
'free' in the package. Depending on how much the monthly fee is for
such a limited package -- typically $15-20 per month -- you won't wind
up paying any more in the first year than you would by purchasing the
phone outright without any activation. Doing it this way, you also get
the flexibility of using the phone for urgent (not necessarily 911)
calls; something not available to you without activation.

Sit down and pencil out the costs for yourself. So much per month for
service (assuming no calls ever made) for twelve months versus buying
the phone unactivated at a much higher cost. You'll see you can get a
new phone every year if desired (with a resulting new contract from the
carrier each time) and *spend less* in many or most instances. And as
noted above, you've got the flexibility to make non-911 calls if you
really need to (car broke down on the highway, etc).   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stefan Schulte-Strathaus)
Subject: What's up With DCA?
Date: 01 Dec 1994 21:49:33 GMT
Organization: Fachhochschule Koeln FB-Informatik (Germany).


Hello!

One week ago I read an article about the sale of DCA - the creators of
Crosstalk.  Is there someone out there who know how the story continues
and if there are later versions of xtalk planned.


Thanks in advance,

Stefan Schulte Strathaus

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Silbernagel)
Subject: T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP?
Date: 02 Dec 1994 21:29:21 -0800
Organization: Pacifier, a public access Internet site. (206-693-0325)


I am interested in your opinion on how to best manage a point-of-sale
card swipe application. The plan calls for ~4000 sites, each having
~10 devices. At any given moment in the day, they expect about 700
calls to be 'in progress'. Each device is one of those small boxes you
see at the store which calls and authorizes card transactions.

The idea of being able to demux a T1 (or T3!) into serial ports ... or
better still a TCP/IP stream, is appealing. The data will then be
managed by a UNIX box or boxes.

Anyone seen a particularly elegant solution for managing this many
incoming modem calls? I've heard that USR has a T1>TCP/IP product that
may work well for this (Enterprise total control?).

TIA ... and I'll post a summary if there's interest. E-Mail to
[e-mail] or responses here are fine.


Mark Silbernagel
[phone]   [phone] - FAX

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

Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1994 22:32:55 +0100
From: Kristoff BONNE <[e-mail]>
Subject: Exchange Voice-Mail


Greetings,

For four months now, I have a voice-mail box (the type which is
implemented in the public telephone-switch itself).

Now, considering the possibilities of the ordinary mail-systems (e.g.
X.400); is there (or are there plans for) an international recommendation
for mail-exchange between voice-mail systems and/or between a
voice-mail system and a 'ordinary' mail-box?  I've heard somewhere
that X.400/1992 has extensions towards voice-mail (?)

I ask the salesman. He said 'no' but I would like to have a second
opinion on that. ;-)


Cheerio!

### Kristoff Bonne, BelgaCom IS/TeLaNet (WAN Planning and management)
(C=BE,A=RTT,P=RTTIPC,S=BONNE,G=KRISTOFF)   [e-mail]
FAX : [phone]                        Voice Mail: [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Somewhere a few years ago I experimented
with a voice mail system which had a provision for exchange of mail
with other systems. I cannot for the life of me remember where this
was or who made it. All the users had regular voice mail numbers, but
there were a series of special boxes where you entered the number for
that box, then entered the number of the user on some other system and
at a certain time each day the systems 'polled' each other and exchanged
messages. I sure wish I could remember where it was ... I think it might
have been the system Illinois Bell was using a few years ago, and I
do not think the exchange of messages between systems had been implemented
when I was looking at it.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #434
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa06425;
          5 Dec 94 18:24 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18139; Mon, 5 Dec 94 12:11:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18132; Mon, 5 Dec 94 12:11:04 CST
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 94 12:11:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #435

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Dec 94 12:11:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 435

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (James Madsen)
    Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (Larry Schwarcz)
    Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (John Higdon)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Pat Binford-Walsh)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Stanley Ulbrych)
    MCI and the Future of Internet (Newsbytes via [e-mail])
    Re: Direct Inward Dialing on Voice Mail Card; Other PC Card? (Barton Bruce)
    Re: T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP? (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU (Russ Bryant)

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 America
On Line. 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, 4 Dec 1994 23:27:50 -0800
From: [e-mail] (James Madsen)
Subject: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?


California is the only state which forbides bundling cellular service
with the handset purchase.  The law is you pay them no more than $25
more for a handset without activating service, than you would if you
had service activated at the same time.  So at least in CA, one need
not even choose a limited package to get a phone for 911 only usage
and get the phone at a reasonable price.


Jim Madsen


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a legal way around the situation
in California. Too bad none of the retailer's are using it. See my
response to John Higdon later in this issue.  PAT]

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 1994 11:09:47 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?


Another thing to consider: not all "911" numbers are accessed by 9+1+1
i.e., there are various star (*) codes.  You sometimes see these on
highway markers, or via promotional literature.

How does this affect your plans for unactivated emergency access?


/Pete, Penn State


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are probably thinking of services
such as we have here in northern Illinois:  'star nine nine nine' is
a coalition of the emergency services which accepts calls dialed to
that number, takes the information and forwards it to the appropriate
emergency service such as Chicago 911, or that of the various suburbs
in the area.  I know when we dial 911 from a cell phone here in this
area we get an intercept 'cannot be completed as dialed, if this is
an emergency, dial the operator or star nine nine nine ...'    PAT]

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

Subject: Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 94 11:50:12 -0800
From: Larry Schwarcz <[e-mail]>


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You probably could do it, but you must
> bear in mind that to purchase an unactivated cell phone in most places
> you will wind up paying $200-400 more for the phone than if you have it
> turned on to some carrier.

Correct you are, but, I live in California.  Here, bundling is
illegal.  Cellular stores can only discount the phone by the amount of
the activation fee.  So, we see ads for phones at cost less the $25
activation fee.

So, we still pay $200-$400 for phones here :-(.


Thanks,

Lawrence R. Schwarcz, Software Design Engr/IND      Internet:  [e-mail]
Hewlett Packard Company                               Direct:  [phone]
19420 Homestead Road MS 43UK                            Main:  [phone]
Cupertino, CA 95014                                      Fax:  [phone]
Internal-only WWW: http://hpisrhw.cup.hp.com/~lrs/homepage.html

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

Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 23:20:56 -0800
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?


Larry Schwarcz <[e-mail]> writes:

> I'm trying to see if it's possible to have a cellular phone that is
> NOT activated with any carrier and still use it to call 911 in
> emergencies.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You probably could do it, but you must
> bear in mind that to purchase an unactivated cell phone in most places
> you will wind up paying $200-400 more for the phone than if you have it
> turned on to some carrier.

Not in California. Service providers and phone vendors are
specifically prohibited from in any way linking the sale of the phone
to the activation of service. Although a number of dealers have tried
some sleazy tricks to avoid selling phones without activation ("sorry,
I just looked and we are out of stock -- someone must not have taken
the last one out of the computer..."), I have inside information that
even as we speak there are some undercover efforts to bring the big
foot down on them.

It is amusing to note that some of the big chains in southern
California have implemented elaborate ruses to either discourage
customers from buying a phone without activating it, or con the amount
of the commission from the carrier out of the customer himself. One
such trick is to have the salesperson produce the phone, saying,
"let's make sure everything is here". He opens the box and surprise!
the charger, extra battery, etc.  happens to be missing.

"And this is our last one, too. If you really want it, I could sell
you the [charger, battery, etc.] from our accessory stock." One
undercover person phoned a store pretending to be a salesman from
another store in the chain.  He asked what to do with a customer that
wanted a phone without service. He got an earful of sleazy tricks to
kill the sale or to get some extra money out of the customer.

As I mentioned, this is being cleaned up. That means that if you are
in California, you need not worry about weighing the cost of getting
or not getting service vs the price of the phone. It should not make
any difference.


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



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two comments here. At least Radio Shack
(the stores in the Chicago region) does open the boxes for customers on
lots of products 'to see if everything is here', and if something is
missing that is intended to come with the purchase, RS replaces it for
free with other stock in the store. For example, you are to get a
battery charger as part of the purchase and it is not in the box, then
the clerk gets a battery charger from the collection of same (for sale)
in the store, changes the price on the register to 'zero' for the
battery charger and 'sells' it to you for 'zero' in order that you can
walk out of the store with a complete unit of whatever it was you
bought. He has to account for it on the register so that the store's
quarterly inventory balances correctly, and the unit he 'sold' to you
for 'zero' is then charged back to the distribution center so the store
gets its money (each company owned RS -- there are also franchise,
privately owned RS stores -- is considered a profit center in its own
right; corporate RS expects each store to account for its stock, etc).

For next: I hear a rumor that in order to bring California more in
line with other states where cell phones are concerned, instead of the
stores giving reduced prices with activation -- illegal there -- the
carriers will begin offering a 'gift to new subscribers' equal to the
discounted amount. And really, that is what is happening now in other
parts of the country. RS and the other dealers are not *really* giving
you a phone for free or for $25 or whatever ... yes, that's what they
ring at the register, but the fact is the carrier they go through is
paying them the difference after the fact. So the stores in CA cannot
say to you, 'this phone is $25 with activation and $300 without activation.'
What they can say is 'all phones are $300 ... and upon your decision to
sign up with the carrier, the carrier will give you a gift of $275
in exchange for your one/two year contract with their service.'

That is all that is happening anyway elsewhere in the country. The
carriers reimburse the *dealers* for the phones they are giving away
at very low costs as part of activation ... the carriers will simply
start giving the money to the *customers* instead once the customer signs
with them direct rather than go through the dealers with the rebate.
The customer will have to come up with more money upfront, but will
be able to get most of the money back the same day, just hours later,
when the carrier turns on the phone and authorizes the dealer to write
the customer a check for the 'free gift to new subscribers'.

Now it becomes legal: all phones cost the same, activated or unactivated.
This nice bag phone costs $200, period. Buy it and leave the store if
you wish ... should you decide to have Ameritech activate it 'at some
later time' they will give you the $200 you paid for the phone. If you
decide as a matter of convenience to have the phone activated right now,
the carrier has authorized me (as the dealer) to write you a check for
the $200 once you have made certain commitments. The check would look
sort of like one of those you get from long distance carriers for
switching service, with lots of fine print on the back. Should you
wish to get it activated at some future time, at least this one carrier
(the one the dealer works with) has agreed to send you the $200 direct
once you sign up.

I'd like you to know that when the Chicago City Council, in its wisdom
many years ago decided that it was illegal for landlords to make tenants
pay a 'late fee' for rent not paid on time, the landlords' response was
to simply raise *everyone's* rent by the amount of the late fee effective
with the next lease being signed; and they built a new provision in the
lease offering a 'discount' (of the late fee amount, whatever it was)
for 'prompt or early payment' of rent. Then they proceeded to advertise
their apartments for rent at the 'discounted' (usual) amount of money.
When the tenants came to sign the lease, they of course saw the higher
amount of money stated on the lease and if they questioned this they were
told about the 'discount' if they paid on time ... 'we assumed you were
the sort of person who pays his bills on time ... that's why we mentioned
the lower rate in our advertising ...'  That also was legal. How is a
city council or any government going to punish someone for selling at
*less* than the contracted price or giving 'discounts' to customers?

So if California really begins to crackdown on cell phone dealers, watch
them change the wording and terms: the cost of all phones will go up
and the generosity of the carriers -- once an iron-clad contract has
been signed -- will be noted in 'free cash gifts' to customers, but from
the carrier itself, not from the dealer.     PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (pat binford-walsh)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: 3 Dec 1994 18:26:28 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Does anyone know of any of MCI's dedicated (56kbs, 128 kbps, 256 kbps,
and T-1) and frame relay (56 kbps, 128 kbps, 256 kbps, T-1) access
charges for internetMCI.  I don't believe that the following info is
correct for 9.6 kbps and 4.5 mbps, which is probably 45 mbps (T-3).
The service has been sold commercially since October.  Does anyone
have any rates that have been quoted to them or seen a price list?
Their 800 number for questions are not staffed with very knowledgeable
people.

Also, when will the local sites be available and where?  MCI is
providing 7 hours of local access for $20/mo. and $3/hr. afterwards,
but only 3 hours of 800 access for $20/mo. and $7/hr. afterwards.

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

Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
From: [e-mail] (STANLEY ULBRYCH)
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 94 07:56:00 -0500
Organization: Eagle's Nest Communications, Inc.  PVD, RI US  401-732-5290
Reply-To: [e-mail] (STANLEY ULBRYCH)


I admit I goofed. Can someone please repost either the 1-800 number or
better yet the EMAIL address for internetMCI.

I saw it, wrote it down, and promptly lost the paper.


Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (RAPME)
Subject: MCI and the Future of Internet
Organization: RAPME
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 09:39:06 GMT


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This was sent in by [e-mail]
without indicating *where* the comments by Kennedy Maize appeared.
It appears to be Newsbytes, but I wish the sender had stated that
explicitly in some sort of introductory comment. Please do this in
the future.   PAT]


WASHINGTON, D.C., U.S.A., 1994 DEC 2 (NB) -- By Kennedy Maize.

I have seen the future of the Internet and its name is MCI.  The
Washington-based long-distance carrier recently gave reporters a tour
of its new Net offering, including the online shopping mall it plans
to begin rolling out in January. As one MCI executive told Newsbytes,
"We are going into cyberspace commercial real estate."

For most of its brief, 25-year history, the Internet has been a
government project. Access has been free, which is to say, subsidized
by the taxpayers through Defense Department and National Science
Foundation appropriations. Populated mostly by academics and students,
the Net has been a free-form, chaotic, sophomoric, but incredibly
powerful new way of communicating.  But the future of the Internet is
in commerce, which the federal government recognized some time ago.
And, based on what I saw in MCI's plush conference room this week, MCI
has a major head start in the race to commercialize it.

"MCI is making the Internet as easy to use, as accessible and as
critical to businesses as today's global phone network," says Timothy
Price, recently elevated to executive vice president of MCI.

MCI brings some major assets to the table as it tries to turn the
Internet into a routine business tool and a new way of shopping for
the average consumer. As an aside, 80 percent of catalog shoppers are
women, which means MCI will have to make its Internet shopping
attractive to women.

The biggest head start MCI has on the new Internet is its existing
presence on the net. NSFnet is essentially MCI. MCI's high-speed,
digital data network currently handles 40 percent of all US domestic
Internet traffic.

With its long-distance capability available to virtually any American
with a phone, and its Internet backbone, MCI can easily offer access
to the net from dialup to ISDN to, eventually, ATM.  More important,
MCI seems to have the human resources necessary to transform the Net
into a well-behaved service. It starts with Vint Cerf, rightly called
"father of the Internet." Cerf, at Stanford, and Robert Kahn at DOD,
developed the TCP/IP (transmission control protocol/Internet protocol)
that is at the heart of the network of networks.

Cerf provides the "vision thing" for MCI's Internet ventures.  Cerf
has also assembled an impressive team and forged important significant
alliances, especially with Netscape Communications, the new software
firm Jim Clark put together after leaving Silicon Graphics. Clark
basically hired the entire programming team that developed Mosaic, the
World Wide Web browser, and turned them loose on making it a
commercial product. "I was blown away by Mosaic," Clark told
reporters, "by its potential to enable commerce and enable anybody to
be on the net."

Realizing that security was a key to commerce on the Net, Clark turned
to RSA to integrate its encryption technology into Netscape for MCI
Internet users. Shoppers at MCI's virtual shopping mall will be able
to make purchases with the knowledge that their credit card data is
inviolable.

MCI also turned to FTP Software to provide the TCP/IP software that
will be the foundation for the Netscape application. That means users
won't have to fret over TCP/IP issues, but can simply surf the net
painlessly. (MCI's demonstration of its virtual mall included a stop
at Vint's Surf Shop, complete with a picture of the bearded Cerf on
the beach in a Hawaiian shirt, to pick up some boards and routers.)

The shopping mall is also a brilliant idea. MCI will essentially rent
cyber floor space to businesses that will offer goods and services
online. This allows a business to get on the Net and into a Web site
without the need to create a full-fledged WWW interface. MCI takes
care of that.

The evolution of the Internet has been fascinating, especially the
emergence of the WWW, invented at CERN, the European high energy
physics lab. In 1992, according to Cerf, Web traffic was in 127th
place in terms of traffic on the NSFnet backbone. By last year, he
added, Web traffic had risen to 11th place and today, Web traffic
consumes 10 percent of the capacity of the backbone. Mosaic's
graphical interface is responsible for that phenomenal growth.

Now, MCI and Netscape are taming the interface and the Internet.  When
MCI's $49.95 package goes up for sale in January, I'll be one of the
first in line to buy it.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Direct Inward Dialing on Voice Mail Card; Other PC Card?
Organization: Digital Equipment Computer Users Society
Date: 5 Dec 94 03:02:17 -0500
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Koos
van den Hout) writes:

> I was approached by someone who is interesting in providing a system
> where people use direct inward dialing to select information items.

> Something like:

> Allocating block 555-xxxx. When someone dials 555-1234, the number 1234 is
> used as selection of information.

> Somehow the selection 1234 would have to be passed to the voicemail
> system.

> All of this on the Dutch phone system.

> Can this be done?

I don't see why not. the 1234 is just an extension number. The voice
mail system gets a call that effectively is just a call to 1234 that
is busy and so got forwarded.

But skip the PBX. The voice mail systems can have cards that take the
DID directly. There is no need for the PBX. If you only have a few
dozen lines, the PC card stuff is fine. If you have hundreds or
thousands of lines all on T1 or E1, get something like Excel's
products (they are XL.COM, try a WHOIS). Excel also makes PC cards,
too, but their big boxes are what you need if you are making an
airlines reservation switching system or a telco CO grade voice mail
product. Excel sells the hardware to their OEMs that write the s/w for
special applications.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP?
Organization: Digital Equipment Computer Users Society
Date: 5 Dec 94 03:14:33 -0500
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


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

> I am interested in your opinion on how to best manage a point-of-sale
> card swipe application. The plan calls for ~4000 sites, each having
> ~10 devices. At any given moment in the day, they expect about 700
> calls to be 'in progress'. Each device is one of those small boxes you
> see at the store which calls and authorizes card transactions.

Each store should have ONE controller handling all POS terminals and
it can use x.25 over the D channel on an ISDN BRI line to handle all
terminals at that site, whether 10 or 500.

The x.25 carrier wil deliver ALL your traffic on a single x.25 line if you
want at 56kb or perhaps faster.

If there is other traffic, then this is not the way to do it, and
maybe look at LEC frame relay where available and a mix of other
things for other sites.  Pure dialup is still viable but when you look
at the stupidity of 10 phone lines per site, spending those dollars
other ways is easy. Even using an elcheapo tiny PBX (Panasonic 6x16
size) to pack a smaller number of phone lines is possible but also a
hassle.

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

From: [e-mail] (russb)
Subject: Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU
Date: 5 Dec 1994 13:57:22 -0700
Organization: XMission Public Access Internet (801-539-0900)


Dennis E. Miyoshi ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Hello.  I hate to ask such a simple question but, I am to the point of
> total confusion.  I am in the process of connecting two TyLink ONS150
> CSUs.  After several attempts at getting the CSUs to sync I was
> successful.  However, my routers seem to be confused.  The last
> setting that I have is the LBO.  The manuals state that this must be
> specified by the carrier.

> My two questions are:

> 1.  What is the meaning of the LBO?
> 2.  What would the results be if the LBO is set to the wrong dB level?

Dennis:

LBO is defined as "Line Build Out".  It is very simply how much gain
you want to have transmitted to the T1 network.  Most T1 CSU/DSU have
ALBOs for receiving a DS1 signal from the T1 network; ALBO (Automatic
Line Build Out).  Normally, you have three settings, 0, -7.5, and -15.
The 0 setting sends out a DS-1 (digital signal at 1.544 Mbps or T1) 4
to 5 kfeet over normal 100 ohm impedance, 22 guage PIC twisted pair
cable, (PIC: plastic insulated cable).  The -7.5 pads down the gain of
the transmitted signal to approx.  2000 feet and -15.0 pads down the
gain to a very small distance ... 655 feet or less.

What all this mumbo jumbo really means is if the telco has a NID
device (network interface device) real close to your ONS150s you could
be overdriving the T1 signal and causing some major errors.  The NID
device is also a digital regenerator and looks for an incoming T1
signal at a certain peak to peak signal level.

My advice is to go to a -7.5 LBO setting and see if it improves your
transmission.  That setting usually works with a variety of
situations.  If it doesn't, look for a small rectangular box in your
telecomm closet that has the words WESTELL or WESCOM on it; this is
the NID device.  If it is really close to your ONS150; (within a
couple feet), set your ONS150 for -15.0 LBO.

If this still doesn't help ... consider returning your ONS150s for Txport
310 T1 CSUI/DSUs and our technical support people will have you up and
running in no time!  (Just kidding ... sort of!)


Russ Bryant    [e-mail]
Txport Inc.     T1 Transmission Products

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #435
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07083;
          5 Dec 94 19:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20582; Mon, 5 Dec 94 13:30:06 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20569; Mon, 5 Dec 94 13:30:01 CST
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 94 13:30:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #436

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Dec 94 13:30:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 436

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Paul Wallich)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Bill Spikes)
    Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute (wizard@astor)
    Re: Looking for E1 Vendors (Prakash Thatte)
    Re: Looking for E1 Vendors (Russ Bryant)
    Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Re: T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP? (John Lundgren)
    Re: Rochester Telephone's Open Market Plan (Robert Levandowski)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Lynn Betts)
    Re: Exchange Voice-Mail (Prakash Thatte)

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 America
On Line. 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 Levenson)
Subject: Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 1994 22:06:28 GMT


Dave Niebuhr ([e-mail]) writes:

> {Newsday} on 11/30/94 had this article in its business section:

> "Cellular One customers who live in the Washington, D.C. area (one of
> those affected) will be unable to receive calls on their cellular
> phones while in New York City and parts of northern New Jersey.  Calls
> will either be automatically forwarded to subscribers' voice mail, or
>  -- if they don't have voice mail -- a recording will tell the caller
> that the recipient no longer is in Cellular One's coverage area.

If I were a CellularOne subscriber in the Washington D.C. area and
were treated this way by the carrier, I would be strongly-tempted to
switch my service to the competing carrier -- in this case, Bell
Atlantic Mobile Systems.

Cellular fraud is rampant (I use CellularOne in Northern NJ, and one
my cell phones was compromised earlier this year) but this is not
the fault of the paying subscriber.  It is the fault of the system
designers who, apparently, believe in security through obscurity.
They apparently decided that it would be okay to transmit the
telephone's MIN and ESN (the user ID and Password, if you like) in
the clear, in the same message, on every access message.  They
apparently thought that nobody would be clever enough to figure out
how to demodulate their control channel messages, even if billions
of dollars worth of bandwidth were available to be stolen.  Really!

Now that there are nearly twenty million AMPS-compatible cellular
telephone sets in use nationwide, it's a little too late to
re-design the system and implement some kind of cryptography in the
control channel.

Do the next-generation digital cellular sets provide any better
security?


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you could cancel your contract
with them on the premises that they had violated the contract or changed
the terms without proper notice when they cut out roaming in the area.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Wallich)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: 5 Dec 1994 12:12:30 -0500
Organization: Trivializers R Us


In <[e-mail]> Greg Monti <[e-mail]> writes:

> I am a Cellular One Washington-Baltimore customer (system owned by
> Southwestern Bell).  I just got an oversized yellow postcard in the
> mail.  Verbatim:

> New Roaming Procedures for New York City:

> What does this mean to you?  If you are roaming in the New York City
> area, incoming calls to your cellular number will not be delivered to
> your phone.  Instead, callers will be forwarded to your Message Plus
> voice mailbox or be advised by a recording that you are out of the
> coverage area.  Outgoing calls may still be made.  However, they will
> be intercepted by an operator who will request your credit card
> information for billing purposes.  Call set-up charges and per minute
> rates will be significantly higher than todays' standard roaming
> rates.  Emergency calls to 911 will continue to be free.

Now let me understand this: there's a problem with cellular fraud
because criminals are monitoring the frequencies and grabbing the
phone serial numbers and billing codes (which are transmitted in the
clear). The solution to this is to have people making outgoing calls
speak their credit card information on that same open channel. Huh?
(I suppose that for Cellular One, moving the potential fraud to a
different billing channel is a good idea, but I don't know what
customers would think.)

On the one hand, this may slow fraud briefly, since you have to
supplement the ESN-grabbing box with a personal and a cellular
scanner, but on the other hand, what could be more convenient to have
than the credit card number of someone who's roaming to New York (i.e.
probably affluent and quite possibly on business) while they're out of
their home town?


paul


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The idea is to pass the fraud problem
over to the wireline carriers. If you say your credit card number over
the cell phone, then the wirelines get all the fraud hassles as a
result instead of the cell phone outfits. Smart thinking, eh!  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Spikes)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: 5 Dec 1994 15:44:26 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard


As a new cellee, I may be wrong here, but giving your credit card
number to ANYONE while you're on a cell phone, wireless phone, marine
operator call or ham radio is just asking to ripped off. If lowlifes
are hacking digital info from your phone or cell site xmitter, doesn't
that mean they just MIGHT be capable of listening to a voice conversation
with your credit card info?

I might be missing something here.  Has Cell One thought this through?

And now ... anyone have any info on the Motorola "3-Watt Extender"?
Our "new" company car we just bought had all this stuff mounted in it.
It works with the little flip phone that was the wife'ss Xmas present.
But ... it might be nice to interface the Icom ham transceiver to it
when the wife isn't in the car.  I would be trying to use the hands
free mic/speaker/electro-guts, not the RF power amp, naturally.  I
don't even have a user or installers manual for the stuff. How about a
Motorola number to order manuals?


Thanks,

Bill    wb6rzg

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 94 11:08:28 EST
Organization: The Toads


Pat, Larry, Dennis and All:

Rather than quote all three of the previous messages we'll just go on
from there. There were roughly 1500 workers suspended for two days,
the CWA has filed charges with the NLRB against the company for
ordering members to take off the T-shirts. The union had notified the
company in advance that this was a concerted activity protected under
Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act. Freedom of speech
either applies universally or not at all; the Constitution doesn't
have an off switch for employers. this is for your benefit, Larry and
Dennis.

As to Pat's statement about the company's draconian reaction to this
situation, this is NOT the first time in the very recent past that the
company has reacted this way. We'll go back to the 'shoe incident' of
Oct 5th this year, when we were only given 12 days notice previous to
that date to purchase a pair of steel-toed safety shoes, and we were
told that we must be wearing the shoes when we reported for work on
Oct 5th. So because of shortages at stores due to high demand, a small
number of employees reported to work without the shoes anyway, and
they were suspended without pay. Gee we don't see a pattern here do we?

Yes there are many unhappy employees here, probably three to five
times the number that were suspended. These two recent incidents only
demonstrate how draconian the company has become. I've never in my
quarter century of employment here been witness to such abuse; that is
all it is plain and simple.


W


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you are wrong about the 'off
and on switch for employers'. Everything I have been taught about the
US Constitution says that that document addresses the relationship between
the *goverment* and the persons being governed. It says nothing about
relationships between people, between people and their employers, etc.
'Free Speech' means the government cannot prevent you from owning a
printing press or a pulpit and using it. It does not have to *give*
you a press or pulpit; your employer does not have to provide time or
resources for you to speak; your employer is not obliged to listen to
you. All the constitution says is the *government* cannot stop you in
these activities. Your employer is not your governor. We enter into
contracts with our employers; on the other hand we presumably obey
the government. You can change employers whenever you like -- or have
none at all if that's your desire -- we cannot very conveniently
change our governor; thus the protections in the constitution regards
the *governor's* behavior.

Despite our apparent disagreement on this -- whether or not your
employer is obliged to give you anything other than a day's pay for
a day's work -- it seems to me it would be prudent for B-A to sit down
and listen closely to what at least some of its workers are saying.
Before responding to your comments on the 'shoe incident' I would like
to hear more. I do not believe the company only gave twelve day's notice
in total. I suspect there were earlier requests and at the start of
October a final reminder to expire twelve days later. Am I wrong on
this?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Prime perf)
Subject: Re: Looking for E1 Vendors
Date: 4 Dec 1994 22:05:14 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ernest
Brouwer) writes:

Try STA (I believe it is Systems Technology Associates) in Sterling,
VA.  Their entire product line (channel banks and signalling converters)
is aimed at the export market.


Prakash Thatte
Prime Performance Technologies, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (russb)
Subject: Re: Looking for E1 Vendors
Date: 5 Dec 1994 03:41:06 -0700
Organization: XMission Public Access Internet (801-539-0900)


There are two companies out three companies that I'm aware of that have
E1 CSU/DSUs....1) Larscom [phone]; Split T E1 Version  2) Digital
Link [phone]; Encore DL200 E1 and 3) ADC Kentrox [phone];
Datasmart E1 ICSU.

My company, Txport Inc., is one of those "next year" companies.  T1/EI
framer-deframer chips are becoming widely available, therefore, you
should have a broad choice of manufactures over the next 6 - 9 months.


Russ Bryant    [e-mail]   Txport Inc.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU
Date: 5 Dec 1994 18:34:15 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dennis E.
Miyoshi) writes:

> Hello.  I hate to ask such a simple question but, I am to the point of
> total confusion.  I am in the process of connecting two TyLink ONS150
> CSUs.  After several attempts at getting the CSUs to sync I was
> successful.  However, my routers seem to be confused.  The last
> setting that I have is the LBO.  The manuals state that this must be
> specified by the carrier.

> My two questions are:

> 1.  What is the meaning of the LBO?
> 2.  What would the results be if the LBO is set to the wrong dB level?

LBO refers to Line Build Out. The original design of the T1 system
used repeaters at nominal 6000 foot intervals. The loss through the
cable is on the order of 31db at 772khz (the fundamental for T1).
Early repeaters were designed to work with signals with dynamic range
of only +-4db. If the interval was less than 6000 feet, it was
necessary to provide the effect of a cable section with a LBO. Modern
repeaters incorporate ALBO (Automatic Line Build Out) circuitry which
automatically provides the proper buildout over a typical 35db dynamic
range.

FCC Part 68 requires CPE to provide a selectable LBO on the Output (to
the network) side for 0db, 7.5db, or 15db, of equivalent cable loss.
The required LBO is specified by the telephone company at install. It
is normally labelled at the CPE/Network Demarcation where the RJ-48C
is provided.

Whether an incorrect setting will cause problems depends on the span
length and whether ALBO are used in the repeaters. This is strictly
the TELCO's concern. You provide the LBO that they specify.

It wasn't clear in your post whether you are connecting two CSU's back
to back or through a TELCO provided T1 span. If back to back use 15db
on both CSU's.  If through a TELCO span between two premises you
should go through the basic startup procedures to verify each span
CPE/TELCO and then end to end. Most telco have a channel unit at your
prem that they can loop back to test the span to each premise from the
CO. They can also loopback your CSU to verify the span to that point.
If both check out, there can be a problem with equipment for both
spans not being the same format (B8ZS/AMI). If the two spans are
connected by a DACS in the CO then you must loop time your routers
from the span. If your two prems are directly connected, then 1 or
both of your routers must clock the other. At most one can be loop
timed. Most likely you have a clocking or AMI/B8ZS problem since these
are the most common.

Hope the above helps. Describe your configuration in better detail and
you will probably get a more useful answer.


Wally Ritchie   Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 00:36:53 GMT


You can get used deactivated cellular phones for about $100.  Lots of
people upgrade their cellular phones and need to dump their old one.
It was cheaper for me to switch cellular companies and get a new phone
than to give my phone back to my old company and get a discounted new
one.  So I sold my old one for $150.  I've seen older ones for $100 in
pawn shops.


Shawn Gordhamer    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP?
Date: 5 Dec 1994 01:45:05 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Mark Silbernagel ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am interested in your opinion on how to best manage a point-of-sale
> card swipe application. The plan calls for ~4000 sites, each having
> ~10 devices. At any given moment in the day, they expect about 700
> calls to be 'in progress'. Each device is one of those small boxes you
> see at the store which calls and authorizes card transactions.

> The idea of being able to demux a T1 (or T3!) into serial ports ... or
> better still a TCP/IP stream, is appealing. The data will then be
> managed by a UNIX box or boxes.

I can't figure why you would want to divide the bitstream up into
RS-232 low speeds, because they would be separate and not a network.
If you want RS-232 ports, just buy the Unix box with a bunch of them.
Then they would plug into terminal adapters and these would be plugged
into the demuxed parts of the T-1 bitstream.  The phone company would
furnish the hunting feature so that the next available line would be
connected.

If this sounds a bit complicated, maybe it would be best to keep away
from connecting a bitstream directly to the phone company. Just have them
install 'pair gain' equipment to your site.  The T-1 line(s) are
broken down to individual regular phone lines, which then get
connected to regular modems.  This would be economical if the modems
are inexpensive.

The Unix boxes I've seen lately have an AUI port on them and just plug
into an Ethernet network.  You then plug it into the gateway and that
connects by V.35 cable to your T-1.  This T-1 is a single point-to-point
bitstream from another single location somewhere.  It's not a 24 phone
line bitstream.

Our phone company reps gave us help and info on our T-1 lines.  Your
installation seems to be big enough for them to be willing to bend over
backwards and give you some advice.


    John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
    Rancho Santiago Community College District
    17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
[e-mail]\[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Levandowski)
Subject: Re: Rochester Telephone's Open Market Plan
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 94 03:59:40 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Eli
Mantel) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> Prakash Hariramani <ph2k+@andrew.
> cmu.edu> writes:

>> I am looking for an official copy of Rochester Telephone's Open Market
>> Plan, i.e. the one approved by the P.U.C.  I would appreciate it if
>> any one could tell me how to get one.

The pamphlet that came with my last RochTel bill offers the phone
number 1-800-477-9371 as an automated information number on the Open
Market Plan (hereafter OMP). The RochTel phone book lists 716-777-1000
as "General Information about Rochester Telephone."

> Isn't this the plan where Rochester Telephone proposed that everybody
> would still get their dial tone from them, but there would be resellers
> (aggregators) competing to sell that product?

> I suppose under this plan, customers would be offered a greater
> variety of calling plans, some perhaps would be message unit plans
> with a low monthly fee, others would be flat rates, perhaps some would
> have extended calling areas, maybe even with special deals for
> selecting their preferred IXC.

Here's an overview of OMP as I understand it:

The current Rochester Telephone Corporation will be renamed Frontier Corp.

The physical network will be owned and handled by Rotelcom Network
System, a division of Rochester Telephone, owned by Frontier Corp.
Rotelcom will sell access to its network to all comers.

State-regulated telephone service over the Rotelcom network will be
provided by "Rochester Telephone". RochTel will also provide directory
and 911 service.

"Competitive" local phone service over Rotelcom will be offered by
"Frontier Communications".  Frontier will provide the 'dialtone' as
well as services such as call waiting, call forwarding, Centrex, voice
mail, etc.

RochesterTel Mobile and RCI Long Distance will be owned by Frontier Corp.

The OMP brochure claims that the benefits include: a seven-year rate
freeze; rates decreasing due to competition for local service; a
phase-out of touch- tone charges; cheaper business rates; and a 27%
decrease in long-distance and cellular access charges.

I'd agree that it sounds like a swift way for RochTel to get a cut of
all the competition, except for one wildcard. As of this summer,
Greater Rochester Cablevision finished rewiring its entire
distribution network with fiber-optic cable.  GRC has announced its
intention to use its own fiber network to provide local phone service,
INDEPENDENT of the Rotelcom network.  The two networks will be linked
so that you won't notice a difference between networks -- just dial as
usual -- but GRC won't have to buy your physical connection to their
switch from Rotelcom.  Rochester will actually have two phone networks
in operation, or so the theory goes. This caused some consternation
for RochTel, from my understanding, but the OMP as it was approved
will let GRC go ahead with their plan.

Personally, I like RochTel's service as a whole.  It beats the hell
out of NYNEX.  They also seem to be a bit more on the ball than
SNET -- my parents live in Connecticut.  My only recent gripe with them
was their decision to force RochTel calling card users to use RCI Long
Distance to make LD calls. (RCI is a division of RochTel.)  However
since my post to this group about that announcement, I noticed a
roughly 4x4 advertisement buried in the local newspaper: RochTel is
suspending their plans to force the use of RCI (and incidentally
prevent use of 10xxx codes etc. with a RochTel card) indefinitely.  --


Rob Levandowski
Computer Interest Floor associate / University of Rochester
[e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 5 Dec 94 12:57 EST
From: Lynn Betts <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement


[e-mail] wrote:

> Indeed, all IXCs must pay fairly substantial "local access" or the like
> charges; that is, I believe, one of the main reasons MCI for example
> is moving to offer it's own local services in major cities in the near
> future.

> But it raises the qeustion, how can a new phone company justify the
> infrastructure expense of trying to compete with embedded networks of
> LECs by installing their own network?  Or can they only "win" in
> metropolitan areas where fiber is cheaper to install and garner
> massive amounts of business customers?  Any thoughts?

A bit of info on MCI's situation:

In about 1988 or 89 MCI purchased the "downtown" cable facilities and
rights-of-way from Western Union that was used for its telegraph/telex
network (as well as long distance and packet-switched services).  This
included rights and facilities for a dozen or so of the largest cities
in the U.S., with wiring directly into all principal buildings.  Until
recently, however, neither the quality of the facilities nor the regula-
tory environment were conducive to their activation for competing local
dialtone.

I am with MCI and formerly with Western Union.

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

From: [e-mail] (Prime perf)
Subject: Re: Exchange Voice-Mail
Date: 4 Dec 1994 22:15:22 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, Kristoff BONNE
<[e-mail]> writes:

> There is an industry standard (not international as in CCITT) voice
> mail system interchange protocol (AMIS).

Voice mail to E-mail interchange has not been standardized although
several vendors including AVT and VMX provide a desktop connection
over a local area network that presents the list waiting messages in a
format similar to most E-Mail systems. AVT allows the subscriber to
hear a E-Mail message (you have to listen very carefully as the
text-to-speech is less than perfect). This is useful specially if you
are away from the office and are expecting an important E-Mail. You
can then have the E-Mail message FAXed to you.


Prakash Thatte    Prime Performance Technologies, Inc.  [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #436
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07371;
          5 Dec 94 19:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21738; Mon, 5 Dec 94 14:09:10 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21723; Mon, 5 Dec 94 14:09:03 CST
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 94 14:09:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #437

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 5 Dec 94 14:09:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 437

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Apartments Getting Into the PBX Business (John Lundgren)
    Programmable Distant Extension Needed (Glenn Foote)
    Kuwait/Islam Telephone Information Service (Daniel Metz)
    CID Comes to Texas (Mark W. Earle)
    Emergency Numbers in Various Countries (Kimmo Ketolainen)
    The "Roadkill" Incident (Workers World Service via Danny Burstein)
    Re: New York Suspends Baltimore-DC Roaming (Douglas Reuben)

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 America
On Line. 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 Lundgren)
Subject: Apartments Getting Into the PBX Business
Date: 4 Dec 1994 20:46:32 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


I was talking to one of the Pac Bell techs this morning, and he said
that many larger apartment complexes are getting a PBX.  He said that
as of Jan 1, anyone can get into the business of furnishing dial tone.
Evidently, apartment complexes are putting in their own PBX and
getting DID lines, and then reselling them to their tenants.  I'm just
kind of parroting what he said, since I work for a public entity and I
haven't the foggiest what really happens with a PBX and reselling it.
We use Centrex.


    John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
    Rancho Santiago Community College District
    17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
[e-mail]\[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting how things that go around
come around. (Or is that the other way around?)  ... clear up into the
late 1960's lots of large apartment complexes in Chicago and other cities
had switchboard service to all the apartments, operated from a front
desk in the lobby area, which is where the tenants also got their mail.
As the economics of running very large, older highrise apartment buildings
changed during the 1970's, one of the first things the owners did was
pull out the switchboard and make tenants get their own phones. This
saved a lot of the payroll costs for the buildings. along with the
elimination of maid service, which was also very common. They did not
have the nerve to simply raise the rent to make up for the increasing
costs of running the building; far easier in their estimation was to
gradually let the building deteriorate at a slow enough pace it would
be years before the tenants found out how crummy the place had gotten.
Of course who is to say that if in the 1970's we had had the modern
phone systems we have now, perhaps the apartment building owners would
have switched from plugboard to automated console rather than simply
killing the phone service entirely ... but still, that would have
required a front desk attendant; something they wanted to eliminate
because of the cost of staffing same three shifts a day, seven days
per week including holidays, etc.  And maid service was cut out in the
early seventies as the buildings began to find it increasingly difficult
to get black women willing to work at the wages they wanted to pay.
FYI, the maids and porters were always black; the front desk/switchboard
operators were always white, except in black neighborhoods. A white
woman always served as 'housekeeper'; that is, the maids' supervisor.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn Foote)
Subject: Programmable Distant Extension Needed
Date: 5 Dec 1994 15:43:35 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet


I am looking for a device (or service) that allows me to call a number at
one location, get an answer, re-dial, and complete the call from that
location.

For example:  I am in (say NV, or even HI).  I want to call an 800 number
in KY (or PA, NY, or ??) that only accepts calls from within the state of
KY (or wherever)... to reach that 800 number I must complete the call from
a KY exchange ...  (NO, the people who own the 800 number WILL NOT accept
calls other than on the 800 number).

Suggestions, anyone??  (Yes, you can assume that I am willing to rent
office space and and telephone lines in the various states.)


Thanks,

Glenn L Foote ...... [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Metz)
Subject: Kuwait/Islam Telephone Information Service
Date: 5 Dec 1994 13:25:15 -0500
Organization: Digital Gateway Systems


[This message is posted on behalf of my client, Sam Messinger, of
Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.  Mr. Messinger is currently traveling in
the Middle East and is seeking responses to this posting from
interested investors, academic experts in the fields described below,
and anyone else interested in helping with the development of this
project.

Information on how to respond to this posting can be located at
the bottom of the message.]

                Kuwait/Islam Telephone Information Service
                              (1-800-Kuwait)

The Kuwait/Islam telephone information service will employ a
touch-tone menu system similar to many telephone information services
available today.  Through the use of a touch-tone phone, the user will
be able to select from a wide variety of information choices, several
of which are outlined below.  The service will be available throughout
the United States, and will present material in English, Arabic,
French, and Spanish.  The service will be advertised in major
newspapers, including the {International Herald Tribune, The New York
Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The
Chicago Tribune, and The Los Angeles Times}.

Among the many services envisioned are:

     Greetings from the Kuwaiti Emir;
     A daily quote from the Koran;
     An explanation of what the Koran is for those unfamiliar
with Islam;
     Daily prayer times by time zone;
     Daily price quotes on gold, silver, and oil;
     Information on Kuwaiti petroleum and mineral resources;
     History of Kuwait;
     Information on Kuwaiti manufacturing and businesses;
     Information on Kuwaiti society, customs, and traditions;
     Information on the Kuwaiti economy;
     Information on Kuwaiti art;
     Information on Kuwaiti science;
     Information on Kuwaiti medicine;
     Information on Kuwaiti recreation and sports;
     Information on Kuwaiti government;
     Information on Kuwaiti agriculture;
     Explanations of Islamic holidays;
     Explanations of the Islamic calendar and months;
     Special section for children on growing up in Kuwait;
     Information on Kuwait-U.S. relations;
     Information on Kuwaiti ecological concerns;
     Interactive services, for instance, the ability for a user
to leave his/her name and address to receive a Kuwaiti calendar
and quarterly updates of available services;

     In some instances, famous American figures will be used to read
and explain topics.  The American public will readily recognize the
voices of these people, which should create a good public response as
well as favorable publicity from the U.S. media.

The phone lines to the Kuwait/Islam Telephone Information Service
would be available 24 hours per day with the exception of religious
holidays.  Similar programs are envisioned for France, England,
Germany, Japan, etc.

Academics interested in lending their expertise to this project are
encouraged to submit resumes.  Interested investors and others who
would like to help in the establishment of this system are encouraged
to submit informal proposals and inquiries.

Mr. Messinger can receive correspondence in two ways:

1) Mail can be sent to:

     Sam Messinger
     11305 Baroque Road
     Silver Spring, Maryland 20901
     USA

2) E-mail sent to the following address
     [e-mail]
   and addressed to Mr. Messinger will be promptly forwarded to
him.

Thank you.

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

Date: Mon, 5 Dec 94 13:39 EST
From: Mark W. Earle <[e-mail]>
Subject: CID Comes to Texas


Caller ID has come to South Texas (Southwestern Bell, A/C 512 and
210).

The 'default' if you do nothing is that your number is transmitted.
However, Per-Call blocking of ID transmission is available with *67
and is free, regardless if you subscribe to receive CID information or
not.

Anonymous Call Rejection may be purchased for a monthly charge.  If
purchased, it may be turned off/on with seperate codes not noted in
the brochure/bill insert. It did say it was not a toggle though.

You may send a written certification that you have a compelling need
for 'per line blocking' by completing the enclosed reply card ... it
will be granted automatically free of charge without any need to
explain your compelling need.

Interestingly, if you subscribe to per line blocking, there is no
overide, according to the bill insert. To make calls to ACR subscribed
customers, you would "call from a payphone or cellular phone, make a
credit card or operator assisted call, or ask someone who does not
have per line blocking to place the call for you."

A hassle, but that's good. No toggle conditions to worry about.

They're also offerring a "try a CID unit free until Jan 1" promotion.
You call and order a SB 60 memory unit. If you keep the unit, you are
billed $60 in four convenient monthly installments beginning January
95.


[e-mail]---


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only is it turned on in Texas, it
is being transmitted around the USA. My sister lives there and I got
a call from her over the weekend. Guess what?  Her number showed up
on my Caller ID box here in Skokie.   PAT]

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

Subject: Emergency Numbers in Various Countries
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 03:40:24 EET
From: [e-mail] (Kimmo Ketolainen)
Organization: Turun yliopisto - University of Turku, Finland


Do you have any other to add, Pat? Some of these have been extremely
hard to find, because people in many countries have not known what to
do in case of emergency ... and thus don't know the number at all.


Kimmo.

    Australia            000
    Austria            122 fire dept, 133 police, 144 ambulance
    Belarus            01 fire dept, 02 police, 03 ambulance
    Belgium            112
    Bosnia and Herzgovina    92 police, 93 fire dept, 94 ambulance
    Brazil            190 police, 193 fire dept
    Bulgaria            160 fire dept, 166 police, 155 ambulance
    Canada                      911
    Chile            133 police, 132 fire dept, 131 ambulance
    Columbia            111 police
    Corea            112 police, 119 fire dept and ambulance
    Croatia            92 police, 93 fire dept, 94 ambulance
    Czech Republic        150 fire dept, 155 ambulance, 158 police
    Denmark            112
    Estonia            01 fire dept, 02 police, 03 ambulance
    Finland            112, 10022 police
    France            112
    Germany            112 fire dept and ambulance, 110 police
    Great Britain and N.Ireland 112
    Greece            112
    Hong Kong            112
    Hungary            04 ambulance, 05 fire dept, 07 police
    Iceland            0112 (to be replaced by 112)
    Ireland            112
    Italy            112
    Japan            119 fire dept
    Kuwait            115, 119
    Latvia            01 fire dept, 02 police, 03 ambulance
    Liechtenstein        112
    Lithuania            01 fire dept, 02 police, 03 ambulance
    Luxembourg            112
    Macedonia            92 police, 93 fire dept, 94 ambulance
    Mexico                    No emergency number. Number for police varies.
    Monaco            112
    Netherlands, The        112
    New Zealand            111
    Norway            112
    Portugal            112
    Poland            997 police, 998 fire dept, 999 ambulance
    Russia, rest of CIS        01 fire dept, 02 police, 03 ambulance
    Saudi Arabia                999 police, 998 fire dept, 997 ambulance
                                996 traffic accidents, 995 narcotic police
    Singapore            999 police, 995 fire dept
    Slovakia            150 fire dept, 155 ambulance, 158 police
    Slovenia            92 police, 93 fire dept, 94 ambulance
    South Africa            10111
    Spain            091 police
    Sweden            112
    Switzerland            112
    Thailand            191 police
    Turkey            155 police
    Ukraine            01 fire dept, 02 police, 03 ambulance
    United States        911
    Yugoslavia            92 police, 93 fire dept, 94 ambulance



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A footnote should be added to the USA entry
noting that 911, while the common number, is not available in all areas.
Many places still use seven digit numbers. Also, various forms of 911
are available, some more sophisticated and useful than others.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: The "Roadkill" Incident
Date: 5 Dec 1994 02:46:52 -0500


(Pat, etc.: I found this floating around the net. Workers World
Service is a somewhat, ahem, unique source of news and viewpoints
often overlooked by the mainstream media /danny)


 From: [e-mail]
 Newsgroups: alt.society.labor-unions
 Subject: Penn. Bell
 Date: Sun, 4 DEC 94 23:25:11 -0500

 From: Workers World Service <[e-mail]>
 Subject: Phila.Communications Workers Fight Layoffs
 Sender: [e-mail]
 Date: Sun, 4 Dec 1994 16:30:42 GMT


Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit

PHILADELPHIA/COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS FIGHT LAYOFFS

By Joe Piette
Philadelphia

Bell Atlantic workers held a rally outside company offices here Nov.
23. They protested against the "downsizing" of 5,600 jobs.  They also
challenged the two-day suspensions of over 1,000 Bell Atlantic workers
for wearing T-shirts opposing layoffs.

Two months ago, Bell workers started wearing plain red T-shirts on
Thursdays to protest planned massive layoffs. In November, a new
protest shirt began to spread. The popular "Road Kill" T-shirt depicts
a furry animal labeled "Bell Atlantic Employees" squashed on the
information superhighway as Bell Atlantic and AT&T trucks speed by.

On Nov. 22, when Bell bosses ordered workers to take the shirts off or
turn them inside out, workers wearing the roadkill shirt refused.
Between 1,000 and 1,200 were then sent home and suspended without pay
over the "Thanksgiving" holiday.

Besides calling the protest rally, the Communications Workers union
also filed charges with the Labor Board. The union charged that the
disciplinary suspensions violate labor law and infringe on workers'
rights to freedom of expression.

UNIONIZE INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY WORKERS

The Philadelphia-based telephone company announced in August that it
would eliminate 7.7% of its work force in order to cut costs and
expand into a vast video network. Instead of using the unionized
workers who now maintain and install current telephone lines, Bell
Atlantic wants to use non-union workers and subcontractors to install
the new fiber-optic cables that would transmit audio and video signals
into customer homes.

Some of the costs for these high-tech changes will be passed on to
phone customers, subject to approval by the Public Utility Commission,
as authorized by new state legislation passed this year.

Communications Workers District 13 Vice President Vincent Maisano
explained: "We don't want the company contracting out our work.  We
have built the best telephone system in the world, and we want to
build the best information highway in the world."

Bell Atlantic paid Chief Executive Officer Raymond W. Smith $2,462,800
in salary, bonuses and stock options in 1993. The next four executive
officers split $3,434,600. Bell Atlantic has had a 211-percent
increase in value of investment over the last five years.

Those rewards came at the expense of 8,000 jobs eliminated at Bell
since 1988. In addition, Bell Atlantic now wants to replace the 5,600
relatively low paid but unionized workers with lower-paid, non-union
subcontracted-out labor.

The so-called information highway is the convergence of many formerly
separate products and services into one multi-media industry.
Telecommunications, cable, computers, television, publishing, postal
services and other information media are all under intense competitive
pressure to grow or die.

Information companies have been merging and acquiring each other in a
race to become the strongest and most profitable provider to
residential homes of a wide range of interactive superhighway
services. The future is very near.

While the telephone industry was once 90-percent unionized, the
multi-media industry is perhaps 35-percent organized. In other words,
high tech means low wages unless or until workers fight back.

Bell Atlantic workers and many other workers spread out all over the
globe are struggling now for the rights and benefits workers will need
on the information superhighway of the near future.

                               -30-

(Copyright Workers World Service: Permission to reprint granted
if source is cited. For more information contact Workers World,
55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011; via e-mail: [e-mail].)

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

[e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: Re: New York Suspends (Baltimore-DC) Roaming
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 05:45:29 PST


On Fri, 02 Dec 1994 13:10:46 EST, Greg Monti <[e-mail]> writes:

> I am a Cellular One Washington-Baltimore customer (system owned by
> Southwestern Bell).  I just got an oversized yellow postcard in the
> mail.  Verbatim:

> Cellular Fraud on the Increase!
> As users of Cellular One's service, you know how valuable and useful a
> cellular phone has become.  Unfortunately, so do numerous criminals
> who want to steal your cellular phone and electronic serial numbers,

[fraud scare hype deleted, almost as bad as New York Telephone and its
payphone "War on Drugs".]

> Since implementing the fraud management system, we have monitored an
> extremely high amount of fraud originating from the New York City
> metro area (including northern New Jersey).  To protect our customers
> from becoming victims of fraud and to deny criminals use of stolen
> cellular phone numbers, we are TEMPORARILY SUSPENDING AUTOMATIC
> ROAMING AND CALL DELIVERY TO THE NEW YORK CITY AREA.  [emphasis
> theirs]

They forgot to mention that in all likelihood the reason they are
doing this is because they are much more concerned with paying CO/NY a
lot of money for fraudulent roaming charges than to save the phone
numbers of their customers or to punish fraudulent users.

> New Roaming Procedures for New York City:
> What does this mean to you?  If you are roaming in the New York City
> area, incoming calls to your cellular number will not be delivered to
> your phone.  Instead, callers will be forwarded to your Message Plus
> voice mailbox or be advised by a recording that you are out of the
> coverage area.

In other words, after setting up an automatic call delivery system on
the East Coast which will someday (Hello, SWBell/Boston...! :( ) allow
for seamless coverage on the "A" side from Maine to Virginia (but no
voicemail in Bell-owned properties), SWBell/DC is now telling it's
customers that there is sort of this "temporary" big gap in coverage
in NYC, and that they should please put up with it ... how nice ...

Although I'm not a big fan of the B-side system in the East for a
number of reasons (NYNEX's lack of features for one, no re-direct to
voicemail, non-standard feature codes, and that God-awful "Please hold
on message" which uneccessarily doubles the time it takes to deliver a
call), it may be a good time to remind readers that BAMS/Baltimore-DC
[phone]-0204, has automatic call delivery all the way from DC
to Maine, reasonable roaming rates ($.59 to $.79 per minute), and none
of this annoying "temporary" roaming blockages deal that CO/DC feels
comfortable to implement as if they "suddenly" discovered the NYC
fraud problem.

> Outgoing calls may still be made.  However, they will
> be intercepted by an operator who will request your credit card
> information for billing purposes.  Call set-up charges and per minute
> rates will be significantly higher than todays' standard roaming
> rates.  Emergency calls to 911 will continue to be free.

Yeah, you talk to a roaming operator, who will (curtly) take your
destination number, and your credit card number (Bell or AT&T), and
bill you something on the order of $1.99 per minute for the call. On
top of that you pay about $.80 for the Calling Card surcharge, and
around $.20 to $.25 daytime rates for the call. Note: You don't need
an active cell account to do this, so you could just drop CO/DC and go
to NYC and not pay CO/DC anything for the "privilege" of roaming in
NYC.

> YOUR ROAMING SERVICE STILL WORKS ACROSS THE NATION

That's comforting to know the next time I find myself along I-95 and
somehow it mysteriously has moved itself to Salt Lake City, Utah
instead of running through NYC like it used to. (Actually, considering
what NYC is like, that may not be so bad! :) )

> With the temporary exception of the New York City area, your Cellular
> One roaming and call delivery services will not be affected in other
> parts of the nation.  Again, we apologize for any inconvenience this
> may cause, especially during the holiday season.  We are hopeful this
> situation can be resolved in a short period of time.

As I am sure are all SWBell CO/DC customers who travel to NY.

If you travel to NY a lot, and feel this will place you in a bit of a
spot in terms of cellular coverage, feel free to tell them that you
wish to cancel you annual service contract (at no penalty to you of
course) and go set up an account with Bell Atlantic Mobile.

If they give you some trouble about it being a contract and that you
must stay on for a year, tell them that you had the expectation that
silly things such as reasonable roaming rates in NYC, auto call
delivery, and all those other things that they hyped in order to get
you to sign on would continue as well. If they restore these
immediately, you will continue to honor your annual agreement. If they
break their deal with you because they want to save "hundreds of
thousands of dollars" (let's see, they make that in oh, about a hour?
Poor little SWBell ... sniff sniff) then you can rightly explain to them
that you wish to save a nearly similar amount by not using NY's
gouging ... err ROAMING operator.

Moreover, although I am not too familiar with CO/DC's Autoplex (?)
switch, I do know that in most systems, a given range of numbers can
be restored quite readily should a customer need to roam in a blocked
market. This happened to me on the B side in Oregon and on the A side
in Philly, and it was never a problem to put a range numbers where
mine was located back into the blocked system so that I could roam
there normally.  If you don't want to score points by cancelling your
(annual/contract) service with them, try telling them this and INSIST
that they explain to you why they can't do it if that's the answer
which they give to you.

> If you have any questions, please call out Customer Relations Department
> at 1-800-CELL-ONE.

Oh yeah, like that's going to help -- they couldn't even tell me what
the rates were in Boston (another SW Bell property) or if a roam
charge would be incurred.

> Cellular One.  Clearly Better.

At what?

> Note that it doesn't say what happens if a caller dials 212 847-7626
> (the New York A-carrier roamer port), receives a dial tone and dials
> .your ten-digit cellular number.  I tried that and got an immediate fast
> busy after dialing my own ten-digit cellular number.  But this may not
> have been a good test since my phone was in the Washington-Baltimore
> area at the time -- and turned off.

Won't make a difference -- most NACN customers (DC is on the NACN)
will get a fast busy if they dial a roamer via the roam port in
another NACN city. A silly Call Delivery thing which guarantees that
the only way that someone can reach you while roaming is if YOU agree
to pick up the LD costs. I think there may be some technical reason
for this as well in Ericsson switches -- they are always having
problems with the ports in NYC. (You need to use three or four ports in
sequence to find a roamer in NY, the switch can't do it.)

Overall, another typical SWBell roaming annoyance. This comes from the
same people who charge their own customers in Boston HOME (ie, THEY
make money too) airtime for call-delivery when customers roam outside
the Boston coverage area, the same people who randomly seem to charge
a $2 "Roamer Administration Fee" whenever they need some more beer at
their headquarters, the same people who will not work out a roaming
agreement with another (albeit slimey) cellular outfit in Western
Mass, so that roamers who receive calls will unknowingly pay $3 per
day, $.99 per minute (and don't forget the CO/Boston HOME airtime and
$2 beer fee), and the same people who were supposed to be on the NACN
almost a year ago but for some reason just never got around to it.
(There's more, of course, but let's not get into that.)

What else can you expect? I hope that a lot of their customers who
travel to NYC will be so outraged that they just flat out drop their
SWBell Cell One service and sign up with BAMS or NYNEX. (One good
thing about NYNEX -- unlike SWBell CO/DC, you will NEVER pay a daily
roam charge in any B market.)

SWBell "tried" to get rid of the free airtime deal in Boston a few
years ago (or maybe it was just a marketing ploy), but as a result of
a lot of negative customer feedback, they dropped these plans.
Hopefully, a significant number of Baltimore/DC customers will
complain about this, causing SWBell to reconsider its NYC raoming
decision.

Finally, may I add that if SWBell were really serious about trying to
mitigate any inconvenience to its customers, it would allow regular
roaming and call-delivery in CO/NY's market, and force customers to
use 0+ dialing for all toll calls outside the local calling area (or
an 800 calling card, etc.) I know CO/San Francisco's Ericsson allows
for this, and I suspect that CO/NY could do this too, although I don't
know if this service restriction can be handed out to specific (e.g.
DC/Baltimore) roamers. I was told it could, but that may be
misinformation. Any Ericsson people out there?

There are other potential solutions, such as the use of the "Fraud
Protection" feature supported by CO/NY (even if only when roaming in
NY).  Again, I don't know if this is possible or if the coding is
already in place or not, but at the very least have something like the
above available prior to turning off roaming in one of the nation's
largest markets. The failure to do this is typical of the generally
annoying, petty, nickel-and-diming approach which SWBell manifests in
many of its properties.


Doug Reuben        //  CID Technologies/InterPage Network Services Group
[e-mail] //  (203) 499 - 5221

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #437
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19380;
          6 Dec 94 18:03 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA17106; Tue, 6 Dec 94 11:08:13 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA17098; Tue, 6 Dec 94 11:08:10 CST
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 94 11:08:10 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #438

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Dec 94 11:08:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 438

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Philadelphia Police 911 Call Transcript (rec.radio.scanner via Steve Brack)
    Bell Canada Rate Changes (Bell Canada News via Dave Sellers)
    PacBell Not Aiming to "Please" (David Leibold)
    Who is SRX in Plano Texas? (John Einstoss)
    Articles on 800 Pay Services and Cordless Phones (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 America
On Line. 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, 5 Dec 94 10:09:09 -0500
From: Steve Brack <[e-mail]>
Subject: Philadelphia Police 911 Call Transcript (from rec.radio.scanner)


This is the full text of the Philadelphia Police 911 tapes regarding
the recent incident which unfortunately resulted in the death of a
teenage boy.  According to published accounts, the speed of response
to citizens' repeated calls to 911 is being held partly to blame for
his death.

Presented as read on rec.radio.scanner.
Thanks to [e-mail] for posting this transcription.


Steven S. Brack         [e-mail]
Toledo, OH  43613-1605  [e-mail]
Tel: [phone]

               =======================================

  From: [e-mail] (SCAN911)
  Newsgroups: rec.radio.scanner
  Subject: Philly POLICE 911 call transcripts
  Date: 3 Dec 1994 14:15:04 -0500
  Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

Here's a transcript of the now-famous Philadelphia Police 911 calls in
which dispatchers were cited as rude.  The rudeness is at 10:44:23.
Enjoy!

Chuck Gysi, N2DUP
[e-mail]


10:01:25 p.m.
dispatcher: Police 225.
Caller: Hi. I'm sorry to call you, but could you please send a car to the
McDonald's at the corner of Hasbrook and Oxford?
Dispatcher: On the corner of Hasbrook and where?
Caller: Oxford. It's in Fox Chase.
There are a pack of kids and they're really noisy.
Dispatcher: Inside the McDonald's?
Caller: They're in the parking lot.
Dispatcher: OK, the McDonald's parking lot.
Caller: Thanks so much.
Dispatcher: You're welcome. Bye.

10:10:19 p.m.
dispatcher: Police radio [inaudible.
Caller:: Ah yes, I'm calling from the McDonald's at Fox Chase on Oxford
Avenue.
Dispatcher: Uh-huh.
Caller: I have a bunch of kids in the parking lot and they just broke one
of my customers' windows.
Dispatcher: Where's the customer?
Caller: She's out in the parking lot and she was going through the
drive-through and they broke one of her windows.
Dispatcher: Is she going to wait for the police?
Caller: I'm sorry.
Dispatcher: Is she going to wait for the police?
Caller: Well, how long is it going to be?
Dispatcher: I have no idea.
Caller: Uhhh, I'll find out, but I imagine she would. She could fill out a
report. OK.
Dispatcher: Uh-huh.
Caller: OK. Thank you.

10:13:58 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police radio. May I help you?
Montgomery County dispatcher: Hi, it's Montgomery County. We have a report
of a disturbance at Borbeck and Oxford.
Dispatcher: OK. On the highway?
Montco dispatcher: On Borbeck.
Dispatcher: On the street or inside somewhere ?
Monaco dispatcher: Juveniles throwing rocks -- at the McDonald's.
Dispatcher: At the McDonald's?
Monaco dispatcher: Yeah, there's about 20 of them.
Dispatcher: All right, we'll send somebody out there.

10:20:49 p.m.
Caller: Could you send some police over here to 7979 Rockwell Avenue?
About 50 kids are busting up cars [Inaudible]
Dispatcher: What are they doing?
Caller: Busting up the cars, windows and everything . . . 7979 Rockwell
Avenue.
Dispatcher: Uh-huh. Wait a minute. They are inside the lot?
Caller: Yeah.
Dispatcher: Teenagers?
Caller: Yep.
Dispatcher: About how many is there?
Caller: About 50.
Dispatcher: All righty.

10:33:58 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 232.
Caller: Hi, this is the Oxford Avenue Pizza Hut. We have a gang of at
least 50 young kids with bats outside beating each other, chasing each other.
They Just ran behind the store.
Dispatcher: How many have bats?
Caller: About 10.
Dispatcher: What hundred Oxford is?
Caller: What hundred Oxford is this? 78. They are between our store and
the McDonald's.
Dispatcher: In the parking lot?
Caller: Yep. Yes, in between both parking lots.
Dispatcher: OK.
Caller: Thank you.
Dispatcher: You're welcome.

10:37:15 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 225.
Caller: I don't believe this -- this rang about 10 times. There's a big
commotion going on outside our home. Like a gang fight.
Dispatcher: Where is that, ma'am?
Caller: Ridgeway Street. 7900 Ridgeway Street.
Dispatcher: OK.Caller: They got clubs out there. [It's a gang fight, says
a
male voice in the background.] There's a kid hurt out there.
Dispatcher: All right.
Caller: Did you get that?
Dispatcher: Yeah, a kid is hurt outside and there's a fight. All right?
Was that it?
Caller: Yeah, that's it. Send a police car to Seven
Dispatcher: Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. You asked me and
I'm asking you. I have the information, you can hang up now.

10:37:34 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 244.
Caller: Thank you. I'm calling from the Fox Chase section of the city.
There seems to be a lot of gang fighting in front of my house. 7900 block of
Ridgeway Street. It's just above the recreation center. A lot of screaming,
yelling, and kids look like they are carrying clubs of some kind. They are
in the middle of the street.
Dispatcher: I'll send someone out.
Caller: Thank you.

10:37:50 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 45. How can I help you ?
Caller: Hi, I live across the street from the Fox Chase School and the
playground and there is a tremendous amount of kids out there fighting and
 ... I'm afraid something's going to happen.
Dispatcher: OK, Fox Chase playground. What's the address?
Caller: Uh, it's, well, right now they're in front of Ridgeway and Rhawn
in front of the school but they just keep growing and they keep talking about
a fight ...
Dispatcher: OK. Ridgeway and what's the other street you mentioned madam?
Caller: Rhawn.
Dispatcher: Oh, OK. We'll send somebody out.
Caller: Hurry up because I don't know what's happening, there's a lot of
screaming and yelling.
Dispatcher: Yeah, OK. Bye-bye.

10:38:25 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 170.
Caller: Hi, I'd like to report a disturbance . . .
Dispatcher: Where?
Caller: Ridgeway Street.
Dispatcher: What and Ridgeway?
Caller: 7940 Ridgeway Street. There's about 20 kids outside fighting.
Dispatcher: We'll send somebody around.
Caller: Thanks a lot.

10:41:01 p.m..
Dispatcher: Police radio.
Caller: Yeah. Could you get a couple of cars over here, 7979 Rockwell
Avenue. There's about 50 teenagers, baseball bats. A gang fight down in
the complex between the Fox Chase playground and the auto body area.
Dispatcher: 7979 Rockwell?
Caller: Yeah.
Dispatcher: We'll get somebody right over.

10:41:21 p.m.
Dispatcher [alerting police officers]: 203 . . . 7845 Oxford at the Pizza
Hut/McDonald's parking lot. Check for civil males all with baseball bats.
7845 Oxford. Parking lot McDonald's and Pizza Hut. There's no flash.
Police: 28.
Dispatcher: 28.
Police: We'll swing by that location.

10:41:24 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 157. What's your problem?
Caller: Yeah, I just want to let you know. I live across from the Fox
Chase playground.
Dispatcher: Yeah.
Caller: And there's about 25 youths right now running around, yelling
obscenities, yelling about niggers and everything else. They are running
through people's yards and all. I don't know if something's going on
tonight or not, but ...
Dispatcher: Somebody will be there, sir.
Caller: Thank you.

10:42:32 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 170.
Caller: Hi, how ya doing. This is . . . I'm in Fox Chase and we've got a
near riot and there's no damn police around.
Dispatcher: Where? Where?
Caller: On Ridgeway Street!
Dispatcher: Well, I don't know that!
Caller: We've been calling. Everybody in the neighborhood's been calling.
I call the district, they tell me to call 911. What are we suppose to do
here? There's cars. There's a whole damn convoy of cars coming up here.
You got a damn riot goin' up here.
Dispatcher: Police will be there.
Caller: Yeah, huh. Thanks a lot

10:44:13 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 244
Caller: Yes. This is one of the sisters at St. Cecilia's Convent on Rhawn
Street. There's a bunch of kids out in the parking lot and it looks like
they are beating up one kid.
Dispatcher: 500 Rhawn, madam?
Caller: 525 Rhawn.
Dispatcher: In the parking lot?
Dispatcher: We'll send someone out.
Caller: Thank you.

10:44:23 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 94
Caller: We're in Fox Chase on Ridge way Street. They are beating the hell
out of people with baseball bats up here. When are you going to send
somebody?
Dispatcher: Who's got a bat, sir?
Caller: Who got a bat? Some gorilla. What the hell do you mean?
Dispatcher: Wait a minute! Wait a minute! Don't talk to me like that. I
asked you a question.
Dispatcher: Who's got the bat? Is he white, black or Hispanic?
Caller: There's a man with a bat ...
Tape ends.

10:44:37 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 232.
Caller: Hello?
Dispatcher: Police.
Caller: [inaudible].
Dispatcher: Where?
Dispatcher: This is at Rhawn and what?
Caller: At Rhawn Street. St Cecilia.
Dispatcher: OK, but that's Rhawn and what. What's the cross or what
hundred block of Rhawn.
Caller: It's St. Cecilia schoolyard.  [Inaudible].
Dispatcher: Yeah, what hundred block of Rhawn Street is it on, sir.  I
can't hear you because there's something wrong with the phone. You're saying
Rhawn, and it's by what?
Caller: I'm trying to find a cross street ..... What street is this
[caller speaks to someone in the background]?
Dispatcher: Look at one of the buildings and tell me the address on it
Caller: Yeah, it's on Rhawn and [inaudible].
Dispatcher: Rhawn and what?  Look at one of the buildings and tell me the
address on it.
Caller: 500 Rhawn Street
Dispatcher: 500?
Caller: Rhawn Street. A [inaudible] just went by.
Dispatcher: Where's he at? [Get an address, says another voice in radio
room]
Dispatcher: OK.

10:45:37 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 157.
Caller: Hello?
Dispatcher: Yes, police.
Caller: My friend, my friend's bleeding. He's at [inaudiblel hospital.
Dispatcher: He's what?
Caller: He's at [inaudiblel hospital.
Dispatcher: Slow down, he needs what at the hospital?
Caller: I mean. [inaudible] He needs a hospital. He's bleeding.
Dispatcher: Where's he at?
Caller: He's at St. C's. At the church.
Dispatcher: He's where?
Caller: St. Cecilia's.
Dispatcher: I can't understand you? Give me an address?
Caller: He's at St. Cecilia's.
Dispatcher: And where's that at?
Caller: Oxford Avenue.
Dispatcher: Oxford and what?
Caller: It's like. Oh my god.
Dispatcher: Listen, listen, if you don't calm down, he gets no help. Do
you understand that much?
Caller: I'm trying.
Dispatcher: All right, so you gotta tell me. Oxford and where?
Caller: Oh God. Do you know where Fox Chase School is?
Dispatcher: No, I don't.
Caller: OK, it's, it's Oxford Avenue and Verree.
Dispatcher: Verree. All right, what happened to him?
Caller: He got beat with a bat.
Dispatcher: All right. Are the people that beat him still there?
Caller: No!
Dispatcher: Hold on. I'm gonna connect you with rescue, you tell them
where he is.
Caller: OK.
Rescue: Rescue.
Caller: [inaudible] got beat with a bat.
He's at [inaudiblel church.
Rescue: What?
Caller: St. Cecilia's.
Rescue: What's your address. What's the address. Where's it at?
Caller: It's right across the street from the [inaudible] school, which is
right by ... Rhawn.
Rescue [to dispatcher]: Please, could you tell me where she's calling
from?
Dispatcher: She's calling from 501 Rhawn Street by the Free Library.
Caller: Yeah, I'm at the Free Library, but ... is at St. Cecilia's Church.
Dispatcher: She told me it was at Oxford and Verree, first. She can't seem
to get it together.
Rescue: Is that where St. Cecilia's is? Oxford and Verree?
Caller: It's, it's . . . Where are you at?
Dispatcher: Don't worry about where we're at. Tell them where you're at.
Where you want him to go?
Caller: [Inaudible] I don't know the two streets. Right now, I'm at the
library, but St. Cecilia's at ...
Rescue: How far are you away from it?
Caller: He's at, I think he's at Rhawn and [inaudible] Street.
Rescue: Rhawn and where?
Caller: I think it's [inaudible, but I'm not sure. It's at St. Cecilia's
Church. He's right in front of the church.
Rescue: And what's wrong? What happened?
Caller: He got beat with a bat.
Rescue: He got beat with a bat?
Caller: He's bleeding.
Rescue: It's right near Rhawn and [inaudible.]
Dispatcher: No, no. It's not a good cross street. She's probably talking
about Rhawn and Verree.
Caller: It's at St. Cecilia's Church. He's right at the church.
Dispatcher: Rhawn and Verree is close to where she's calling from.
Rescue: We're on the way.
Caller: Thank you.

10:45:53 p.m.
Police officer: 203.
Dispatcher: 203.
Police officer: Send rescue to the Seventh District side right at Rhawn
and Ridgeway in front of a church. We've got a kid down. I think he was beat
up. It could possibly have something to do with that Oxford Avenue thing.
Dispatcher: You said Rhawn and Ridgeway?
Police Officer: Correct. On the Seventh District side. [inaudible] rescue,
please.
Dispatcher: Thank you.

10:45:59 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 170.
Caller: Hi, Could you send a car to Fox Chase Rec.
Dispatcher: Where's that?
Caller: Um. It's on, uh, Rockwell Avenue. There's a bunch of people in
cars and they are coming out and beating people up.
Dispatcher: OK.
Caller: It's really bad. Can you hurry?
Dispatcher: OK.

10:46:22 p.m.
Dispatcher: Police 344.
Caller: Hi. We're having a problem outside our house here.
Dispatcher: What's your address.
Caller: Ok. It's not on my street. It's at St. Cecilia's on Rhawn Street.
In the rectory. In the schoolyard.
Dispatcher: What's the address there?
Caller: OK. 525 Rhawn Street.
Dispatcher: 525 Rhawn?
Caller: Right.
Dispatcher: Is it R ...
Caller: R-H-A-W-N! We've got kids they've beat up. And no one wants to
help us!
Dispatcher: I'm trying to help you madam. I have to first understand you.
Caller: Rhawn. R as in robot. H as in health. A as in apple. W as in
[inaudible] and N as in [inaudible]. Does that help?
Dispatcher: Immensely. Now, can you continue? What's the problem there?
Caller: We've been calling for 20 minutes now to get the cops up here and
no one's come.
Dispatcher: So, what, what's, what madam. Madam?
Caller: I'm near the Fox Chase Rec.
Dispatcher: Madam, what's going on out there?
Caller: I've been telling you ...
Dispatcher: You haven't told me what's going on?
Caller: We have like a group of 50 kids out front, about.
Dispatcher: Uh-huh. What are the kids doing, madam?
Caller: Well, a few of them have golf clubs. And then this one little boy
just came down and said to us someone's beating him up with a baseball bat.
Dispatcher: We'll send the police, madam.
Caller: Pardon me.
Dispatcher: We will send the police.
Caller: Send them now, not in 10 minutes, but now.
Dispatcher: We will send the police, madam.
Caller: Thank you. Do you know where it is?
Dispatcher: You said 525 Rhawn madam. That's what you said, didn't you?
Caller: Yes.
Dispatcher: OK, that's where we're gonna send them.
Caller: Thank you.
Dispatcher: You're welcome.

10:46:32 p.m.
Police: Have a rescue [inaudible] in and out of consciousness.
Dispatcher: All right, 03. Rescue's in route. They got the message.

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

Date: Mon, 5 Dec 94 10:01:12 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Sellers)
Subject: Bell Canada Rate Changes


 ----- Begin Included Message -----
Publication:      News Release                            Community: COMM
Article Subject:  Bell Canada's prices are
Author:           Linda C. Gervais                        Issued:    94-12-01


              Bell Canada's Prices Are Changing
          for Long Distance and Basic Local Service

Ottawa, December 1, 1994 -- Come January 1, 1995, Bell Canada's
residence and small business customers will be able to save even more
on their long distance calling.  Bell is introducing savings of up to
35 per cent, depending on when and where customers call.

The decreases are included in a rate rebalancing proposal Bell and
Canada's other telephone companies filed today with the Canadian
Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC).

Along with January's long distance decreases, basic local service
prices for all residence and many business customers will increase by
$2 per month.

Business customers in the local calling areas of Montreal, Toronto,
Ottawa and Quebec will see no increase, because the prices they pay
already cover Bell's costs of providing local service.

This rate rebalancing proposal begins the process of moving long
distance prices down and local prices up.  It follows the CRTC's
landmark regulatory framework decision (Decision 94-19) of September
16, 1994.  In its decision, the CRTC said basic local rates should be
increased so that long distance prices could be made more affordable
for Canadians.  It therefore ordered Bell and the other telephone
companies to reduce long distance prices.

Rate rebalancing is good news for the 97 per cent of Bell customers
who place long distance calls.  Even with the $2 monthly increase, the
first general local rate increase in nearly 12 years, Bell customers
will still pay among the lowest prices for basic service anywhere in
the world.

Today, more than 99 per cent of households in Ontario and Quebec have
basic telephone service.

In its decision, the CRTC reasoned that with basic telephone service
now universally-available, long distance prices need to become more
affordable.  As Canadian families and friends spread across the
country, they need to keep in touch, and long distance is no longer
the luxury it was once thought to be.

Long distance prices will be reduced as follows:

Calls made to locations within Ontario and Quebec:

Calls made to locations within Ontario and Quebec that are more than
65 kilometres (40 miles) away will be reduced by up to 13 per cent.

Calls to the Rest of Canada and the U.S.:

Calls made to locations outside Ontario and Quebec that are more than
90 km (56 miles) away will also be reduced by up to 13 per cent.

Calls made to locations in the U.S. that are more than 176 km (110
miles) will be reduced by up to 11 per cent.

Bell is also introducing a new Saturday discount of 35 per cent on
calls to locations outside Ontario and Quebec, and to the U.S.

As a result, all calls placed between 8 a.m. and 11 p.m.  every
Saturday and Sunday will be discounted by 35 per cent.

The new reduced long distance prices will apply to our existing
time-of-day discounts and to other Bell savings plans such as Real
Plus(TM), so the price of long distance calling will be even lower.

The new reductions will make calling during our discount periods even
more attractive.

Sample Price Savings:

Weekday Calls

10-Minute Call         Discount Period  Current  Price   New  Price

Kingston-Ottawa              none          $3.70            $3.20
8 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Oshawa-Detroit               none          $4.90            $4.50
8 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Oakville-Ottawa              none          $3.80            $3.40
8 a.m.- 6 p.m..
Toronto-Vancouver             35%          $3.12            $2.80
6 p.m. - 11 p.m.
Sherbrooke-Miami              35%          $3.58            $3.19
6 p.m. - 11 p.m.
Laval-Fredericton             60%          $1.76            $1.56
11 p.m. - 8 a.m.
Hamilton-New York             60%          $2.12            $1.88
11 p.m. - 8 a.m.

Weekend Calls:

10-Minute Call         Discount Period  Current Price     New Price

Toronto-Halifax               35%          $2.99            $2.67
6 p.m. - 11 p.m.
Sherbrooke-Miami       new, Sat. at 35%    $5.50            $3.19
8 a.m. - 6 p.m.
Hamilton-New York      new, Sat. at 35%    $5.30            $3.06
8 a.m. - 6 p.m.
St. Jovite-Winnipeg    new, Sat. at 35%    $4.60            $2.67
8 a.m. - 6 p.m.
London-Toronto                60%          $1.48            $1.32
11 p.m. - 8 a.m.
Chicoutimi-Quebec             60%          $1.48            $1.32
11 p.m. - 8 a.m.

Bell Canada, the largest Canadian telecommunications operating
company, markets a full range of state-of-the-art products and
services to more than seven million business and residence customers
in Ontario and Quebec.

Bell Canada is a member of Stentor -- an alliance of Canada's major
telecommunications companies.


For more information, please call:

Linda Gervais                        Susanna Cluff-Clyburne
Bell Canada Public Affairs           Bell Canada Public Affairs
[phone]                       [phone]
[phone]                       [phone]

Sandra Cruickshanks
Bell Ontario Public Affairs
[phone]
[phone]

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

Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 01:20:01 EST
From: David Leibold <[e-mail]>
Subject: PacBell Not Aiming to "Please"


An article by Richard Heft for {The Toronto Star} (19 Nov 94) entitled
"Pulling the plug on telephone politeness" refers to Pacific Bell's
decision to have their directory assistance operators remove the word
"please" from their greeting. That is, the operator would answer
something like "Hi, I'm xxxx, what city?" (where the xxxx is a name,
which is likely a pseudonym).  The old greeting went something like
"This is operator ###, what city, please?".

Seems some critics, including Judith "Miss Manners" Martin, don't like
PacBell's triumph of efficiency over politeness. PacBell, meanwhile,
claims the new please-less greeting saves $5M/year and 0.5 seconds per
call, to keep the entire greeting within a 1.2 second limit. Yet, the
current average call times are slightly longer (19.6 sec, versus the
previous 19.35 sec).

The article writer mentioned one unidentified operator who mentioned
that PacBell doesn't want anyone talking about the matter. Unfortunately,
the context of the article didn't indicate whether the operator was
being interviewed while on a directory assistance call, or while off
work. This situation is on top of reported performance quota requirements.


David Leibold [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, overall the operators are saying
a lot more in greeting than they used to say many years ago. Long, long
ago, the 'greeting' was simply "number please?" when they first answered
you, and "operator" if you flashed for them to return to the line at some
point in the call. And then, the word 'operator' frequently came out in
a smashed-together blur as 'opter' with the two middle syllables missing.
It has only been in the past ten or fifteen years that a more detailed
greeting including name -- albeit phone name, rarely real name -- and/or
operator number was included. Strange in a way, effeciency has been
replaced by courteous greeting. The old time operators were super fast and
effecient; you never had to ask them twice or repeat anything. They were
like human switches or robots.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Einstoss)
Subject: Who is SRX in Plano Texas?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 1994 03:45:39 GMT


I haven't been around PBX's for about five years.  Who is SRX (Shared
Resources Exchange) out of Plano Texas?  Their product is SRX Vision.
It is distributed locally here in the Bay Area by VoicePro.  Can
anyone inform me?  I am researching this for a potential buyer (60
lines and growing).


Thanks.

[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: Articles on 800 Pay Services and Cordless Phones
Date: 6 Dec 1994 10:33:14 -0500


The December 1994 issue of {Consumer Reports} has some articles of
special interest to the telecom crowd.

First is a piece on how 800 phone calls may generate a charge.
(Everyone in this group knows the deal, but it's interesting to see
how a mainstream consumer group reports it).

Second is a survey/test of cordless phones. In short, Consumer Reports
found that 10 channel 49 mhz units were better than 1 channel ones,
and that (most) 900 mhz units had -much- better range than those on 49
mhz.  They also gave a reasonable explanation of scrambling and other
security methods (although, surprisingly, they didn't hve the Motorola
phone).

They also, for good measure, report on the different types of consumer
batteries available and come to the unsurprising conclusion that just
about all alkalines are alike and you should buy based on price. (They
also compare ni-cads, the new Rayovac Renewals, lithium cells, and
even analyze the "Buddy-L" recharger.)


danny    [e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #438
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19804;
          6 Dec 94 18:52 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19331; Tue, 6 Dec 94 12:18:24 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19324; Tue, 6 Dec 94 12:18:20 CST
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 94 12:18:20 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #439

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Dec 94 12:18:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 439

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU (Jim Long)
    Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU ([e-mail])
    Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU (Bruce Sullivan)
    WilTel Ignores Privacy/*67 - Update (Douglas Reuben)
    Re: WilTel Ignores *67 For Caller ID, Also Incorrect Billing (Glen Roberts)
    Re: WilTel Ignores *67 For Caller ID, Also Incorrect Billing (Brad Allen)
    Re: CID Comes to Texas (Glen L. Roberts)
    Re: T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP? (William Dawson)
    Re: T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP? (Ed Goldgehn)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (John Canning)
    Re: MCI's Announcement (Eric Kessner)
    Re: MCI and the Future of Internet (Gary Darcy)

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 America
On Line. 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] (Jim Long)
Subject: Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 1994 12:12:34 -0800
Organization: NET


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

> LBO is defined as "Line Build Out".  It is very simply how much gain
> you want to have transmitted to the T1 network.  Most T1 CSU/DSU have
> ALBOs for receiving a DS1 signal from the T1 network; ALBO (Automatic
> Line Build Out).  Normally, you have three settings, 0, -7.5, and -15.
> The 0 setting sends out a DS-1 (digital signal at 1.544 Mbps or T1) 4
> to 5 kfeet over normal 100 ohm impedance, 22 guage PIC twisted pair
> cable, (PIC: plastic insulated cable).  The -7.5 pads down the gain of
> the transmitted signal to approx.  2000 feet and -15.0 pads down the
> gain to a very small distance ... 655 feet or less.

> What all this mumbo jumbo really means is if the telco has a NID
> device (network interface device) real close to your ONS150s you could
> be overdriving the T1 signal and causing some major errors.  The NID
> device is also a digital regenerator and looks for an incoming T1
> signal at a certain peak to peak signal level.

> My advice is to go to a -7.5 LBO setting and see if it improves your
> transmission.  That setting usually works with a variety of
> situations.  If it doesn't, look for a small rectangular box in your
> telecomm closet that has the words WESTELL or WESCOM on it; this is
> the NID device.  If it is really close to your ONS150; (within a
> couple feet), set your ONS150 for -15.0 LBO.

The distance you need to be concerned with is the distance to the
first repeater after not to the NID or NIU(Network Interface Unit).  Also
known as a smartjack.

The NID/NIU does not perform the same functions as a network repeater.

The first repeater can be no more than 3000 feet from the CSU/DSU or in
most cases, from the NID/NIU.

The most common setting for a CSU build out is 0dB. If this is too
"hot" of a signal then pad to -7.5 and then -15.  I doubt that you
wjill need either of these settings as the telco likes to set up their
repeaters at the maxium distance allowed.  Most of my problems with
repeater distances have been where the telco placed the first repeater
greater than 3000 feet from the "demark", the entry point to the
building for the T1 line.

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

Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 15:08:40 -0500
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation
Subject: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU


In TELECOM Digest Volume 14 Issue 434, Dennis E. Miyoshi
<[e-mail]> wrote (in part):

> What is the meaning of the LBO?

LBO stands for Line Build-Out, a general term that refers to the
inpedance and/or signal level that is applied on the output (transmit
pair) of a CSU or other transmission gear. The levels you'll see on a
CSU are essentially attenuation settings that can be used to
compensate for a short cable run to the first repeater (or other
receiving equipment, such as a back-to-back set of CSUs, a T3 or OC
mux, or a DACS). With a short cable run, the CSU's output may need to
be attenuated to avoid overdriving the receiver at the other end.


> What would the results be if the LBO is set to the wrong dB level?

If the CSU is connected to a carrier-provided span, chances are the
correct setting is 0, so the wrong setting (on most CSUs) would result
in a low-amplitude signal being received by the next repeater on the
span.  Depending on several variables, a low setting on the LBO would
probably cause loss of signal at the next repeater (i.e., the span
would be down).

You say the routers are "confused". Are the routers expecting a single
T1 or FT1 channel? Do the CSUs handle fractional rate conversion on
the DTE side? Have you matched the DS0 channels allocated at the two
CSUs (same DS0s at both ends)? Are the CSUs and the span set up to
handle clear channel transmission (ESF/B8ZS)?

Have you selected corresponding sync sources on the CSUs and the
routers?  Usually, you'll want to get clocking from the CSU at both
ends. The CSUs, in turn, get their clocking from the stratum clocking
coming from the span.  However, some local T1 spans do not pass
through any equipment that provides a clock signal. In that case,
you'll need to select a clocking source from the routers and the CSUs
and allow all of the other units to pull clocking from that source.

Probably the best way to set up a self-clocking connection is to set
one of the CSUs as internally clocked and the other CSU to sync to the
incoming signal (from the first CSU). Then, set both routers to pull
their clocking from the respective CSU. However, if the CSU that's
providing the clocking has a wide clock tolerance, the result can be
that other equipment can't follow the clock signal over its range or
sets alarm conditions due to clock variations. If that occurs, you may
have to switch to a different unit for your clock source.

I've been through similar situations, and it gets "interesting". Check
with your carrier: If the span stays up and they don't get any alarms,
then the problem probably involves DS0 channel allocation, bits
overwritten by a non-clear channel setup, or sync clocking not getting
to the router port.  See if you can come up with details beyond
"confused" routers, and you'll probably find your answer.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve)
Subject: Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU
Date: 6 Dec 1994 13:04:20 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


LBO = Line Build Out which is a way to equalize for a length of cable
to a signal interface.  An improper LBO may cause intermittent errors
and could even prevent ANY communication at all.


Take it easy,

Steve

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

Date: Tue, 6 Dec 94 13:39 EST
From: Bruce Sullivan <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU


> My two questions are:

> 1.  What is the meaning of the LBO?
> 2.  What would the results be if the LBO is set to the wrong dB level?

1.  This sets the signal strength (in dbs) transmitted to the network
interface. Typical settings for this are 0.0, -7.5, or -15.0. I've
also seen -22.5, however. 0.0 is usually the default. The choice of
settings is dependant upon the distance from the demarc (telco
demarcation point). Typically one is 'sitting on top of' the demarc,
hence the 0.0 setting. However, sometimes one has an 'extended'
demarc. In that case, you may wish to use one of the other settings.
The reason that it says it must be specified by the carrier is because
the carrier should have noted the line levels when the line was
installed (and because you are unlikely to know the distance to the
demarc). The reality is that telco doesn't usually tell me anything
about it unless I beat on the for the information.

2.  If this were a real problem, it would likely manifest itself by
errors on the line. For instance, when you say your routers seem to be
'confused', are you getting errors at the serial (WAN) interface? (if
it's a cisco router, that would be 'sho int s 0' command, assuming
this is serial interface 0). That's the only problem that this would
cause.  The CSU should also provide some indicator of a problem. If it
shows clean stats, then this is not causing you any problem. In any
case, I would try setting them first at 0.0.  For the vast number of
my installations (+-75) that does the trick. If that doesn't do it,
I'd try -7.5. It's possible you'll have to go beyond that, but
doubtful.

Keep in mind that, if you are having line errors, this isn't the only
possible cause. I can't tell you how many times I've seen telco screw
up the provisioning of a circuit. If you are seeing errors at the CSU,
I'd call telco into it.  One dicey thing I've run into time and time
again, is a line coding mismatch. If this is a B8ZS line, all telco
equipment (as well as your CSU's) must be set that way. I've had telco
screw this one thing up more than other.


Best of luck,

Bruce Sullivan
Nordstrom   Network & Computer Operations Supervisor/Network Analyst.
[e-mail]               [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: WilTel Ignores Privacy/*67 - Update
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 01:40:55 PST


I posted a few days ago on how WilTel seems to be ignoring the
"Privacy" command for Caller ID (*67/1167) for calls originating from
Connecticut.

Apparently, I did not realize that the problem was significantly more
widespread. Similar test calls from Milton, Mass; New York City, NY,
Rockaway, NJ; and North Salem, NY all indicated the same failure:
There is NO WAY to block the transmission of your ID via *67 (or 1167
rotary) if you use WilTel!

Moreover, it is NOT Caller ID which is being transmitted, it's ANI!

Let's say I have the following call-forwarding set up:

A  ------------>   B   --------->   C
   Local Telco         WilTel

Thus, when A calls B, B's calls are forwarded to C, so C gets the call.

If C has Caller ID, and A -> B is an SS7 link within the local telco,
BEFORE all this started happening if A were to call B and the call
were to be forwarded to C, C would receive the Caller ID (telephone
number) of A.

Currently, when the same thing happens, instead of getting A's number,
C always gets B's number, which leads me to suspect that they are not
doing CLASS/Caller ID stuff but instead passing just the ANI from B.
I've tried this from a number of different locations, and each time
the results are the same. Note that they USED TO do it correctly, and
now they do not, so they can't say "Oh, well, we HAVE to send the ANI,
since we think that Caller ID transmission is impossible."

In any event, they did mention to me that they upgraded or installed a
new switch in Newark, NJ about a week ago, and that it may not be
programmed correctly. They took some information from me, asked what
numbers I had called to/from, and said they would get back to me. So
far, no progress, and *67 will apparently not have any effect (nor
will Per Line blocking) on any calls placed via WilTel.

I'll post when I get some answers as to when this will be fixed. In
the meantime, be advised that you may not be able to control the
transmission of your ID and/or ANI if you are using WilTel. (I'm not
saying this out of spite, just a fact ...)


Doug Reuben    CID Technologies/Interpage NSG        (203) 499 - 5221
*FTP to: 'ftp.netcom.com', pub/ci/cidtech for MacPager Call ID->Pager Demo*
*WWW to: http://interpage.net for info on E-Mail to ANY Pager gateway*

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen L. Roberts)
Subject: Re: WilTel Ignores *67 For Caller ID, Also Incorrect Billing
Date: 6 Dec 1994 22:05:33 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605


CID Tech/INSG ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I just noticed that WilTel has turned on Caller ID signaling from CT
> to points outward, such as New York and New Jersey.

You can always check by calling 10555-1-708-356-9646 ... also, preceed
it with the *67 ... You will hear whatever Caller-ID Info AmeriTech
passes on.


Glen L. Roberts, Editor, Full Disclosure
Host Full Disclosure Live (WWCR 5,065 khz - Sundays 7pm central)
email [e-mail] for catalog on privacy & surveillance.
Does 10555-1-708-356-9646 give you an "ANI" readback? With name?
email for uuencoded .TIF of T-Shirt Honoring the FBI
Remember, fd _IS FOR_ Full Disclosure!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I got some interesting results from
trying out the above number in different ways. When I simply dialed
it locally (I am in 708) as 356-9646 it responded with a message
giving me the (non-published) name and number on my phone. When I
dialed it with *67 first, then it responded by telling me I had
pressed that code to hade my name and number. In both instances
after a short blurb about Caller-ID and privacy, it then went on
to say if calling from a fax machine to press 3, otherwise to begin
speaking and leave a message. But ... I tried some other things as
well:  Dialing 10555-356-9646 (remember, I am in 708 so don't use
it in the dialing string) must have given his system some kind of
different reaction since instead of the opening spiel about Caller-ID,
and/or lack of same by dialing *67 it answered immediatly with the
message about 'if from a fax machine dial 3 ....', in other words
in the middle of the original message. I also tried dialing to it
via a WATS extender I am authorized to use in California. That is,
I dialed the 800 number for my contact in California then outdialed
back to 708-356-9646. That time Glen's machine answered the same
way, but cutting in at the middle of the message telling me to
'dial 3 if calling from a fax machine ...'.   So apparently if the
Caller-ID he gets is 'outside area' he chooses not to give his
spiel at all ... and by using 10555 in front of the seven digit
number -- even though local to me -- apparently no ID of any kind
was passed as far as Glen. Then just on a lark I tried one final
combination, dialing *67-10555-356-9646. That also cut me into the
middle of his message (press 3 now). I am surprised he does not
have some sort of greeting for that condition (outside of area)
as well, since he provides for the other two conditions.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (bradley ward allen)
Subject: Re: WilTel Ignores *67 For Caller ID, Also Incorrect Billing
Date: 6 Dec 1994 08:22:45 -0500
Organization: URL:http://www.armory.com/~ulmo/ (see rivers.html for PGP key)


Is it possible this is a screw up of the local phone company in CT
(SNET) in the way it passes the information to Wiltel, and Wiltel
actually does the correct thing (regarding both *67 and billing for
non-answered calls)?

What is the correct way to approach problems like this from a customer
point of view?  Explosives don't seem to be the accepted approach ...

And every time I have a problem that *could* be the other company's
problem, all the operators are *programmed* to *tell* me it *is* in
the other company's system, and there's *no way* it could be in their
own.  Both (or multiple when there are more than two) companies always
insist these things.

For my 800 number problems, Sprint was the worst.  One operator told
me they don't look at any problem until it's at least four hours old,
period.  NYNEX always referred me to Sprint, so I don't know who's
worse.  And the problems were horrible, and would come and go within
half-hour periods; no amount of tracking information I told them got
me any reply whatsoever except "ticket closed".

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen L. Roberts)
Subject: Re: CID Comes to Texas
Date: 5 Dec 1994 21:34:15 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605


Mark W. Earle ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Caller ID has come to South Texas (Southwestern Bell, A/C 512 and
> 210).

> The 'default' if you do nothing is that your number is transmitted.
> However, Per-Call blocking of ID transmission is available with *67
> and is free, regardless if you subscribe to receive CID information or
> not.

> Anonymous Call Rejection may be purchased for a monthly charge.  If
> purchased, it may be turned off/on with seperate codes not noted in
> the brochure/bill insert. It did say it was not a toggle though.

> You may send a written certification that you have a compelling need
> for 'per line blocking' by completing the enclosed reply card ... it
> will be granted automatically free of charge without any need to
> explain your compelling need.

> Interestingly, if you subscribe to per line blocking, there is no
> overide, according to the bill insert. To make calls to ACR subscribed
> customers, you would "call from a payphone or cellular phone, make a
> credit card or operator assisted call, or ask someone who does not
> have per line blocking to place the call for you."

> They're also offerring a "try a CID unit free until Jan 1" promotion.
> You call and order a SB 60 memory unit. If you keep the unit, you are
> billed $60 in four convenient monthly installments beginning January
> 95.

Look at the local stores ... $60 is a bit steep.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only is it turned on in Texas, it
> is being transmitted around the USA. My sister lives there and I got
> a call from her over the weekend. Guess what?  Her number showed up
> on my Caller ID box here in Skokie.   PAT]

Wiltel (carrier access code 10555) has passed Caller-ID from many
parts of the country for a long time ... including Texas and
California.

Not that it matters ... since my replies are never posted here.


Glen L. Roberts, Editor, Full Disclosure
Host Full Disclosure Live (WWCR 5,065 khz - Sundays 7pm central)
email [e-mail] for catalog on privacy & surveillance.
Does 10555-1-708-356-9646 give you an "ANI" readback? With name?
email for uuencoded .TIF of T-Shirt Honoring the FBI
Remember, fd _IS FOR_ Full Disclosure!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Only two of your replies to the Digest
were posted here today ... sorry that's all the space available for
your comments in this issue. You say Wiltel has passed the ID from
many parts of the country, yet when I called your system today my ID
(or the noted lack thereof) was responded to by your machine. When I
went through 10555 both locally and from California, you must have
gotten an 'out of area' response since your machine skipped its opening
commentaries and went right to the 'press 3 now' part.  So I guess
Wiltel is not passing ID from many parts of the country, huh?  At
least not from Chicago area and not from California.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (William Dawson)
Subject: Re: T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP?
Date: 6 Dec 1994 11:16:27 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY


Greetings,

     We have a product called the channel bank multiplexer which
converts a T1 into separate RS232C data channels . Each DS0 of the T1
can contain a RS232C channel operating up to 38.4 KB for a total of 24
RS232C channels per T1.  The multiplexer can also provide voice
(4-wire, FXS or FXO) ports if you do not need only data channels.

     Please contact the listing below for additional information.

Anadigicom Corporation
Ph- 703-803-0400
Fax- 703-803-2956
TLX - 4930285 ANA UI

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Re: T3 or T1 Demux'd to RS-232 or TCP/IP?
Date: 6 Dec 1994 04:34:00 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


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

>> I am interested in your opinion on how to best manage a point-of-sale
>> card swipe application. The plan calls for ~4000 sites, each having
>> ~10 devices. At any given moment in the day, they expect about 700
>> calls to be 'in progress'. Each device is one of those small boxes you
>> see at the store which calls and authorizes card transactions.

> Each store should have ONE controller handling all POS terminals and
> it can use x.25 over the D channel on an ISDN BRI line to handle all
> terminals at that site, whether 10 or 500.

> The x.25 carrier wil deliver ALL your traffic on a single x.25 line if you
> want at 56kb or perhaps faster.

> If there is other traffic, then this is not the way to do it, and
> maybe look at LEC frame relay where available and a mix of other
> things for other sites.  Pure dialup is still viable but when you look
> at the stupidity of 10 phone lines per site, spending those dollars
> other ways is easy. Even using an elcheapo tiny PBX (Panasonic 6x16
> size) to pack a smaller number of phone lines is possible but also a
> hassle.

Ok, let's be real here for a moment.

1) There will not be ten phone lines at every site.  Given that at any
one time there will be 700 active transactions, one -- maybe two -- phone
lines will be needed at every location.  This is that way that transaction
terminals have been operated since the early 80's.

2) Forget ISDN -- that is unless you have a back up plan for those
stores that cannot get it.  With 4,000 sites, I suggest your back up
plan account for the 1,500 - 3,000 sites that won't see it.

3) A central controller in the store makes sense (something like the
Verifone 340).  But, depending on whether or not the terminal are
already installed, this may not be viable.  Assuming with 4000 sites
with an average of ten terminals each, who's going to pay to replace
40,000 terminals?

You don't mention what kind of price per transaction you are
anticipating.  If you haven't checked into using an X.25 carrier
(SRINTNET, COMPUSERVE, etc) that is your first approach.

Another approach, depending on the concentration of sites, is to set
up remote connectivity centers in core areas.  This would take some
stragetic placement analysis with some understanding of local calling
areas and tarrifs, but with the number of sites and calls it could be
worth it.  Of course, this is what SPRINT, COMPUSERVE and the rest
have already done.

Finally, of course, is the aspect of setting up the bank of lines
available for something of this size.  Notice I didn't say modems.  At
that size, you want to go to some type of DSP like Primary Access or
USR Total Control and output the data to X.25, Ethernet or (if all
else fails) standard RS-232 ports.  The implementation of VISA-1 or
VISA-90 protocol that the terminals speak is relatively straightforward
once you get your hands on the specs.

BTW, if the customer is expecting 700 calls at any one time, make
certain you prepare for Christmas -- which means prepare for 1,000
(assuming their 700 has been verified).


Ed Goldgehn            E-Mail:  [e-mail]
General Manager            Voice:    [phone]
The INTERNET Connection, LLC    Fax:    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Canning)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 94 23:58:59 EST


In comp.dcom.telecom [e-mail] (Pat Binford-Walsh) writes:

> Does anyone know of any of MCI's dedicated (56kbs, 128 kbps, 256 kbps,
> and T-1) and frame relay (56 kbps, 128 kbps, 256 kbps, T-1) access
> charges for internetMCI.  I don't believe that the following info is
> correct for 9.6 kbps and 4.5 mbps, which is probably 45 mbps (T-3).
> The service has been sold commercially since October.  Does anyone
> have any rates that have been quoted to them or seen a price list?
> Their 800 number for questions are not staffed with very knowledgeable
> people.

 From MCI's internetMCI Sales Reference Guide - Part 2, dated November
28, 1994 --

The section on Inernet Dedicated Access states that the pricing
structure has four components to it:

    1.  Installation Charges;

    2.  Standard recurring access charges -- for things such as your
    phone line, DDS line or T1.

    3.  Additional Internet non-recurring charges; for some reason,
    there is this magic $300 that is charged for setting this
    stuff up;

    4.  Monthly recurring charges:

        9.6    Kbps    $   600
        56/64      1,000
        128          1,500
        256          1,700
        384          1,800
        512          2,000
        1024      2,100
        1472/1536      2,300
        4 Mbps      4,600
        10          8,700
        16         12,000
        25         17,000
        34         20,600
        45         23,000

You receive a 15% discount for a one year commitment, 17% for two
years, 20% for three years, 22% for four years and 25% for five years.

I hope this helps.

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Kessner)
Subject: Re: MCI's Announcement
Date: 6 Dec 1994 06:08:28 -0700
Organization: MCI Communications Inc.


Someone had posted: (and someone else had deleted attribution):

> Needless to say, MCI will find out soon enough that full Internet
> access can be had for $20.00 a month flat rate, using dial-up
> SLIP/PPP. For $65.00 per month, I can get my own domain name (through
> a local provider)!

Well, I'm not in the group that's doing the internetMCI product, but
the November 28th {Communications Week} I have sitting here on my desk
say the pricing is $19.95 per month, NOT $65.00 a month. (Includes seven
hours local or three hours '800' access).


Eric Kessner, MCI Communications
[e-mail]
DoD #1388/Damiano di Fiorenza, Outlands

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

Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 00:46:48 -0800
From: Gary Darcy <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI and the Future of Internet


I sure hope that whatever MCI does includes protecting and maintaining
the privacy of ones password.  I'm a former user of MCI Mail who was
forced off when my password was breached and I all of a sudden found
myself with hundreds of dollars worth of online charges I had nothing
to do with.  The day I return to MCI Mail and the day I use MCI as a
business tool will be the day my disputed charges are cleared and my
original account is reinstated.  MCI is not the only company with
Internet capabilities.  Many others offer far more.


[TELECOM Digewst Editor's Note: Did they refuse to remove the charges
or investigate the problem, or are you just annoyed with them that the
problem occurred and they seem disinterested in resolving it?   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #439
******************************


Received: from zeta.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22018; Tue, 6 Dec 94 13:54:37 CST
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by zeta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06080; Tue, 6 Dec 94 13:54:34 CST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22012; Tue, 6 Dec 94 13:54:33 CST
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 94 13:54:33 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #440
Status: RO

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Dec 94 13:54:30 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 440

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Sri Changiana)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Paul Beker)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Rick Duggan)
    Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors (Richard L Barnaby)
    Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors (Bradley Ward Allen)
    Re: Regulation about Microwave Usage in the US? (Dean Heinen)
    Re: Regulation about Microwave Usage in the US? (Patton M. Turner)
    Re: DTMF to Serial Port Help Wanted (John Lundgren)
    Re: DTMF to Serial Port Help Wanted (Mike Morris)
    Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU (Dave O'Shea)
    Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe (Steve McKinty)
    Re: Rochester Tel Open Market Plan (Chris Calley)
    Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute (Rick Dennis)
    Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute (Dale Farmer)
    Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute (Bill Rushmore)
    Stupid Things to do at Work (Gavin A. Karelitz)

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 America
On Line. 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] (Sri Changiana Saar Sikorogaeshn Karagadych)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 1994 11:59:39 -0600
Organization: United Rulers of Mankind, Local 112


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

> Outgoing calls may still be made.  However, they will
> be intercepted by an operator who will request your credit card
> information for billing purposes.  Call set-up charges and per minute
> rates will be significantly higher than todays' standard roaming
> rates.  Emergency calls to 911 will continue to be free.

Is this legal for for them to do?  "Hello Valued Customer, we've
decided, with no warning, that you will now have to pay us three times
the normal fee, and risk having your credit card numbers stolen, in
order to use the phone service that you contracted with us to have.
What?  You didn't read the fine print that allows us to do this?
Sorry, stop going to New York then."

Listen, I'd be outraged too if someone stole my cellular phone number,
and I'd do something about it.  But if I had business in Washington
and New York to regularly attend to (and they can't pretend no one
does...) I'd be even more outraged at having my phone service cut off.
If it is such a problem, then let the op-assisted calls be rated at
the same as direct dial for their few roaming customers in New York.
Jeez, how many Washington Cell One customers can be in NY at any one
moment?  Couple of thousand at most I'd think.  Makes you think Cell
One would be delighted to invoke this anti-crime procedure in all
their service areas.

Can they get around tariffs like this, or are such emergency procedures
automatically allowed?

If I was up there and had that policy handed down to me, I'd sue Cell
One's hind legs off to make them comply with my contract.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They don't care about getting sued. They
get sued all the time for one reason or another. That would be a totally
meaningless threat to them. And if you want the landline telco to have
to eat the difference in charges (as a result of using credit card billing)
their answer would be that it was not their idea; they are simply responding
in their usual way (and at their usual rate structure) to requests for
long distance calls billed on credit cards. They would say its not their
fault that the vendor you chose for cellular service is imposing these
new terms. This reminds me of when the neighborhood committee to help fight
in the War on Drugs (when I used to live in Chicago) got Illinois Bell
to change payphones in the area to 'no coin' during evening  and overnight
hours. Supposedly drug dealers don't have calling cards or third numbers
to be billed to, and even if they did, they would not want to leave a
paper trail. Legitimate users asked Bell if they would waive the operator
surcharge from payphones affected in this way. Heck no said Bell. It was
not our idea to restrict those phones, we are just trying to comply with
community demands.  You'll get the same rap from the landline carrier in
New York ... it wasn't their idea to set it up this way, although they'll
be glad to have the extra business.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Beker)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 20:34:55 GMT


Greg Monti <[e-mail]> writes:

> I am a Cellular One Washington-Baltimore customer (system owned by
> Southwestern Bell).  I just got an oversized yellow postcard in the
> mail.  Verbatim:

[ stuff deleted .. PB ]

> Outgoing calls may still be made.  However, they will
> be intercepted by an operator who will request your credit card
> information for billing purposes.  Call set-up charges and per minute
> rates will be significantly higher than todays' standard roaming
> rates.  Emergency calls to 911 will continue to be free.

What a pathetic case of pass-the-buck!  So, now Joe Blow with a plain
old scanner (no specialized equipment at all) can listen in to a
continuous, totally free, and totally safe broadcast stream of credit
card numbers, expiration dates, and names instead.  Great.


Paul Beker - Atlanta, GA   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well not really ... if you have spent
any time at all illicitly listening to cellular phone conversations in
the 850-890 megahertz range on a scanner which has been modified -- you
have to get the mods done, they don't sell them with that frequency range
intact -- then you would know it is not quite like tuning into a radio
talk show host and sitting there listening all day.

All you get are whisps of conversations, a few seconds of this one, and
a few seconds of that one; maybe with luck a minute or so of some conver-
sation. You have 832 channels to be scanned with some on one tower and
some on another, etc. As motorists pass from one tower's coverage area
to another, the conversation moves from one channel to another and your
scanner cannot keep up with any single continuous conversation. When it
drops off, your scanner will start searching again, but it will run into
half a dozen other conversations before it gets back to the one you
were listening to, if it ever finds it again.

So you can't just sit there with pencil and paper copying down credit
card numbers. This is what annoys me so much where the privacy freaks are
concerned in their arguments against giving out credit card numbers over
cell phone (either phone cards or 'actual' credit cards). If a person
had two or three scanners set up going at one time, trying to listen to
all of them and he listened 24 hours per day in a major urban area he
*might* -- and I contend even that is unlikely -- he might happen to hear
a valuable number being recited over the air. Of course, he also has to
be quick enough to grab a pencil and paper and copy it down right away
in its proper context (is it a calling card, a VISA card, or what).

Now, he listened all day and heard someone give out a calling card number.
That is not a very good rate of return for the investment of his time and
effort. What is he going to do, rush right over to the Port Authority Bus
Terminal and sell it for ten dollars to someone?  All the things the
privacy freaks contend can happen are theoretically possible -- but they
happen so seldom it hardly warrants any concern; not in the overall scheme
of things. I would be more upset about having to pay the operator surcharge
on a calling card than I would be about the remote possibility that some
fool sitting at home with a couple scanners just happened to hit my channel
at the instant I was passing a number to the operator and just happened
to recognize it for what it was and just happened to be malicious and
just happened to have a pencil and paper handy or a tape recorder turned
on, etc.

Now if you want to talk about *specialized equipment*, that is a little
different. Yes, there are a few people around with that stuff but you
still are not going to find a 'continuous stream' of information being
passed. They are more likely to get your phone's ESN than they are to
get (or be too concerned with) your calling card number. They'd rather
have the ESN anyway ... and how do you plan to stop that?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rick Duggan)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: 6 Dec 1994 11:09:36 -0500
Organization: College of Computing


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

> Cellular Fraud on the Increase!

[information on thieves stealing cell phone info deleted]

> Outgoing calls may still be made.  However, they will
> be intercepted by an operator who will request your credit card
> information for billing purposes.

Cellular One's response to ESN fraud?  Give us your credit card number
over your phone.  Brilliant.


Rick Duggan - [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: In a way it makes sense. With the ESN
at hand -- and that is really what they get the most of -- direct dial
calls can go all over the world. Add in the requirement to have a
calling card and you've put one more obstacle in the way of the freaks.

In other words not only must they be properly tuned in with specialized
equipment to capture your ESN, but now they have to be listening to
just the right conversations; the one out of a hundred or so where
they got the ESN and the person happens to be making a long distance
call and needs to speak his card number, and they got there just at
the right five second period to hear him saying his number to the
operator. The average guy with a Radio Shack scanner he bought sitting
at home for a couple hours every night snooping is not going to hear
very much of value; he certainly will not get the ESN on the phones
and he may or may not possibly overhear some number being recited that
means something.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard L Barnaby)
Subject: Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 07:02:14 GMT


> Do the next-generation digital cellular sets provide any better
> security?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you could cancel your contract
> with them on the premises that they had violated the contract or changed
> the terms without proper notice when they cut out roaming in the area.  PAT]

Interesting point.

I just drove from Vermont via NYC, Wash DC, across 40 to LA.  I was
unable to roam in so many places, I just gave up.  Sure keeps the
phone bill down :-) .  They would be happy to complete my call with a
credit card.  What?  Give my card number over the air?  I don't think
so given the climate.  There's an opportunity for someone to figure
out how to beat em.


[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See my earlier comments. I am not
advocating giving your number over the air repeatedly, but once here
and once there along the way is not likely to cause a problem, not
for the five seconds or so you are 'exposed' in your quick passing
of the number to the operator. Anyway, why not instead punch it in
using the touchtones on your cellular phone?  You know, in the form
of 0+AC+number+calling card+PIN. If someone is listening, they are
going to wish they had been taping recording those (usually meaningless
to the human ear) beeps of your calling card entry. Overall, don't
get too uptight about it.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (bradley ward allen)
Subject: Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors
Date: 6 Dec 1994 08:38:45 -0500
Organization: URL:http://www.armory.com/~ulmo/ (see rivers.html for PGP key)


This is funny.  As with many of these articles, they suggest the
solution to the problem of finding another way to steal access:

You can no longer do this:

> "Cellular One has temporarily suspended a service that allows
> out-of-town visitors to use their phones in the New York City area
> because cellular bandits have been stealing their phone numbers."

So you now have to do this:

> "Fraud in New York has reach the point that thieves stole codes of
> phones used by Mayor Rudolph Giuliani and Police Commissioner William
> Bratton earlier this year."

Gee.  Every time I see something like this, I wonder if the reporters
*want* me to switch from a paying customer to some other type of
customer ...

I'll note my average bill went down from $800 to $400 in the last two
to three months, with 90% of calls charged being received calls in
both cases.  The $800 bills were due to a large number of received
calls which as soon as I answered the caller hung up.  I believe it
was not a fraud issue with Cellular One, but it is possible I am
wrong.  I've never spotted outbound dialed calls which weren't mine.
Perhaps the benefit of having a phone model that is not sold locally?
(When I accidentally dropped it eight stories and had insurance, I had
to wait a week for the replacement (same model) to come in.  Argh.)  I
live in the same neighborhood as Giuliani; perhaps it's someplace else
he's going to where his codes get stollen.

Finally, LA Cellular credited my account with portions of a claim I
made against them; they settled it ``informally'', but I was at least
satisfied that they finally admitted to some wrongdoing.  I regard
them better now.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dean Heinen)
Subject: Re: Regulation About Microwave Usage in the US?
Date: 6 Dec 1994 16:14:07 -0800
Organization: Pacific Northwest Net


Juergen Ziegler ([e-mail]) wrote:

> While travelling in the US, I recognized a large number of microwave
> links.  Mostly to be operated by several telecommunications carriers
> like local or long-distance companies.

> But it seems to me, that "private" operators had their own links. Such as
> one factory plant to be linked to another.

> What is the regulation about such microwave links in the US?

Under CFR 47, Part 94 Any citizen, or company (corporation) owned by a
citizen of the U.S. may apply for license to operate a microwave
communications link.

There are many bands designated to this, and a user must have the
proposed link "coordinated" by an F.C.C. recognized coordination firm.

It is also a good idea to have the system designed and installed by a
qualified microwave communications company,  such as,


Dean A. Heinen    Northwest Technical Services
 email address     : [e-mail]  or  [e-mail]
 voice address     : [phone]
 snail mail address: 623 S. 17th Ave.
                   : Yakima, WA  98902

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

From: [e-mail] (Patton M Turner)
Subject: Re: Regulation About Microwave Usage in the US?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 02:27:16 GMT


Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com> writes:

Excelent post deleted.

Actually the FAA approval is trivial unless you are near the approach
surface or an airport.  I have an HF antenna that we have to call them
if we want to move, because it is 5000' from the end of a runway.  Of
course the antenna is 30' high and another 20' of tower must be added
to install or remove.  All of this is on top of a 6 story building.

FAA has very little jurisdiction unless the tower is over 200' and
then the requirements seem reasonable (lighting, painting, monitoring
of the lights and issuing a NOTAM (soon to be replaced by a more PC
term) under some failure conditions).  BTW, current practice is for
the FCC to hold the tower USERS, not the owners liable in the event of
a failure to monitor tower lights.  This may change soon.

Now if you have high power Xmitters, such as radio stations, the FAA
is interested in how they affect aero band communications.  The FCC on
the other hand worries about how your tower will affect dirrectional
AM stations if you are within a few miles.

Thats about it as far as the site, but since I mentioned the FAA,
don't aim your dish at one of our Long Range Radar Sites if you can
help it.  If the radar has a problem, you link may fade real fast from
1,000,000 watts peak power into a 60' antenna.  Course, this isn't
supposed to happen. :-)

Now the interference studies can be a real pain when it comes time to
select a frequency.


Patton Turner KB4GRZ  pturner@@netcom.com  FAA Telecommunications

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: DTMF to Serial Port Help Wanted
Date: 6 Dec 1994 20:38:57 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Egan F. Ford ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I need a box that will allow me to dial in to it with a touch tone
> phone and after the box answers I press some tones and the box
> converts them to numbers and pumps them out the serial port to a
> program I have waiting to receive them.

> I know there is such a box, but where can I find it.

There are several brands of modems on the market that can detect DTMF
and put it out the serial port.  One of them is ZyXEL, which has an
email address of [e-mail].  Their modems also can process
speech.


   John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
   Rancho Santiago Community College District
   17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
[e-mail]\[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: DTMF to Serial Port Help Wanted
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 09:08:50 GMT


[e-mail] (Egan F. Ford) writes:

> I need a box that will allow me to dial in to it with a touch tone
> phone and after the box answers I press some tones and the box
> converts them to numbers and pumps them out the serial port to a
> program I have waiting to receive them.

Seven or eight years ago I discovered a box called a "TL-901" made by
Vega in El Monte, CA. (the wireless mic people) 818-442-0782. They also
make stuff for the two-way radio market, and this is one of their
products.  It will do just what you need.  (When you call, ask for a
catalog and price list -- they have some rather neat modules.)


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ  PO Box 1130
Arcadia, CA. 91077    ICBM: 34.12N, 118.02W
Reply to: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave O'Shea)
Subject: Re: Meaning of Line Build Out on CSU
Date: 6 Dec 1994 22:28:41 GMT
Organization: WilTel
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Dennis E. Miyoshi ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Hello.  I hate to ask such a simple question but, I am to the point of
> total confusion.  I am in the process of connecting two TyLink ONS150
> CSUs.  After several attempts at getting the CSUs to sync I was
> successful.  However, my routers seem to be confused.  The last
> setting that I have is the LBO.  The manuals state that this must be
> specified by the carrier.

> My two questions are:

> 1.  What is the meaning of the LBO?

Line Build-out. Distance from CSU to the smartjack or first repeater.
Some of the newer CSU's allow you to select from a number of presets
(i.e.  0-100 feet, 100-1000 feet, etc.)

> 2.  What would the results be if the LBO is set to the wrong dB level?

Unpleasant. Either you overload the network interface or get signals
below it's threshold. I've never seen a case where an incorrect LBO
passed network diagnostics but left a "confused" router, but I suppose
anything's possible.


Dave O'Shea                         [e-mail]
Sr. Network Engineer                201.236.3730
WilTel Data Network Services        Did I *say* I'm a WilTel spokesman?

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?
Date: 6 Dec 1994 03:57:41 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


Some stores here in California will add programming and handling
charges if you choose not to have them activate it with them. More are
not charging anymore at least in Southern Calif. The charge adds about
$110.00 to the cost of the phone. A couple of years ago Radio Shack
had two prices for the phone, one for Hawaii, Florida and California and
another for the rest of the world. Ours were $100.00 more. I complained
to them saying that was against the law; it did no good. A call to
the PUC got me the phone at the advertised price and after that point
most of the stores around here did not carry the phones and now you
almost always have to go to one of their computer centers. I'm happy
with my OKI 900 and the service I get from the dealer who did not
charge extra or force me into his service.


-=- Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS
             Home of GBBS/LLUCE support
       [phone] 12/24/14.4 V32/V42bis


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: As I mentioned yesterday, what I think
you will begin to see happening in California is that the price of
cellular phones will just be some very high rate, across the board.
The phone costs $200-300 or whatever. If you choose to have it activated
the cellular carrier will give you a 'free gift' for making the decision
to use his service; a check for whatever you paid for the phone or some
predetirmined amount. Although it may be illegal to discriminate and
charge more to non-subscribers (to purchase a phone) it certainly is
not illegal, nor will it ever be, for a merchant to give away free
gifts to his customers. <grin> ... you see, its all in how you phrase
it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve McKinty - SunSoft ICNC Grenoble)
Subject: Re: Metered Pulse Call Costing in Europe
Date: 6 Dec 1994 18:40:29 GMT
Organization: SunConnect


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Lars
Poulsen) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
> (Mitch Weiss) writes:

>> In the United States, calls are priced based on time and distance
>> using a V&H (vertical and horizontal) coordinate system.  In Europe,
>> they are priced based on something called Metered Pulse.  How does
>> that work?  Is there a constant price per pulse?  Also, if I have a
>> PBX, how does the SMDR represent this information?  Thanks!

> In the United States, the telephone company prices each call, and
> gives you an itemized invoice. In most European countries, the company
> sends you a bill at the end of the month, indicating the total, but
> with no substantiation of detail.

That was the case in the past, when mechanical exchanges were the
norm, but countries with modern networks can offer itemised billing
where subscribers are connected to electronic or digital switches.
That is definitely true for British Telecom and France Telecom, where
itemised billing is available almost everywhere.

For consistency across the whole network BT still bill by the unit,
where 1 unit is a fixed price timeslot, whose duration varies with
distance and time of day. Each unit corresponds to a 'meter pulse', so
named because old exchanges had simple mechanical counters which
stepped once per pulse. I believe this will change soon, once the last
mechanical local exchanges are phased out.


Steve McKinty
Sun Microsystems ICNC
38240 Meylan, France
email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Calley)
Subject: Re: Rochester Tel Open Market Plan
Organization: DSC Communications Access Products, Petaluma, CA
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 1994 17:37:23 GMT


Phillip Dampier ([e-mail]) wrote:

> New telephone directories and bill inserts are heralding the upcoming
> introduction of competition in residential local telephone service
> early in 1995.  Rochester will be the first major city in the country
> with multiple local service providers serving both residential and
> business customers.

[stuff deleted]

> Customers will be sent ballots to select a local telephone company
> once another player exists in the market.  Residents who do not return
> a ballot or do nothing will stay with Rochester Telephone.

Some questions:

How will the _new_ local carriers get dialtone to the subscribers?  Will
they be using the infrastructure already in place, i.e. piggybacking off
of Rochester Telcos. network, or will they have to duplicate everything
from scratch including re-wiring the neighborhoods?  I'm curious as to
how how multiple local providers will coexist.


Christopher A. Calley - all opinions are my own... etc.
internet:     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rick Dennis)
Subject: Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 18:03:52 EST


Hey,

   Okay I'll bite ... if we're talking about Bell Atlantic employees,
why were AT&T trucks included in the picture on the shirts?  If I
missed something, let me know.


Rick Dennis                                    Go Jackets (Ga Tech '91)
AT&T Global Business Communications Systems
Conversant(Intuity) Systems                    Suite 600
email: attmail!rickdennis                      5555 Oakbrook Parkway
Phone: [phone]                          Norcross, GA 30093

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute
Date: 6 Dec 1994 01:16:42 GMT
Organization: Boston University


[e-mail] wrote:

> situation, this is NOT the first time in the very recent past that the
> company has reacted this way. We'll go back to the 'shoe incident' of
> Oct 5th this year, when we were only given 12 days notice previous to
> that date to purchase a pair of steel-toed safety shoes, and we were
> told that we must be wearing the shoes when we reported for work on
> Oct 5th. So because of shortages at stores due to high demand, a small
> number of employees reported to work without the shoes anyway, and
> they were suspended without pay. Gee we don't see a pattern here do we?

    Up here in NYNEX land the contract with the CWA says that
NYNEX has to provide safety shoes to it's employees.  (So sez a couple
friends who are employees, I havent seen the contract myself.)  Also
my recollection of many state's labor laws sez that any required
safety equipment, such as safety shoes, must be provided by the
employer.
    So guess how vigorously the rules about safety shoes are
enforced by NYNEX.  Yup, got it in one, not at all.

YMMV, IHMO, etc, etc ...


Dale Farmer

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

From: Bill <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 94 10:01:49 PDT
Organization: Lugaru, Inc.


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

> The workers were demonstrating in protest regards Bell Atlantic's
> recent decision to considerably downsize its work force and rely on
> lower paid workers to install networking technology for the company's
> future 'full service network' that would deliver both video and phone
> services.

Bell has my vote of no-confidence.  I haven't noticed service being
overstaffed with over-competent tecnicians before the announced
cutbacks!

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

From: Gavin A. Karelitz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Stupid Things to do at Work
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 09:02:20 GMT


Here is my top ten list of stupid things to do at work:

    10 - Be late to work often.
    9  - Leave early once or twice a week.
    8  - Be derelict in your job.
    7  - Be insubordinate to a manager.
    6  - Usurp the authority of a manager.
    5  - Verbally threaten other employees.
    4  - Submit false time sheets or travel vouchers.
    3  - Call in sick whenever you get put on a hard project.
    2  - Take long breaks and an extra long lunch.

Let me qualify this by saying I've worked for Southern Bell for fifteen
years and have been a union member the entire time.  Unfortunatly I've
witnessed the union protecting employees doing all of the above things
and usually winning the grievances.

Oh, yes ... the number one thing on my list (these days):

    1  - Organize a mass protest on company time with employees
         saying derogatory things and wearing shirts with slogans
         designed to inflame the management.  We'll have to see if
         union can pull them out of the fire.

I can just imagine the union officers thinking this one up: " ... and in
the ten months before the next contract, we need a way to make the
company into the ultimate villain.  I have an idea ... let's sacrifice
our members like turkeys just before Thanksgiving."


[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #440
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20387;
          6 Dec 94 20:02 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23040; Tue, 6 Dec 94 14:23:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23029; Tue, 6 Dec 94 14:23:03 CST
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 94 14:23:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #441

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 6 Dec 94 14:23:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 441

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Internet (was Re: MCI's Announcement) (Ajay Shah)
    Re: Pager Advice Wanted (Andrew Laurence)
    Call For Papers: ICCC95 (Lee JaiYong)
    Re: Emergency Numbers in Various Countries (Yves Blondeel)
    Re: WilTel Ignores *67 For Caller ID, Also Incorrect Billing (Glen Roberts)
    Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (Shawn Gordhamer)

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 America
On Line. 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, 6 Dec 94 14:40:53+050
From: [e-mail] (Ajay Shah)
Subject: Internet (Was Re: MCI's Announcement)


I don't think it's so bad.

John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> The Internet has several, distinctive traditions. One is the concept
> of, as you put it, fixed rate access. Need to download a couple of
> megabytes of material? Fine. How fast the transfer takes place is

Fixed rate access is also music to the ears of _paying_ customers.
Look at the success of netcom, for example.  Internet providers that
meter by the hour are going to find life very difficult.

So I don't see how the likes of MCI can dislodge fixed rate access.

> The commercializers would like to begin charging you for each and
> every item you download or utilize. As carriers, they would do this by

This is technically infeasible if a Internet provider is giving out IP
connectivity.  If lusers are stupid enough to buy some shrink wrapped
web browser running under MSW, which might support some ridiculous
metering-per-use concepts, then it's their funeral.  Internet
providers who sell such applications won't be hurting "our Internet".

> But what is more sinister involves a redefinition of the Internet
> structure from peer-to-peer to client/server. The commercializers see

That is not really true.  The basic protocols, and their symmetry
between peers, are very much in place.  The only new twist is idiocy
like shrink-wrapped MS Windows applications which let you access the
net without knowing anything.

> make money is with such a device. If it is necessary to kill the
> Internet in order to save it by turning it into a gigantic Prodigy or
> CompuServe, then the era is at an end. The great Information
> Superhighway that we have been looking forward to will be nothing more
> than 500 cable channels and a dozen shopping channels.

>> it. My main concern is that those of us who have over the years helped
>> to make the net what it is today not be forgotten.   PAT]

I have some slightly heretical opinions on this:

a) I think VOD is much oversold.

   It takes T1 lines to the home to deliver VOD, and that is some
   ways off.

   The new medium that is the Internet is capable of a whole
   lot of wonderful things; it is not clear that a server offering
   a "family ties" episode of your choice is the smartest thing that
   we can do (in a money-maximising sense) with something like the
   Internet.

   Instead the "killer app" is likely to be applications like the web,
   which work _now_ off 14.4k lines.  I think multi user games have
   a great future.  When you can play multi user games, I think you
   won't want to see conventional hollywood programming.  In that
   sense I think the threat of the internet turning into cableTV-
   just-VOD is overrated.

b) I think the greatest threat is the creeping encroachment
   of Microsoft into internet protocols.  Microsoft is trying
   to basically ignore the RFC procedure in connection with
   internet protocols, and I think that is terribly dangerous.

   Similarly, at a technical level, if protocols like SMTP and HTTP
   evolve in the direction of a commercial internet, then that will be
   quite sad.  There is a message for us: if you care about this,
   then participate in standards processes!  Otherwise we'll have
   gunk like Microsoft breathing down our necks.

c) Another threat is the swamping of the original Internet crowd
   by the great unwashed masses.  I'm quite elitist, and I think
   that  an internet built of people from the great universities
   and research institutions was a Good thing.  But exactly how
   will this swamping occur? Anyway we're not going to have these
   newbies participating in things like comp.dcom.telecom

   Answer: we're going to have them on groups like alt.sex!  :-)
   Conclusion: the great unwashed masses will "spoil" some recreational
   parts of the net for us.  But the more fascinating recreational
   parts, like comp.unix.wizards, are unlikely to be hurt.

I full well expect the origins of the Internet will be shrouded in
mystery and mostly forgotten by "the masses".  How many people using
PCs know about the noble origins of MS-DOS?  :-) There will always be
a hacker community which will have a different view of the world, but
that community will increasingly become a tiny minority on the net.  I
guess that's okay.


ans

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Pager Advice Wanted
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 00:38:26 GMT


[e-mail] (Russell Brunelle) writes:

> It would have to have a monthly fee that's very low (I don't mind if
> the unit is expensive to buy, because I'm paying for that, but she
> will be paying the monthly fee so that should be QUITE low), a display
> that can light up so you can read it when it's dark, the ability to
> vibrate (or do something quietly) instead of beep so it doesn't bug
> people, and the ability to store a few numbers in case several people
> call in a row.

I pay $8.50 per month for unlimited use on a six-month contract. I
live in the San Francisco Bay Area. I bought a used Motorola Bravo
numeric only display pager for $25 from someone on the Net, and it's
worked fine.  I broke the belt clip, replaced it, and later broke the
flange where the clip fits into the pager housing, so I bought a new
housing for $10, and now I have a cool-looking magenta translucent
housing (you can see the "guts").

> I would also like (and perhaps here is where some advice would come
> in) the ability to send some sort of message with the phone number.
> This could be as simple as the pager allowing me to type more than
> seven digits so the first seven digits would be the phone number she
> should call and the rest are a code indicating generally what the call
> is about and how urgent it is (i.e. 44 for it's just to chat, 77 for
> the cat died, etc.).  Is there some way to type a space or dash
> character so the person can tell where the phone number ends and the
> code begins?

Pressing the * key on a touch-tone phone will generate a hyphen on
most pagers. It certainly works on mine. My carrier is PageNet, and I
believe they have an office in the Seattle area.

> Also, wasn't there a book published recently with three digit codes
> for various messages?  Does anyone know what this was called or where
> I could find something like this?

I am not aware of this, but it sounds like a good idea.

> What sort of pager should I get, and where could I get it the most
> inexpensively?  Is there some neat new feature I should look for in a
> pager?

Motorola Bravo, Bravo Plus, and Bravo Express tend to be reliable and
easily affordable. Some resellers offer a pager cheap if you sign up
for service. Also, you can usually buy a pager and apply for service
at Price Costco warehouses.


Andrew Laurence [e-mail] | | Certified NetWare
Administrator (CNA) Oakland, California, USA | | CD-ROM Networking
Consultant Pacific Standard Time (GMT-8) | | Phone: [phone]
Pager: [phone] Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lee JaiYong)
Subject: Call For Papers: ICCC95
Date: 6 Dec 1994 11:52:17 GMT
Organization: Yonsei University


Following is the SECOND CALL FOR PAPER for ICCC'95(revised version) to
be held in Seoul Korea 1995.

Publicity Chair,
ICCC'95
         ----------cut here-----------

                           CALL FOR PAPERS
                                ICCC '95

       "Information Highways for a Smaller World  & Better Living"
              Seoul, Korea
                     August 21 - 24, 1995


    The ICCC, the International Council for Computer Communication (ICCC),
    founded in 1972,  is an Affiliate Member of the International Federation
    for Information Processing (IFIP).

    Its purposes are to foster:
       scientific research and the development of computer communication;
        progress in the evaluation of applications of computer communication
    to educational, scientific, medical, economic, legal, cultural and
    other peaceful purposes;
        study of the potential social and economic impacts of computer
    communcation and of policies which influence those impacts.

    This 12th conference aims at providing a forum to exchange ideas, discuss
    key issues and to present  the late research results for "Information
    Highways for a Smaller World & Better Living."  The main program includes
    technical presentations, invited talks, tutorials, and technical visits.

    TOPICS :  Areas of interest include but are not limited to

    . Strategies, Policies, and User       . Wireless Communications
      Perspectives of Information          . Intelligent Networks
      Superhighways                        . Personal Communication Systems
        . Social and Economical Impacts        . Broadband Communication
      of Information Superhighways         . ATM Switching
        . Computer Communication for           . International Emergencies
      Developing Countries                 . Distance Learning
        . Network Planning                     . Optical Communications
    . Security and Privacy in Computer     . Multimedia Communication and
          Communications                         its Applications
        . Evolution towards the High-Speed     . High-Speed Protocols
      Networks including Frame Relay       . Network Management
      and SMDS                             . Protocol Engineering
    . Packet Radio Technologies
    . Satellite Communications


    SUBMISSION OF PAPERS

        Prospective authors should send 5 copies of a full paper to
the following address:

        ICCC'95
        Dr. Seon Jong Chung
        ICCC'95 Technical Program Chairman
        ETRI,  Yusong P.O.Box 106, Taejon, Korea, 305-606
        Tel: [phone]
        Fax: [phone]
        E-mail: [e-mail]

The manuscript should not exceed 4000 words in length and should
include author's name, affiliation, and addresses(telephone, e-mail,
fax), and 150-200 words abstracts in the title page. Also, authors are
encouraged to send a Postscript version of their full paper to the
Technical Program Committee Chairman by e-mail [e-mail]

                     |-------------------------------|
                     |  Important Dates              |
                     |    Submission of Paper        |
                     |      February 1st, 1995       |
                     |    Notification of Acceptance |
                     |      May 1st, 1995            |
                     |    Camera-ready Papers        |
                     |      June 15th, 1995          |
                     |-------------------------------|
    Sponsored by
    The International Council for Computer Communication

    Hosted by
    Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute
    Korea Information Science Society

    Under the Patronage of
    Ministry of Communication, The Republic of Korea

    Conference Governor
    Ronald P.Uhlig, Northern Telecom, U.S.A.

    Conference Organizing Committee
    Chair : Chongsun Hwang, KISS, Korea
    Co-Chair : Seungtaik Yang, ETRI, Korea

    Local Arrangement
    Dongho Lee, Kwangwoon Unvi., Korea

    Publication
    Keosang Lee, Dacom, Korea

    Publicity
    Jaiyong Lee, Yon-Sei Univ., Korea

    Registration
    Samyoung Suh, NCA, Korea

    Treasurer
    Seungkyu Park, Ajou Univ., Korea

    Tutorial
    Sunshin An, Korea Univ., Korea

    Social Program
    Nosik Kim, KTRC, Korea

    Secretariate
    Yanghee Choi, SNU, Korea
        Jinpyo Hong, ETRI, Korea

    Technical Program
        Chair : Seonjong Chung, ETRI, Korea
    Co-Chairs : Serge Fdida, MASI, France
            Nicholas Georganas, Univ. of Ottawa, Canada
            Roger Needham, Univ. of Cambridge, U.K.
            Otto Spaniol, Aachen Tech. Univ., Germany
            Hideyoshi Tominaga, Waseda Univ., Japan
            Pramode Verma, AT&T, U.S.A.

        Members : Sunshin An, Korea Univ., Korea
          Yanghee Choi, SNU, Korea
          Jin Pyo Hong, ETRI/PEC, Korea
          Byungchul Shin, KAIST, Korea
          Yongjin Park, Hanyang Univ., Korea
          Donggyoo Kim, Ajou Univ., Korea
          Seungkyu Park, Ajou Univ., Korea
          Dongho Lee, Kwangwoon Univ., Korea
          Kwangsue Chung, Kwangwoon Univ., Korea
          Daeyoung Kim, Cheoungnam National Univ., Korea
          Ilyoung Chung, ETRI, Korea
          Chimoon Han, ETRI, Korea
          Woojik Chon, ETRI, Korea
          Hoon Choi, ETRI, Korea
          Jaiyong Lee, Yonsei Univ., Korea
          Tadao Saito, Tokyo Univ., Japan
                  Tahahiko Kamae, HP Lab., Japan
          Reigo Yatsuboshi, Fujitsu Lab., Japan
          Kinji Ono, NACSIS, Japan
          Michel Diaz, LAAS-CNRS, France
          Christophie Diot, INRIA, France
          Jean-Yves Le Boudec, IBM, Zurich Lab., Swiss
          Georgio Ventre, Univ. di Napoli, France
          David Hutchison, Lanchaster Univ., U.K.
          Augusto Casaca, INES,Portugal
          Martina Zitterbart, Univ. of Karlsruhe, Germany
          Ulf Koerner, Lund Univ., Sweden
          David J. Farber, Univ. of Pennsylvania, USA
          Reg A. Kaenel, Marcicopa-County Comm. College, USA
          Ira Cotton, USA
          Martin E. Silveretoin, USA
          Albert Kuendig, Swiss Federal Inst. of Tech., Swiss

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

From: Yves Blondeel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Emergency Numbers in Various Countries
Date: 6 Dec 1994 19:48:18 GMT
Organization: FUNDP, Namur, Belgium


[e-mail] (Kimmo Ketolainen) wrote:

> Do you have any other to add, Pat? -- list of emergency numbers.

The European Union has adopted 112 as a single European emergency call
number. This was done by Council Decision 91/396/EEC of 29 July 1991.

Article 1 of the Decision states that:

Member States shall ensure that the number 112 is introduced in public
telephone networks as well as in future integrated services digital
networks and public mobile services, as the single European emergency
call number.

The single European emergency call number shall be introduced in
parallel with any other national emergency call numbers, where this
seems appropriate.

Article 2 of the Decision states that:

The single European emergency call number shall be introduced by
31 December 1992 at the latest, except... (exceptions to be justified)
 ..

Note: if exceptions are used, the new date must be no later than
      31 December 1996.


Yves Blondeel
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen L. Roberts)
Subject: Re: WilTel Ignores *67 For Caller ID, Also Incorrect Billing
Date: 6 Dec 1994 20:04:31 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet Services 312-282-8605


Glen L. Roberts ([e-mail]) wrote:

> CID Tech/INSG ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> I just noticed that WilTel has turned on Caller ID signaling from CT
>> to points outward, such as New York and New Jersey.

> You can always check by calling 10555-1-708-356-9646 ... also, preceed
> it with the *67 ... You will hear whatever Caller-ID Info AmeriTech
> passes on.


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I got some interesting results from
> trying out the above number in different ways. When I simply dialed
> it locally (I am in 708) as 356-9646 it responded with a message
> giving me the (non-published) name and number on my phone. When I

Even though I log this information analyze what areas supply what
information, it is not sold, or used for any marketing purposes (you
gotta leave a message if you want any more information...). I am quite
happy if people just use it to expirement with the phone system.

> dialed it with *67 first, then it responded by telling me I had
> pressed that code to hade my name and number. In both instances
> after a short blurb about Caller-ID and privacy, it then went on
> to say if calling from a fax machine to press 3, otherwise to begin
> speaking and leave a message. But ... I tried some other things as
> well:  Dialing 10555-356-9646 (remember, I am in 708 so don't use

Interestingly, Wiltel doesn't pass caller-id OUT OF illinois. For
example, when I called my Dad in Michigan, he doesn't get my number
(Wiltel is my normal LD carrier). Yet, if an associate in CA who also
uses Wiltel calls my dad in Michigan... caller-id is passed.

Wiltel in Michigan (313 and 616 but not 517) does passed Caller-ID OUT.

> it in the dialing string) must have given his system some kind of
> different reaction since instead of the opening spiel about Caller-ID,
> and/or lack of same by dialing *67 it answered immediatly with the
> message about 'if from a fax machine dial 3 ....', in other words
> in the middle of the original message. I also tried dialing to it
> via a WATS extender I am authorized to use in California. That is,
> I dialed the 800 number for my contact in California then outdialed
> back to 708-356-9646. That time Glen's machine answered the same
> way, but cutting in at the middle of the message telling me to
> 'dial 3 if calling from a fax machine ...'.   So apparently if the
> Caller-ID he gets is 'outside area' he chooses not to give has

Some others have commented on that ... and soon, it will have a
message for "out of area." I get no information about *67 if it is out
of area.

When you outdialed back to 708-356-9646 did you do it through Wiltel
(10555)?  If not, I doubt I'd get a number, as Wiltel seems to be the
only carrier currently passing caller-ID. (incidentally, I have gotten
names from 313, 216 and a couple other area codes).

> spiel at all ... and by using 10555 in front of the seven digit
> number -- even though local to me -- apparently no ID of any kind
> was passed as far as Glen. Then just on a lark I tried one final
> combination, dialing *67-10555-356-9646. That also cut me into the
> middle of his message (press 3 now). I am surprised he does not
> have some sort of greeting for that condition (outside of area)
> as well, since he provides for the other two conditions.   PAT]

According to Chris Cappuccio, you can fake out the number it gets:

Call 1-800-288-2880

Enter 616-334-3257-94  (or any number of a COCOT phone that uses Wiltel/Encore)

Enter YOUR calling card number.

Enter [phone] when it asks for a number to call.

You should hear 616-334-3257 (or the COCOT phone number), not the
number you are calling from.


Glen L. Roberts, Editor, Full Disclosure
Host Full Disclosure Live (WWCR 5,065 khz - Sundays 7pm central)
email [e-mail] for catalog on privacy & surveillance.
Does 10555-1-708-356-9646 give you an "ANI" readback? With name?
email for uuencoded .TIF of T-Shirt Honoring the FBI
Remember, fd _IS FOR_ Full Disclosure!

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 19:26:53 GMT


John Higdon <[e-mail]> writes:

> Not in California. Service providers and phone vendors are
> specifically prohibited from in any way linking the sale of the phone
> to the activation of service. Although a number of dealers have tried
> some sleazy tricks to avoid selling phones without activation ("sorry,
> I just looked and we are out of stock -- someone must not have taken
> the last one out of the computer..."), I have inside information that
> even as we speak there are some undercover efforts to bring the big
> foot down on them.

So what great "wrong" was the CA politicians trying to rectify by
passing this law?  It seems like this is hurting, rather than helping
consumers.  I'm glad I'm not in CA (for a lot of reasons)!


Shawn Gordhamer    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #441
******************************


Received: from zeta.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29194; Mon, 12 Dec 94 13:30:03 CST
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by zeta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21471; Mon, 12 Dec 94 13:30:02 CST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29181; Mon, 12 Dec 94 13:30:01 CST
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 94 13:30:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #442
Status: RO

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 12 Dec 94 13:30:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 442

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Downsizing at Mercury (AP and Reuters via D. Shniad)
    The "Roadkill" Incident ([e-mail])
    Anyone Know of a Good Exchange For Home? (Doug Pickering)
    Looking for Systems Integrators For Pager and Cellular (Mahmud Haque)
    Long Distance Rates ([e-mail])
    ISDN on DEC Alpha Computers (Dale Farmer)
    Channelling Phone Line Through a Leased Line (Greg Tompkins)
    900 Number Service Bureaus (B. Weir)
    For Sale - Inmarsat-M Brief Case Phone (Stu Jeffery)
    Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? ([e-mail])
    GSM Buying (and Using!) Abroad / Nokia 2110 Question (Ian N.G. Anema)
    New M.S. Telecommunications Program at SUNY Uitca (Eugene Newman)
    UK Phoneday Test (Richard Ross-Langley)
    Update: 1-800-CALL-INFO (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Portable Voice Telecom System (Uri Segev)
    Western Union Telephones (James H. Haynes)
    Help Converting V&H Coordinates to Longitude and Latitude (C. Edward Chow)

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 America
On Line. 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, 12 Dec 1994 10:27:32 -0800
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: D Shniad <[e-mail]>
Subject: Downsizing at Mercury


MERCURY COMMUNICATIONS CUTTING STAFF BY ONE THIRD

LONDON -- Mercury Communications Ltd., the second largest British
telephone operator, plans to reduce its work force of 11,500 by about
one third to lower its costs amid increasing competition.

  Mercury said yesterday that it will directly eliminate 2,500 jobs,
many of them through voluntary retirements, and it will further pare
its payroll by selling off a computer equipment subsidiary that
employs 1,000.

  Mercury is 20 per cent owned by Bell Canada International Inc., a
unit of BCE Inc. of Montreal, and 80 per cent by Cable & Wireless PLC
of Britain.

  All of the cuts are expected by the end of 1995 and will leave
Mercury with a staff of just under 8,000, the company said.

  Duncan Lewis, Mercury's chief executive officer, said the cuts will
save about 50 million ($107 million) a year.  He said they are
necessary in the face of growing competition and the prospect of
falling prices for telephone services.

  Mercury also plans to focus on providing services to businesses,
while working in partnerships with cable television operators to
expand its presence in the consumer market, which is dominated by BT
PLC, formerly known as British Telecommunications PLC.  The major
restructuring will cost Mercury a onetime charge of 120 million.

               -- Associated Press and Reuters


Sid Shniad

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: The "Roadkill" Incident
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 94 19:01:10 EST
Organization: The Toads


While I feel that the wearing of the "Roadkill" t-shirts was somewhat
ill timed, (it should have been done closer to the expiration of our
contract) it was to show the level of frustation that many of the
employees are currently experiencing, the level of stress here has
become unbearable.  An outside observer might ask this question; are
these people just blindly following what the CWA told them to do, or
are they expressing their own feelings in regards treatment in the
workplace, I can only express my own views on this, it is the latter.
As Pat stated it's time for some serious dialog between B-A and the
employees, but I strongly believe it won't happen, the alliance
agreement has died, which was supposed to be a mutual accord re B-A's
entrance into the cable/video market, this coupled with the company's
current attitude toward employees can only end in a long and bitter
strike next August 5th when the current contract expires.

Regarding the 'shoe incident' I checked my own notes on this, we were
only notified Sept 23rd, 12 days before we were required to be wearing
them.

Another demonstration of how draconian this place has become was
sometime in the last several months we were informed that under NO
circumstances were we as employees to speak to the news media, well
while I can understand that all normal requests for information from
the media go to the respective company public relations office, one
had to experience the tone of this letter, to really understand the
message was being conveyed.


W

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

From: Doug Pickering <[e-mail]>
Subject: Anyone Know of a Good Exchange For Home?
Date: 12 Dec 1994 15:41:39 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


Hi,

Can anyone recommend a good telephone exchange?

I need the following features, other would be nice.

Make calls;
Handle one or two telephone lines;
Handle two to six extensions;
Allow one extension to dial another with a voice modem/fax on it;
And that's about it.

I once saw an ad for one which had built in intruder alarm and door
control mechanisms.


Doug Pickering


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Years ago I had a little thing like this
called the Melco System 212. It could handle two outside lines and up
to twelve internal extensions with regular PBX features, ie the extensions
could dial each other, etc. It sure was a great unit. Too bad they are
not around any longer -- Melco, I mean.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mahmud Haque)
Subject: Looking For Systems Integrators for Pager and Cellular
Date: 12 Dec 1994 00:43:13 GMT
Organization: Division of Neuroscience, Baylor College of Medicine,


I am looking for cellular and paging systems integrators for an
overseas setup.  Any pointers will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in
advance.


Mahmud Haque                      Internet: [e-mail]
Division of Neuroscience           uucp: rice!bcm.tmc.edu!mahmud
Baylor College of Medicine       Bitnet: mahmud%bcm.tmc.edu@CUNYVM

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

Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 11:55:40 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Long Distance Rates


You said in a comment on a posting, that LD service is available at
$6-7 an hour or cheaper if you shop. Can you give me a few names and
numbers? The best I can do for daytime calling is $9.00 in and out of
state. Thanks in advance.


Norbert Langbecker, Flagstaff, Arizona


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I pretty much gave up on selling LD
services. It has been squeezed to the bone; almost all the profit
margin is gone from it. I think you can work AT&T down into the $6-7
per hour range if you make a long term agreement with them and
commit to a certain volume of traffic per month which is pretty
large.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
Subject: ISDN on DEC Alpha Computers
Date: 12 Dec 1994 03:42:26 GMT
Organization: Boston University


Today I was building a DEC Alpha workstation for a customer and
noticed on the back a little jack labeled ISDN, and packaged with it
was a cheapie Plantronics headset that plugs into the headset jack
right next to the ISDN jack.  Haven't had a chance to look at the
relevent portion of the manual yet, but it seems to have ISDN built
right into the motherboard of the thing.  Methinks DEC may be
getting a little optomistic about how widespread ISDN availability is,
or is there some deadline coming up that I haven't heard about?


Dale Farmer

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Tompkins)
Subject: Channelling Phone Line Through a Leased Line
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 02:01:36 -0800
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


Here is a little sketch of what I want to do.  I would like to know if
it could be done.

Location A                                   Location B

[REGULAR PHONE LINE]----[LEASED LINE]--------[TELEPHONE]

My whole purpose of doing this is to get away from paying LONG
DISTANCE CHARGES.  Location A is long distance to/from location B.  I
want to have a location A phone line in location B.  I have asked
about this before, but others have told me that I need a MUX and a 56k
line.  I would like to make this as inexpensive as possible.  The two
locations are only 15 miles apart.  I called the phone company and
they told me I had to get signalling and everything.  We don't have a
PBX, either.  I'm not a phone expert, but I know that a lot of you
are.  Could you please send me e-mail with a solution/help?  I would
greatly appreciate it!


Thanks!

 --GREG--

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

From: [e-mail] (Info-Research Clnghse)
Subject: 900 Number Service Bureaus
Date: 12 Dec 1994 05:27:21 GMT


We are looking into starting a 900 number information service.  Is
there a list of 900 number service providers floating around the 'Net
anywhere?  Or perhaps a 900 number FAQ?

If not, could someone provide us with a few 900 Service bureau
contacts?


Thank you,

B. Weir

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

Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 02:29:41 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Stu Jeffery)
Subject: For Sale - Inmarsat-M Brief Case Phone


FOR SALE: Immarsat-M attache case phone. $8500 or Best Offer.

Unit is a Globcom Global Phone 2000, with the fax option. The unit is
in like new condition. It was purchased new last April and came with a
two year warranty, which might be transferable. Upon sale, if the
buyer wishes, we will return it to the factor for complete check out.

The unit works fine. It was used overseas for a few months last
summer, but the business need has changed and we have no further need
for it.

We are HIGHLY motivated to sell it and have priced it at $8500 or BEST
OFFER.

You can contact me via E-Mail, phone or fax.


Stu Jeffery               Internet: [e-mail]
1072 Seena Ave.                    voice:   415-966-8199
Los Altos, CA. 94024               fax:     [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?
Date: 12 Dec 1994 16:31:17 GMT
Organization: URL:http://www.armory.com/~ulmo/ (see rivers.html for PGP key)


My idea covers two big concerns:

1. Residential customers would always receive the caller-id of the
calling party, regardless of whether the calling party is business or
residential, or even blocked via *67 or per-line blocking.  The phone
system would enforce this; any number from "out of area" or "private"
would automatically *not go through*, and instead would receive
intercept, phone-system-wide; the residential customer would have no
choice.  This would force callers to use phone systems which pass the
caller-id, and within a few months every major long distance outfit
and local phone company including cellular would be doing SS7.  I
believe people at their homes deserve to know who is bothering them,
who is calling.  This way, those who always want to know who is
calling them will know.  Who wants to not admit who they are when
calling a residential customer?  The only situation I can think of is
those who are prank-calling someone else's classified sex or personals
ad, which I think is one of the most abusive reasons to block caller id,
and not a valid candidate for blocking.

2. Anyone can block the caller id if calling to a business customer.
Business customers would have the right, of course, to refuse
accepting calls from someone who blocks their caller id.  This would
allow privacy for those who don't want their number on the business
computer when they call.  Personally, I think this is the silliest
thing in the world, since most businesses only give out 1-800 numbers
anyway, which all might be doing ANI.

Gosh, this sounds more like an argument for no-*67 to me.

Question holds: who would want to remain anonymous when calling a
residential phone besides a prank caller, or someone cheating on his
wife who doesn't want his wife to know?

I think protecting the privacy of liars is not a good idea; it's not
my idea of a priority.  This is what really annoys me about the states
that allow per-line blocking; businesses are the *only* ones who get
their caller-id, and that's exactly what the states are trying to
prevent with their stupid no-caller-id laws.

I'm not advocataing taking away the right of liars to lie, but I'm
simply making it harder for them to make up the story which they need
to in order to carry their lie.  Is this who we're defending with *67?
Yuck!

While I always use *67, it's because I have this stupid service called
ring-mate where I can't choose the number caller-id spills, and it
might confuse the person I call; otherwise I wouldn't use it.  I'd
*love* to give up *67 in exchange for always receiving the caller-id.


Bradley


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since you are so concerned about liars
using the telephone, isn't Ring Mate a sort of liar's tool itself?
After all, aren't you choosing (when using Ring Mate) to make certain
claims to the calling party such as I am not home if you called on
line one, and am home if you called on the other side of the line, etc?
Not that I care, but you seem so obsessed with people not being able
to use the phone to play tricks ...  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 11:35:42 CET
From: [e-mail] (Ian N.G. Anema)
Subject: GSM Buying (and Using!) Abroad / Nokia 2110 question
Organization: S.A.R.A. Academic Computing Services Amsterdam


This is a question regarding the Nokia 2110 GSM (also sold in Holland
as Pocketline Darwin).

I am planning to buy this unit abroad, which is also sold under
different brands and types, since the Dutch price is absurb IMHO
(approx. Dfl. 1800 = US$ 1050).  I know this mobile telephone is being
sold around the world, and cheap! (That is, more cheap then in
Holland)

Now, my basic question is: can I buy this telephone in (let's say)
Singapore or USA (without a subscription) and buy a loose
GSM-subscription in Holland and use it? Dutch Telecom tell me I can't
because they don't have an agreement with Singapore or American
suppliers of GSM-signals.  It is my idea however that GSM is some sort
of standard around the globe, and you should be able to buy the same
telephone all over the place. The problem is prob. the billing, that
is why I buy a seperate subscription. Can someone help me out here?

Can you tell me the lowest price you have seen in your country for
this item, and do you have a name of a supplier who would be willing
to mail-order it for me?

In the leaflet I got from a local dealer I quote the following
technical specifications: transmitfreq: 890-915 Mhz, recevingfreq.
935-960, powerclass: class 4,2 Watt, duplex-spacing: 45 Mhz, RF
channels: 124. If these specifications for your Nokia 2110 are the
same (whereever your are in the world), provided you're using a
correct GSM card, it should work over here. (Or not?!?)  How about the
warranty? Is there such a thing as world-wide service?

Please fax or E-mail your answers to me: fax [phone]


With kind regards,

Ian N.G. Anema     Alkmaar, THE NETHERLANDS     [e-mail]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^     [e-mail]^^^^^^^

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

Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 17:05:19 EST
From: Eugene Newman <[e-mail]>
Subject: New M.S. Telecommunications Program at SUNY Utica


SUNY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AT UTICA/ROME ANNOUNCES THE LAUNCH OF ITS NEW
        M.S. IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM FOR SPRING 1995

This new program is a 33 credit interdisciplinary program that builds
on SUNY Institute of Technology's highly successful, industry
oriented, ten year old undergraduate program in telecommunications.
The new Master of Science degree is an interdisciplinary program
combining computer science/information systems and business-related
coursework around a solid core of telecommunications coursework.

The core telecommunications courses investigate critical areas of
advanced telecommunications technologies( anticipated topics include
multimedia, PCS/PCN, information resources network management,
strategic planning) , network design and simulation, project
management, and international telecommunications policy and trade
issues.

Each student will also write a thesis, or perform an original research
topic in the three state-of-the-art voice, data, and network
operations laboratories. These laboratories contain more than $5
million of industry-donated equipment.

The program is advised by a dynamic thirty person telecommunications
industry advisory committee.

The M.S. program is designed to serve both part-time and full-time
students in Central New York, and has a strong and friendly tradition
of serving the education needs of working professionals.

The modern campus is located in Utica, less than one hour's drive from
Syracuse, New York.

Students may enroll now for classes beginning in late January. For
further information, please call the ADMISSIONS OFFICE at [phone].


Eugene Newman   Associate Professor  Telecommunications
[phone] TEL    [phone] FAX

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

Date: Sun, 11 Dec 1994 18:10:01 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Richard Ross-Langley)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: UK Phoneday Test
Organization: MoI Ltd (computer consultancy)


I'm looking for telecom companies who still ban use of the new UK area
codes.  If anyone outside the UK can get through with the old code (eg
+44 71 xxx xxxx) but fails with the new code (eg +44 171 xxx xxxx)
please post a message here.  Note: Followup includes uk.telecom
newsgroup.

The reasons for this request follow ...

Here in the UK, phone numbers were changed on Aug 1, 1994 so that most
area codes get a 1 in front. (There are many exceptions, but that is
another subject). My code used to be 727 and is now 1727.  The old
codes are still working, but will be withdrawn on Phoneday: April 16,
1995.

Some non-UK telephone companies deliberately block calls made to the
old London exchange (eg +44 1 xxx xxxx).  This block should have been
removed by Aug 1, 1994 to allow use of the new codes.

UK businesses are encouraged to display the new codes on signs,
stationery etc, so that others get used to the new codes long before
the old codes are removed.  But we need to be sure that we will not
lose any international calls going to the new codes.

The Office of Telecommunications (OFTEL) is in charge of the Phoneday
renumbering. Their London number is: [phone].


Richard Ross-Langley <[e-mail]> [phone]
Mine of Information Ltd, PO BOX 1000, St Albans AL3 5NY,  GB
** Independent Computer Consultancy * Established in 1977 **

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

Date: Mon, 12 Dec 94 09:45:27 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Update: 1-800-CALL-INFO


Some time ago I mentioned that I had made an inquiry to the Florida
Public Service commission. Last week I received a call from an MCI rep
responding to my "complaint" and assured me that MCI's tactic was
legal with the FCC but every time I asked about *Florida* PUC tariffs
the question was skillfully evaded.

Yesterday, I received a letter stating that the PUC was "concerned"
and was looking into the matter (in fact Florida and fifteen other
states have filed a complaint with the FCC according to my local
paper).

The amusing thing was that the MCI rep who called me asked me to send
MCI a written request for the blocking "so that they could be sure of
my identity". My response was that *she had called me* so she knew
perfectly well who she was speaking to. That was the last I have
heard.

However, I do agree that if this continues, businesses will have no
choice but to block 800 numbers and that will defeat the whole
purpose.


Warmly,

Padgett

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

From: [e-mail] (Uri Segev)
Subject: Portable Voice Telecom System
Organization: ACTCOM - ACTive COMmunication Ltd. - Internet Services
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 00:20:12 GMT


My company needs a telecommunication system for the production floor,
for portable voice and data (control and command) communication.

I heard of FREESET system of ERICSSON that might be appropriate for
our needs.  I think the distributor of this system in Sweden is TELIA.

I need a fax number to get in contact with TELIA people, or anybody
else that can discuss this system technically.

Suggestions on other available systems are welcomed.


Thank You,

Uri Segev

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

From: [e-mail] (James H. Haynes)
Subject: Western Union Telephones
Date: 11 Dec 1994 17:12:42 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


In a Wal-Mart store in Arkansas I just saw some made-in-China
telephones for sale under the Western Union label.  There's a blurb on
the package about how you are dealing with a 125-year-old company,
etc.  "Western Union is a trade mark of New Valley Corp."


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I heard a rumor -- just a rumor -- that
someone might be trying to start up the WUTCO clock service again. But
instead of using wired circuits as before, they'd build little receivers
into the digital clocks which picked up the WWV signal. This type of
digital clock is already available, so it would be a matter of sticking
the Western Union lable on the front of it, I guess.   PAT]

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

From: C. Edward Chow <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help Converting V&H Coordinates to Longitude and Latitude
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 1994 14:44:58 -0700 (MST)
Organization: University of Colorado at Colorado Springs


I am working on a project that needs to convert switching nodes'
locations expressed in terms of V&H coordinates to those in
Longitude and Latitude coordinates.  I checked with telecommunications
references in the library but can not find the definition of telephone
network V&H coordinates.  Can someone help pointing to the right
references or explain it?  Thanks.


Prof. C. Edward Chow  Department of Computer Science
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
Colorado Springs, 80933-7150
Office: [phone]   FAX:    [phone]
email: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #442
******************************


Received: from zeta.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00591; Mon, 12 Dec 94 14:15:04 CST
Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by zeta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21879; Mon, 12 Dec 94 14:15:02 CST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00585; Mon, 12 Dec 94 14:15:02 CST
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 94 14:15:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #443
Status: RO

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 12 Dec 94 14:15:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 443

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended ([e-mail])
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Scott Coleman)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Paul Beker)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Mark Crispin)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Pat Barron)
    Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors (Nick Pandher)
    Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors (P. Greenwell)
    Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors (Nesta Stubbs)
    Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors (Bradley Ward Allen)
    Re: T1<->23 or 24 BRI Equipment? (Fred R. Goldstein)
    CableNet, Spread Spectrum, Wireless Telephony (Randy Gellens)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. 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] (UL ENG)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: 12 Dec 1994 04:46:16 +1100
Organization: Stanilite Electronics Pty. Ltd. Sydney, Australia


TELECOM Digest Editor responded to [e-mail] (Paul Beker):

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well not really ... if you have spent
> any time at all illicitly listening to cellular phone conversations in
> the 850-890 megahertz range on a scanner which has been modified -- you
> have to get the mods done, they don't sell them with that frequency range
> intact -- then you would know it is not quite like tuning into a radio
> talk show host and sitting there listening all day.

> All you get are whisps of conversations, a few seconds of this one, and
> a few seconds of that one; maybe with luck a minute or so of some conver-
> sation. You have 832 channels to be scanned with some on one tower and
> some on another, etc. As motorists pass from one tower's coverage area
> to another, the conversation moves from one channel to another and your
> scanner cannot keep up with any single continuous conversation. When it
> drops off, your scanner will start searching again, but it will run into
> half a dozen other conversations before it gets back to the one you
> were listening to, if it ever finds it again.

With the correct equipment you can easily follow conversations. AMPS
is a well known standard and the new channel for the phone to change
to is transmitted on the air. The equipment can pick this up and
follow the phone to the new frequency. Also if you have a particular
IMSI on ESN you want to follow you can wait on a control channel
looking for calls from that particular phone. I know this sort of
equipment is not cheap but a scanner hooked up to a PC and the correct
software and hardware and you'v got it. This equipment exists and I'd
say there would be quite a few around.

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

Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 94 07:01:14 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (Paul Beker) writes:

>> Outgoing calls may still be made.  However, they will
>> be intercepted by an operator who will request your credit card
>> information for billing purposes.  Call set-up charges and per minute
>> rates will be significantly higher than todays' standard roaming
>> rates.  Emergency calls to 911 will continue to be free.

> What a pathetic case of pass-the-buck!  So, now Joe Blow with a plain
> old scanner (no specialized equipment at all) can listen in to a
> continuous, totally free, and totally safe broadcast stream of credit
> card numbers, expiration dates, and names instead.  Great.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well not really ... if you have spent
> any time at all illicitly listening to cellular phone conversations in
> the 850-890 megahertz range on a scanner which has been modified -- you
> have to get the mods done, they don't sell them with that frequency range
> intact -- then you would know it is not quite like tuning into a radio
> talk show host and sitting there listening all day.

800 MHz scanners, capable of listening in to cellphone conversations,
are relatively easy to get.  Better yet, a communications service
monitor will let you make measurements while listening. <g>

> All you get are whisps of conversations, a few seconds of this one, and
> a few seconds of that one; maybe with luck a minute or so of some conver-
> sation.

You obviously haven't spent much time at all in New York City, let
alone listening to cellphone conversations in New York City.  There
aren't so many places to go very quickly that would cause a hand-off
often enough to fit your scenario.  Try sitting on the approach to the
George Washington Bridge, in Fort Lee, New Jersey, during morning rush
and see if you can find ANY place to go.

> You have 832 channels to be scanned with some on one tower and
> some on another, etc.

The actual number in use at any particular site is far fewer than
that.  A determined buff can amuse himself for a good portion of the
day without having to scan too much spectrum.

> As motorists pass from one tower's coverage area to another, the
> conversation moves from one channel to another and your
> scanner cannot keep up with any single continuous conversation.

But you forget that many people in the New York City area don't move around
that quickly during certain hours of the day.

> So you can't just sit there with pencil and paper copying down credit
> card numbers.

No, Pat, they CAN do that, and without having to go to the trouble of
grabbing it as data.  When commuter traffic slows down to a stand-still,
(probably) the same people who are stealing ESN's will now pick up a
sideline and steal credit card numbers, too.  The only difference is
that now CellOne won't be stuck with eating the fraud traffic.

New Yorkers put up with a lot of daily aggravation (just to live here
it seems ;), but if one cellphone carrier purposefully exposes their
customers to fraud while the other carrier does not, eventually
they'll lose customers and make an example of how NOT to run a
cellphone company.  No doubt exposing this behaviour to the public
will help quicken the enevitable response.

This sort of reminds me of how the new owners of what used to be the
NY Telephone IMTS system approached IMTS fraud.  It doesn't seem that
long ago that I called a csrep and asked her to write-off over $3,000
of pirate billing on several accounts.  The surprised response I got
was, "NO one can bill to your mobile telephone number but YOU." <g>


[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Coleman)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: 12 Dec 94 14:54:55 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well not really ... if you have spent
> any time at all illicitly listening to cellular phone conversations in
> the 850-890 megahertz range on a scanner which has been modified -- you
> have to get the mods done, they don't sell them with that frequency range
> intact -- then you would know it is not quite like tuning into a radio
> talk show host and sitting there listening all day.

That depends on which mod you perform - see below.

> All you get are whisps of conversations, a few seconds of this one, and
> a few seconds of that one; maybe with luck a minute or so of some conver-
> sation. You have 832 channels to be scanned with some on one tower and
> some on another, etc. As motorists pass from one tower's coverage area
> to another, the conversation moves from one channel to another and your
> scanner cannot keep up with any single continuous conversation. When it
> drops off, your scanner will start searching again, but it will run into
> half a dozen other conversations before it gets back to the one you
> were listening to, if it ever finds it again.

This is true if the only modification you have done is to restore the
cellular coverage. There are additional mods which will turn your
Radio Shaft scanner into a very sophisticated cellular snooping
device, capable of monitoring the control channel and tracking any
call from start to finish, allowing thieves to monitor ALL of it,
including the ESN.

> Now if you want to talk about *specialized equipment*, that is a little
> different. Yes, there are a few people around with that stuff but you
> still are not going to find a 'continuous stream' of information being
> passed. They are more likely to get your phone's ESN than they are to
> get (or be too concerned with) your calling card number.

For the price of two Radio Shaft scanners, *anyone* can have this
"specialized equipment" (INCLUDING the Radio Shaft scanner). An outfit
in Canada sells a kit for under $400 which will turn a PRO-2006
scanner into a cellular snoop's dream. The only additional cost is for
an IBM clone to run the control software (and used XTs are selling for
$30 these days).  Now, Joe Sixpack might not have an extra $430 (on
top of the $300 for the scanner) to spend, but you can bet that each
and every cellular ESN thief does. Those mod kits must be flying
across Niagara Falls by the thousands.  (Incidentally, there is a demo
version of the software which accompanies this cellular snoop kit
floating around on the Internet. I forget where I found it, but try an
Archie search on the filename "ddiinfo1.zip".)

> So you can't just sit there with pencil and paper copying down credit
> card numbers. This is what annoys me so much where the privacy freaks are
> concerned in their arguments against giving out credit card numbers over
> cell phone (either phone cards or 'actual' credit cards).

Hmm ... I never considered my concern for privacy to be in any way
freakish. However, if that is indeed the case, then I'll wear the
moniker with pride. Maybe I'll even have a T-shirt made with a picture
of a cell phone (with a big red circle+slash over it) and the words
"Privacy Freak and Proud!" ;-) But seriously, the risks DO exist, and
aren't quite as infinitesimal as the picture you paint.


Scott Coleman, President ASRE (American Society of Reverse Engineers)
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 10:18:11 GMT


Why does this only affect roaming?  I would think that New Yorkers
would get their phone ESNs stolen just as often as roamers.  Or do
criminals prefer roamers because it takes longer for the system to
realize the phone is stolen?


Shawn Gordhamer   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Beker)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 00:43:58 GMT


Well, since actually listening to conversations is illegal, of course
I've never done such a thing!  I did work for a major cellular provider
until recently (mainly working with interconnects, though...).

The fact is: the reliability and continuity, of anything you may hear
is HIGHLY dependent on where the user is (affecting the density of
cell sites), how mobile the user of the phone is, and the power and
quality of the phone the user is using.

Let's say you're driving down some major highway at 6:00 PM.  Of
course, it would be virtually impossible for anyone without "real"
equipment to follow your call as it hops from cell to cell and
frequency to frequency, giving you exactly six-second fragments of
conversations.

Now let's take another scenario.  Suppose you're walking down the
street, or sitting at a restaurant in a fairly rural area.  Odds are
quite high that your conversation will remain on the same frequency
for quite a bit longer than six seconds ... sometimes for minutes.

A better example of this is anyone who happens to be either very close
to a cell site, or out in the country with a good phone.  You will not
get handed off to another cell site.  Period.

As far as "modifying" scanners, I wouldn't call snipping one strategically
placed jumper a big modification.  (Yes, this is often all there is to
it.)

> Now, he listened all day and heard someone give out a calling card number.
> That is not a very good rate of return for the investment of his time and
> effort. What is he going to do, rush right over to the Port Authority Bus
> Terminal and sell it for ten dollars to someone?

Well, maybe he just wasn't very good at noticing things, perhaps realizing
context, or operating the scanner.  I contend that my success rate would be
far better.

> [ ... ] I would be more upset about having to pay the operator surcharge
> on a calling card than I would be about the remote possibility that some
> fool sitting at home with a couple scanners just happened to hit my channel
> at the instant I was passing a number to the operator and just happened
> to recognize it for what it was and just happened to be malicious and
> just happened to have a pencil and paper handy or a tape recorder turned
> on, etc.

Perhaps you're not familiar with the size of the illegal card market?

> [ ... ] They'd rather have the ESN anyway ... and how do you plan to
> stop that?  PAT]

The ESN problem is a much, much bigger issue that won't be solved
anytime soon, in the U.S.  My solution?  Move to an intelligent
cellular architecture (ala GSM, or GSM-like), which actually contains
hooks and facilities to begin to address this issue.  Any algorithm or
validation scheme is beatable, but one of significant complexity would
certainly turn away the vast majority of the "crooks" ...


Paul Beker - Atlanta, GA   [e-mail]

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

From: Mark Crispin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 02:25:59 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


TELECOM Digest Editor wrote:

> All you get are whisps of conversations, a few seconds of this one, and
> a few seconds of that one; maybe with luck a minute or so of some conver-
> sation.

Pat, this simply is not true.  Most cellular calls begin and end on
the same channel.

Nor do you need a scanner.  A flip phone and a piece of aluminum foil
is all that's needed (no, I am *NOT* going to post how; anyone
intelligent who's read this newsgroup for a non-trivial amount of time
can figure it out on their own).  Just hunt around until you find the
local cell's channels, then sit monitoring a popular channel.  In a
major metropolitan area, there's no problem in finding channels that
have something going on most of the time.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Many cellular phones have a 'local' or
'diagnostics' mode which allow the phone to address any given channel
and just sit there listening to it among other things. Where 'program'
mode is usually entered by some series of keystrokes on the keypad of
the phone, often times 'local' mode is entered by taking one of the
pins on the bottom the phone (usually where it connects to the battery)
and shorting that pin to ground. On an old Radio Shack cell phone I
had a few years ago, a pin marked 'ground' was conveniently located
right next to the pin one was to jumper or short to ground to get into
local mode. So indeed, a little piece of tin-foil wedged between the
pins carefully, with the battery pack then reinstalled did do just
what it was supposed to do. Radio Shack happily sells full technical
documentation on all their phones; just ask at the tech support center
in Fort Worth. One of the local test mode conditions allowed the phone
to park on a given channel and stay there manually as long as desired.
There were lots of other things local mode would accomplish also.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in NYC Suspended
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 09:37:32 -0500
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


Well, Cellular One in Pittsburgh (PA) tried something like this once,
with international calls.  They sent around a letter to all
subscribers to tell them that due to an increase in fraud, they would
no longer be able to dial international calls from their cellular
phones.  So, I made a polite phone call to their customer service
number saying that I'd contracted for a service to be able to call
anywhere I wanted to, and that I wanted my international calling
restored.  Immediately.  Guess what?  They did it.  Just for my phone,
not in general.  Has anyone tried this with Cellular One Baltimore and
their NYC roaming policy?


Pat

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

From: Nick Pandher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors
Date: 11 Dec 1994 20:55:20 GMT
Organization: (PCT)


I believe that any future cell/mobile system should take into account
fraud.  When AMPS and TDMA were designed, the cell phone manufacturers
should have left three digits at the end of the ESN as adjustable.
(These three digits would technically not be part of the ESN then.)
If someone clones the phone, adjust the three digits on your phone
when your carrier requests.  Thus, the old ESN with three different
digits is useless.

Lets hope that the PCS spec is more secure.

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

From: [e-mail] (P. Greenwell)
Subject: Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors
Date: 11 Dec 1994 23:30:09 -0800
Organization: Access InfoSystems


> I just drove from Vermont via NYC, Wash DC, across 40 to LA.  I was
> unable to roam in so many places, I just gave up.  Sure keeps the
> phone bill down :-) .  They would be happy to complete my call with a
> credit card.  What?  Give my card number over the air?  I don't think
> so given the climate.  There's an opportunity for someone to figure
> out how to beat em.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See my earlier comments. I am not
> advocating giving your number over the air repeatedly, but once here
> and once there along the way is not likely to cause a problem, not
> for the five seconds or so you are 'exposed' in your quick passing
> of the number to the operator. Anyway, why not instead punch it in
> using the touchtones on your cellular phone?  You know, in the form
> of 0+AC+number+calling card+PIN. If someone is listening, they are
> going to wish they had been taping recording those (usually meaningless
> to the human ear) beeps of your calling card entry. Overall, don't
> get too uptight about it.    PAT]

With people monitoring lines to falsify ESN and MIN info, you don't
believe the capacity is there to decode DTMF? No thanks ... having
played around with friends' scanners I find it far too easy to pull
this info, monitor conversations, etc.


Black Adder


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, never having been inclined to sit
and work on something like that, I tend to get disinterested fast. I
suppose if someone really wanted to work hard on it and had the needed
'dedication to duty' they could accomplish what you suggest. I guess
where we disagree is on how many people do this and how likely it is
to occur to any given person. (getting ripped off this way).  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nesta Stubbs)
Subject: Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors
Date: 12 Dec 1994 00:55:08 -0600
Organization: Moorish Science Temple


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

>> Do the next-generation digital cellular sets provide any better
>> security?

    I remember reading an essay discussing these new ideas in
curbing cell fraud, but I cant remember any specifics.  Sorry.

(TELECOM Digest Editor disputed likelyhood of capturing info ...)

    I had a similiar experience with Ameritech operators.  If you
place a calling card call that stay in there service area (say downtown
Chicago to a suburb) you have to use the Ameritech operator service (or
at least I didnt know of another way to do it) and then you have to
give them your card number out loud, which isn't cool in some crowded
places since there would be no difficult overhearing you.  Maybe you
can do it thru the touch-tone pad, but when I asked the operator if I
should do that she said no.  Anyone have any way that you could get
around this, so I don't need to announce my number to the surrounding
area?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Zero plus the area code (even if your
own) plus the number ... wait for the thank you message, the bong tone
or whatever they give, then enter your calling card number and the
pin. Usually if calling to the number to which the card is assigned,
entering just the pin is sufficient; you will then want to enter the
# as a terminator so it does not have to wait for time out before
starting to process the call.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (bradley ward allen)
Subject: Re: Cellular One Pulls the Plug on Visitors
Date: 11 Dec 1994 19:54:32 -0500
Organization: URL:http://www.armory.com/~ulmo/ (see rivers.html for PGP key)


>> "Cellular One customers who live in the Washington, D.C. area (one of
>> those affected) will be unable to receive calls on their cellular
>> phones while in New York City and parts of northern New Jersey.  Calls

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you could cancel your contract
> with them on the premises that they had violated the contract or changed
> the terms without proper notice when they cut out roaming in the area.  PAT]

Roughly exactly what I did with LA Cellular when my calls wouldn't
come through because of their fraud-blocking schemes which blocked me!

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

Date: Mon, 12 Dec 94 11:02:26 CDT
From: Fred R. Goldstein <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: T1<->23 or 24 BRI Equipment?
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Bob Ames) wrote:

> What is available to connect two remote offices via T1?

Good question, actually, but one that opens up so many options!  (It
gives us consultants a good living.)

> Ideally, I'd like to use a T1 on each end and provide:

> *) Intercom service,

What do the two offices have for telephone service now?  If there are
PBXs, then tie lines via the T1 will do it.  Even without a PBX, there
are ways to derive voice channels from a T1, to mate different types
of telephone system.

> *) TCP/IP traffic (Ethernet),
> *) (One/Several?) ISDN S/T or U lines.  I'd like to be able to use
>    ISDN phones on one end and on the other end connect to the
>    Intercom system or to the LD Company via POTS or ISDN.  Or to
>    use, say, a Waverunner on one side and get thru the T1 to the
>    main office, and then routed into the Ethernet on the other side.
> *) Anything else ISDN provides, like FAX.

> Do I need a PBX for all of this?  Certainly some kind of switch-like
> routing seems necessary.

Several types of equipment terminate a T1.  A few examples:

* A PBX.  These typically handle 64 kbps data calls (period) too.
* A Data Service Unit.  This takes all of the bandwidth and makes
  it into one fat data channel.  Fractional-T1 DSUs operate on a
  subset of the 24 channels, as you specify.
* A channel bank.  This is a static (configure by plugging in cards)
  multiplexor.  Option cards of all sorts are available.  Each of
  the 24 channels is picked up by one card or another.
* A nodal processor.  This is like a fancy channel bank with software
  configurability, multi-T1 networking, etc.  Overkill for two sites
  but worth it for larger networks.
* A drop-and-insert mux.  This generally lets you pick off a couple of
  data channels (n*64k) while feeding the remaining channels into a PBX,
  Fractional-compatible Data Service Unit or whatever.

> How much traffic can fit on an S/T?  For example, can I put all 24 B
> channels on the S/T bus concurrently without degradation or failure?
> (I doubt it)

The ISDN Basic Rate S/T bus handles exactly two B channels (one BRI).
T1 is a different animal.

One common way to go:  Get a T1 to your long-distance company.  Designate
some channels for access to their network ("WATS"-style services.)  Run
others into a Fractional T1 for your site-to-site needs (data, maybe
some voice, etc.).  They can deliver ISDN Primary Rate using one D channel
and however many B channels you designate (the rest used for "FT1" or
individual-channel services).

If you have an ISDN system at one end and want for some odd reason to
remote a Basic Rate channel, you can use a channel bank equipped with
Adtran's BR1TE cards.  These take 3 channels and map 2B+D onto them.
They fit into standard D4-family banks so you can mix and match, or use
8 to fill a T1.  That's a common way to deliver "virtual ISDN".


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 12 Dec 94 08:49:00 GMT
Subject: CableNet, Spread Spectrum, Wireless Telephony


Sorry this is so late.  I'm behind in my reading of our news network,
but I thought this item might still be of interest:

 - - - - - - - - -
                  Unisys to Participate in CableNET '94

Unisys will participate in the CableNET '94 demonstration at the
Western Cable Show, November 30 through December 2, in Anaheim,
California.  CableNET demonstrates to cable operators and
representatives from the converging computer and telephone industries
that 50 different vendor offerings can interoperate on a hybrid
fiber/coaxial network.

Unisys will be the primary systems integrator for the CableNET
demonstration and is a member of the vendor management team, along
with Northern Telecom, Intel, General Instrument and Scientific
Atlantic.  Unisys personnel also will demonstrate spread spectrum
technology over coaxial and wireless telephony as part of the
demonstration.


Randall Gellens      [e-mail]
[phone]       fax [phone]
Mail Stop MV 237     Net**2 656-6350


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am sorry this reached us so late,
but better late than never I guess.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #443
******************************



Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00514;
          13 Dec 94 19:44 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA17908; Tue, 13 Dec 94 12:28:13 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA17900; Tue, 13 Dec 94 12:28:10 CST
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 94 12:28:10 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #444

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 13 Dec 94 12:28:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 444

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Third Intl Workshop: Feature Interactions in Communications (N. Griffeth)
    Cell One/VT Buys Franklin; MA, NY Service Disrupted (Douglas Reuben)
    POCSAG Paging Protocol - Documentation (Marek Ancukiewicz)
    CCMail FTP-type Mail Server (David Kimball)
    TAP, Pager Information Wanted (Martin Johnson)
    PacBell ISDN Seminar (Cherie Shore)
    HAZMAT Information for First Responders (HAZ-First) (Michael F. Vetter)
    Help Wanted With Phone Test Device (Greg Philmon)

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 America
On Line. 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] (Nancy Griffeth)
Subject: CFP: Third Intl Workshop on Feature Interactions in Communications
Organization: Morristown Research and Engineering
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 21:54:00 GMT


               Call for Participation
Third International Workshop on Feature Interactions
         in Telecommunications Software Systems
                   Kyoto, Japan
                October 11-13, 1995

Description

     This workshop is the third in a series, whose mission is to
encourage researchers from a variety of computer science specialties
(software engineering, enterprise modeling, protocol engineering,
distributed artificial intelligence, formal techniques, software
testing, and distributed systems, among others) to apply their
techniques to the feature interaction problem that arises in building
telecommunications software systems (see the back page for a
description of the problem).  We welcome papers on avoiding,
detecting, and/or resolving feature interactions using either
analytical or structural approaches.  Submissions are encouraged in
(but are not limited to) the following topic areas:

   -    Classification of feature interactions.

   -    Modeling,  reasoning,  and  testing  techniques  for
        detecting feature interactions.

   -    Software platforms and architecture designs  to  aid
        in   avoiding,   detecting,  and  resolving  feature
        interactions.

   -    Tools  and  methodologies  for  promoting   software
        compatibility and extensibility.

   -    Mechanisms   for   managing   feature   interactions
        throughout the service life-cyle.

   -    Management of feature interactions in PCS, ISDN, and
        Broadband services, as well as IN services.

   -    Management of feature interactions in various of the
        operations   support   functions   such  as  Service
        Negotiation,   Service   Management,   and   Service
        Assurance.

   -    Feature Interactions and their potential  impact  on
        system Security and Safety.

   -    Environments  and  automated   tools   for   related
        problems in other software systems.

   -    Management of Feature Interactions in various  other
        enterprises, such as banking, medicine, etc.


Format

     We hope to promote a dialogue among researchers in various
related areas, as well as the designers and builders of
telecommunications software. To this end, the workshop will have
sessions for paper presentations, including relatively long discussion
periods.  Panel discussions and tool demonstrations are also planned.
The first day of the workshop, October 11, is devoted to tutorials and
discussions on areas related to feature interactions.


Attendance

     Workshop attendance will be limited to 100 people.  Attendance
will be by invitation only. Prospective attendees are asked to submit
either a paper (maximum 5000 words) or a single page description of
their interests and how they relate to the workshop.  Proposals for
tutorials and discussions are also requested (maximum 3000 words).
About 16-20 of the attendees will be asked to present talks; a small
number of tutorials and/or discussions will also be selected.  We will
strive for an equal mix of theoretical results and practical
experiences. Papers will be published in a conference proceedings.


Submissions

     Please send five copies of your full original paper or interest
description to:

     Kong Eng Cheng
     Department of Computer Science
     Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
     GPO Box 2476V
     Melbourne, Victoria
     AUSTRALIA 3001

     E-mail: [e-mail]
     Tel: [phone]
     FAX: [phone]


Important dates are:

     February 28, 1995: Submission of contributions.
     May 15, 1995: Notification of acceptance.
     June 26, 1995: Submission of camera-ready versions.


Workshop Co-chairpersons

     Tadashi Ohta (ATR, Japan)
     Nancy Griffeth (Bellcore, USA)

Program Committee

     Co-Chairpersons:
     Kong Eng Cheng  (Royal Melbourne Institute of
                      Technology, Australia)
     E. Jane Cameron (Bellcore, USA)

Jan Bergstra         (CWI and University of Amsterdam,
                      The Netherlands)
Ralph Blumenthal     (Bellcore, USA)
Rolv Braek           (SINTEF DELAB, Norway)
Bernie Cohen         (City University of London, UK)
Robert France        (Florida Atlantic University, USA)
Haruo Hasegawa       (OKI, Japan)
Dieter Hogrefe       (University of Bern, Switzerland)
Richard Kemmerer     (UCSB, USA)
Victor Lesser        (University of Massachusetts, USA)
Yow-Jian Lin         (Bellcore, USA)
Luigi Logrippo       (University of Ottawa, Canada)
Jan van der Meer     (Ericsson, The Netherlands)
Robert Milne         (BNR, UK)
Leo Motus            (Tallinn Technical University, Estonia)
Jacques Muller       (CNET, France)
Jan-Olof Nordenstam  (ELLEMTEL, Sweden)
Yoshihiro Niitsu     (NTT, Japan)
Ben Potter           (University of Hertfordshire, UK)
Henrikas Pranevicius (Kaunas University of Technology,
                      Lithuania)
Martin Sadler        (HP, UK)
Jean-Bernard Stefani (CNET, France)
Greg Utas            (BNR, USA)
Jyri Vain            (Institute of Cybernetics, Estonia)
Hugo Velthuijsen     (PTT Research, The Netherlands)
Yasushi Wakahara     (KDD R&D Laboratories, Japan)
Ron Wojcik           (BellSouth, USA)
Pamela Zave          (AT&T Bell Laboratories, USA)


Workshop Statement

     The feature interaction problem is a major obstacle to the rapid
deployment of new telephone services. Some feature communications
system. Telecommunications software is huge, real-time, and
distributed; adding new features to a telecommunication system, like
adding new functionalities to any large software system, can be very
difficult.  Each new feature may interact with many existing features,
causing customer annoyance or total system breakdown.  Traditionally,
interactions were detected and resolved on a feature by feature basis
by experts who are knowledgeable on all existing features.  As the
number of features grows to satisfy diverse needs of customers,
managing feature interactions in a single administrative domain is
approaching incomprehensible complexity.  In a future marketplace
where features deployed in the network may be developed by different
operating companies and their associated vendors, the traditional
approach is no longer feasible.  How to detect, resolve, or even
prevent the occurrence of feature interactions in an open network is
now an important research issue.

The feature interaction problem is not unique to telecommunications
software; similar problems are encountered in any long-lived software
system that requires frequent changes and additions to its
functionality.  Techniques in many related areas appear to be
applicable to the management of feature interactions.  Software
methodologies for extensibility and compatibility, for example, could
be useful for providing a structured design that can prevent many
feature interactions from occurring.  Features are typically design to
suit the purposes of a user or business, hence Enterprise modeling
will play a role in the identification of certain classes of
interaction, in particular the solution of an interaction in one
enterprise may not be desired by another.  Formal specification,
verification, and testing techniques, being widely used in protocol
engineering and software engineering, contribute to the detection of
interactions.  Several causes of the problem, such as aliasing,
timing, and the distribution of software components, are similar to
issues in distributed systems.  Cooperative problem solving, a
promising approach for resolving interactions at run time, resembles
distributed planning and resolution of conflicting subgoals among
multiple agents in the area of distributed artificial intelligence.
This workshop aims to provide an opportunity for participants to share
ideas and experiences in their respective fields, and to apply their
expertise to the feature interaction problem.


Workshop Announcement

     3nd International Workshop on Feature Interactions in
Telecommunications Software Systems, October 11-13, Kyoto, Japan,
Sponsors: IEEE Communications Society. In cooperation with ACM SIGCOMM
and ATR, Japan. Contact Tadashi Ohta, ATR, 2-2, Hikari-dai, Seika-cho,
Soraku-gun, Kyoto, 619-02, Japan, Tel: [phone], Fax: +81 7749
5 1208, e-mail: [e-mail].

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

From: [e-mail] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: Cell One/VT Buys Franklin; MA, NY Service Disrupted
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 05:36:45 PST


I was just driving on I-91 in Franklin County, and noticed that the
system there seems to be under "new management". A call today to Metro
Mobile tech support confirmed this. The Metro Mobile Franklin County
system (old SID 00119) has been purchased by Cell One/VT (Atlantic
Cellular), which recently started operating Franklin as part of their
Vermont/NH (00313) system.

Franklin County lies in the middle of Western Mass, touching the Vermont
state line, and extending southward for about 20 to 25 miles or so.
Service was started there in late 1991/early 1992. It was owned by some
slimey outfit named Boston Communications or something like that, with
Metro Mobile (now Bell Atlantic) serving as the operator of the system.
Metro Mobile customers more or less didn't know it was another system up
there -- the switches are Motorola EMXs, which are the same type that
Metro Mobile uses (I think they used Metro's Springfield switch), the SID
code was 00119 in both Franklin County and the rest of Metro's territory,
all features worked fine, *611 got the same customer service, etc. (The
only thing that didn't work were redirects to voicemail of
no-answer-transfer, since Metro is owned by a Bell Co., and in the DOJ's
infinite wisdom this is not allowed :( ).

In general, the system was good on I-91, where Boston Comm could get a
lot of roamer revenue, but go a little bit either east or west of
I-91, and it was awful -- practically no service anywhere. I think at
most they had four towers, and I'll bet it was more like two or three.
Boston Comm seemed like the typical "soak-the-roamer" license holder
who builds up a system enough to get decent roamer traffic, and then
sits on its hands until they are forced to add more towers or give up
their license. Cell One/Boston customers were victims of this policy,
as calls placed/received (automatically) in this service area were
billed $3/day, $.99 min, and of course CO/Boston's equally slimey $2
"roamer administration fee", whereas anywhere else in Mass, CT, or RI
the rates are only $.44 peak/$.29 off-peak. There was no way to tell
when you were on the Franklin system, and thus no way to tell when you
would pay 29 cents to receive a call or $6 to receive a call.

Cell One/VT, which is owned by Atlantic Cellular of Providence, RI, is
usually sloppy when they add auto-call delivery and take over new
systems. When they set up call delivery to their Concord, New
Hampshire partnership system with CO/Boston (it's REALLY weird ... two
carriers servicing the same system!), access codes and feature codes
we so disfunctional that it made little sense to try to do anything --
I considered myself lucky to merely get a call! Their call delivery to
Boston is also lacking in that feature codes don't work too well
(certain forwarding codes are not standardized, and others don't
work).

Additionally, the link between the two systems seems to be down quite
a bit, and during these times there is no call-delivery nor can you
manually de-register from the Boston or VT system, so calls are lost
if your phone is off since there is no way to forward them back to
your home system.  (Atlantic Cellular also owns a system east of
Sacramento in El Dorado County, just south of I-80 along US-50 near
Tahoe. They have the SAME problems of feature integration into the
California Auto Access system on the B-side as those which exist in
the East with Boston and Concord, NH.)  I've mentioned these problems
to them a number of times, they have never corrected them. Right now,
for example, you can't turn call delivery on (*28), but you can turn
it off (*29). I *do* call them up about these things, it then works
for two days, and then after that, *28 "breaks down" once again, and
we start all over again.

Now, with the apparent addition of Franklin County, MA to their
system, these problems continue. The system seems to be an extension
of their VT/NH system (which in and of itself is an EXCELLENT system
in terms of coverage and RF saturation). As noted above, the SID in
Franklin County is the same as Vermont, 00313, and all CO/VT customers
can use their phones in Franklin, Mass as they would in VT/NH, ie,
seven digit dialing back to VT/NH, features work, etc. It's almost as
if they pulled the lines from Metro Mobile and just connected the
three or four towers in Franklin to Cell One/VT!

However, Boston customers can NOT use all of their features, and at
the moment can NOT use *28 to turn on call delivery. If a Boston
customer has call delivery set "on", then calls will be delivered just
fine, as they would be to anywhere else is CO/VT's coverage area. But
a Boston customer can not activate call delivery once in CO/VT's area,
now including Franklin. (Under Metro Mobile this was not a problem --
everything worked just fine.) It also remains to be seen what rate
Boston customers will pay while roaming in Franklin.

Metro Mobile customers also have the *28 problem, and *611 in that
area will get you Cell One of Vermont, and not Metro Mobile. There now
IS call delivery to all of CO/VT, so Metro Mobile customers can now
drive all the way up Burlington, VT and receive calls, although I need
to find out the rates.  Metro *is* committed to maintaining the same
rates for its customers who drive in Franklin as were in place when
they operated the system, which to my mind is the only fair thing to
do. Perhaps these "home" rates will be extended to all of the 00313
VT/NH system? Overall, Metro customers don't make out too badly,
although the lack of *28 to control call delivery is annoying.
Hopefully they will fix this on a more permanent basis now that Metro
Mobile customers will depend on it.

The people who make out the worst in all this are customers of Cell
One/NY and Cell One/Litchfield, CT (NOT part of Metro Mobile; it's
owned by McCaw).  There used to be call-delivery throughout all of CT
and Western Mass for these customers, and now there is nothing in
Franklin. Cell One/VT doesn't seem to have any sort of connection with
CO/NY or CO/Litchfield (at least as of yet), so useful features such
as call-delivery, call-waiting, Do-Not-Disturb (an unfortunate
NECESSARY feature to some people), and call-forwarding all do NOT
work. I am not sure if CO/VT plans to be added to the NACN any time
soon, or if they will work out something with CO/NY and Litchfield in
terms of a non-NACN call delivery regime, but this loss of functionality
in Franklin -- admittedly not the largest or most heavily-used system
 -- reduces the utility of CO/NY and CO/Litchfield customers' phones on
a heavily traveled section of I-91. This is especially true in the
winter season, as many residents of NYC and nearby Connecticut travel
north on I-91 for skiing and other recreational purposes.

Additionally, CO/NY considers Franklin to be a "home rate" system, ie,
you pay your home airtime plan's charges, and no daily roamer charge.
I will find out what (if any) effect the change will have on CO/NY
customers' rates in this area, and post a summary later on.

The really odd thing about this is that it was never announced -- it
just just seemed to happen overnight, literally! It would have been
nice if Metro Mobile could have informed their customers about the
change (not just their Franklin customers, but everyone ... we do drive
there too, you know!). I'm not too concerned with Metro, as almost
everything remains the same IF they get *28 to work. My main worry is
that CO/NY customers will lose their home rate in Franklin, and that
nothing will be done for a long time to restore call and feature
delivery. This will result in a setback against the B-side which
currently offers all these features and is one, single system under
SNET along I-91. I would hope that CO/NY, CO/Litchfield, and CO/VT all
make efforts to maintain the pre-existing rate structure, and that
progress be made towards restoring call-delivery and call-features in
an expeditious and timely manner.

[End Note: Just talked to Cell One/VT -- they offer home rates in
Franklin, and also in the recently acquired Plattsburgh and Montpelier
systems, which will soon reflect the 00313 SID code. There is DMXing
(haven't heard THAT in a while!) throughout the system, as well as to
all of Mass, RI, and CT. Rates to the rest of Mass, all of CT, and all
of RI are still $3/day, $.99 min., though :( .]


Doug Reuben, [e-mail]
CID Tech/Interpage Network Svcs. Group E-Mail Paging * [phone]
ftp: ftp.netcom.com, pub/ci/cidtech * www: http://interpage.net

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

From: [e-mail] (Marek Ancukiewicz)
Subject: POCSAG Paging Protocol - Documentation
Date: 13 Dec 1994 07:15:39 GMT
Organization: Duke University, Durham, NC, USA


Does anybody know how could I get some info on the protocols used in
in Motorola pagers? As far as I know they are called POCSAG and are
not proprietary to Motorola. I would be grateful for any help,
particularly for references to documentation.


Marek

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

From: [e-mail] (David Kimball)
Subject: CCMail FTP-type Mail Server
Date: 13 Dec 1994 13:56:43 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY


We have developed a remote access mail server fashioned after the FTP
mail servers found on the internet. But this one works in conjunction
with ccmail and/or Notes mail databases. I am curious to see if this
is something others might be interested in as a product. If you have
interest in it please send me an email message.

For those unfamiliar with the concept of a remote access mail server, a
description of what we built follows:

A remote access mail server allows you to access information and files
from your network by sending mail messages to the mail server. Why
would someone do this instead of accessing the network directly? Well
imagine your on the road or working at home and forgot a file that you
needed on the network.  Using cc:Mail mobile, you could send a request
to the mail server to get you the file and it would email it back to
you.

So how do I send a request? By creating an email message and mailing
it to the mail server's ID. It's as easy as sending a message to
someone in your office to get you the file. Only, it will get back to
you sooner!

What does a request look like? The request message uses the FTP
command set available on most internet FTP mail servers. This gives
you the ability to get a file or files, get directory listings, or
search for a file to see what directory it is in. You specify the
server you wish to attach to along with any ID's and passwords
required for verification. You can also specify the directory to look
in for your file or directory requests. In addition the requested
file(s) can be compressed. By default messages are placed in the body
of the email message. Binary files can be uuencoded or xxencoded to
make them appear as text files or they can be sent as attachments.

Here's a sample request:
CONNECT \\MYSERVER\DATA
CD \MYDIR
ATTACH
GET MYFILE.DAT
QUIT

The sample above connects to the shared volume called DATA on the
server called MYSERVER. It changes to the directory called MYDIR. It
the requests that the file be sent back as an attachment instead of in
the body of my mail message. Next it specifies that I want the file
called MYFILE.DAT sent.  Finally it indicates the end of a request
with the QUIT. The QUIT is there in case the message arrives from a
foreign mail system through a gateway and the foreign mail system
appends information to the end of your mail message.

So there you have it. By simply writing an email message you can get
to those files you forgot. Or you can use it to access regularly
updated files on the network if your a field agent.

Well once again if this interests you as a product please let me know.


Thanks,

Bill Richard

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

From: [e-mail] (martin johnson)
Subject: TAP, Pager Information Wanted
Date: 13 Dec 1994 12:43:51 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


I am trying to get a automatic paging function into my PC.  I intend
to use KERMIT scripted to use TAP, Telocator Alph- numeric Protocol.
The problem is, I cant locate a copy of the TAP protocol. Does anyone
on the net know where I can get this, or for that matter, any paging
service protocols?  If anyone has already done this with KERMIT, I
would of course appreciate any suggestions.


Thanks in advance,

Marty    [e-mail]
martin johnson     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Cherie Shore)
Subject: PacBell ISDN Seminar
Date: 13 Dec 1994 02:08:42 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell


On Tuesday, January 24, Pacific Bell will be offering an evening
seminar entitled "What is ISDN?".  We'll be discussing a wide range of
subjects relating to ISDN technology, deployment, applications, and
availability.  We will also be showing a benchmark test; the same file
transferred via 14.4 modem and ISDN at 56kbps.  An ISDN Internet
Access provider will be onhand to show how pleasurable Mosaic can be
at 112kbps.

The seminar will be held at 177 E. Colorado Bl in Pasadena, at 7pm.
To reserve a seat, call 818-578-4114.


Cherie Shore       [e-mail]
ISDN Technology Manager, PacBell

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael F. Vetter)
Subject: HAZMAT Information for First Responders (HAZ-First)
Date: 12 Dec 1994 19:56:02 GMT
Organization: TASC


Hi!

I'm working on a federally-sponsored project that is looking into ways
to get critical information directly and rapidly to emergency
responders (police, fire, EMT) who are the *first units* to arrive at
the scene of a commercial highway vehicle accident or spill involving
hazardous materials. The HAZMAT Information for First Responders
(HAZ-First) Project is in the early planning stages and is looking for
inputs from anyone on similar pilot projects or relevant technologies
that could help us better meet the needs of emergency first responders.
Preliminary interviews and a workshop with first responders indicate a
need to know the following information upon being dispatched to an
accident/spill location and *before* arriving at the scene:

(1) Precise descriptions of all hazardous materials, if any, in a
commercial vehicle, including a description of their containers.

(2) Detailed list of other materials in the commercial vehicle load,
including a description of their containers.

(3) Information on the hazardous materials' physical and chemical
characteristics and any associated warnings.

(4) Implications of hazardous materials within the commercial
vehicle's load interacting with each other and with non-hazardous
materials also present in the vehicle.

(5) Recommended actions needed to immediately neutralize the hazardous
material's effects and/or to treat any injuries resulting from
exposure to the hazardous materials.

We identified the following technologies as having some part in a
first response information architecture and would appreciate your
comments on commercially-available products in the categories (or
additional categories) that you think would be able to meet some of
requirements.

Automated vehicle location and tracking systems;
Automatic vehicle accident sensors;
Hazardous chemical sensors;
Vehicle transponders and remote interrogators;
Electronic smartcards;
Commercial wireless telecommunications;
Personal digital communicators;
Personal digital assistants;
Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW);
Wireless access to Internet resources;
Video teleconferencing;
Mobile crisis command centers;
Computerized MSDS databases (both public domain and proprietary);
Computerized pesticide or other substance information databases;
Toxicological information databases;
Public safety dispatch systems (911 and E-911 CAD);
Commercial carrier dispatch systems;
Commercial vehicle load scheduling and tracking systems.

If you know of test projects being conducted or planned by other
organizations (federal, state, local, non-profit, academic, or industry)
in support of emergency first responders we would also like to know
about them. Initial demonstration of some of the information technologies
listed below will depend heavily on being able to coordinate with
Federal, State, or local agencies in ITS, DOT, and industry-sponsored
projects.

Your comments on first responder's information will always be welcomed.
Thanks very much for your participation.


Michael Vetter   TASC, Inc.
[phone], X 2407
FAX  [phone]  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Philmon)
Subject: Help Wanted With Phone Test Device
Organization: ClientLink, Inc., Atlanta, Ga.
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 17:51:23 GMT


I've seen devices that allow you to bypass the local exchange and
perform phone testing within your office.

That is, they have two or more RJ11 jacks, each assigned a two or
three digit phone number.  You can plug in a standard analog phone and
call any other port.

The device handles dial tone and ring generation, as well as busy
signals, etc.  Some even allow you to adjust the line quality.

What are these things called?  Where can I go to get more info and
perhaps purchase one?  How much do they cost (ballpark)?

Thanks in advance.


Greg Philmon | [e-mail] | CIS: 71161,3445 | MCI: 588-5358

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #444
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00836;
          13 Dec 94 20:03 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22521; Tue, 13 Dec 94 14:07:16 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22513; Tue, 13 Dec 94 14:07:13 CST
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 94 14:07:13 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #445

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 13 Dec 94 14:07:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 445

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    500 Numbers (Todd M. Hauser)
    Information Wanted: Pulse Rate in India (M.A. Kumar)
    Need Wire-Spring PBX (James D. Murray)
    Handshaking: Computer-Computer or Modem-Computer? (Martin Johnson)
    Home Office Hardware/Software? (G. Wong)
    Ameritech Entering LD Market? (Julie Johnson)
    PC Based Line Switching (Adiascar Cisneros)
    Internet Service to the Middle East (Suha Hassan)
    What's Expected to Happen to PRI Rates in 95? (John R. Galloway, Jr.)
    Present and Future Technology of Telephone (Gina Chen)
    Have Parts For *OLD* NT SG-1 (Al Cohan)
    Routing to the Closest Point (Ted Koppel)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Clarence Dold)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Richard W. Sabourin)
    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Dave O'Shea)
    Re: Anyone Know of a Good Exchange For Home? (Phil Schoendorff)
    Re: Anyone Know of a Good Exchange For Home? (Douglas H. Quebbeman)
    Oklahoma to Adopt Full Number Long-Distance Dialing in 1995 (M. McCormick)
    Re: Channelling Phone Line Through a Leased Line (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Channelling Phone Line Through a Leased Line (Chuck Poole)
    Re: ISDN on DEC Alpha Computers (Derya Cansever)

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 America
On Line. 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, 12 Dec 1994 23:47:25 EST
From: The Toddster <[e-mail]>
Subject: 500 Numbers


Pat, I have been lurking around c.d.t for some time now, but don't
remember seeing anything on 500 numbers.  I also looked in the
archives to no avail.  Am I missing something, or is no one discussing
this hot issue?  Here is something you may want to include in the
Digest:

Recently, while talking to AT&T, I found out that they have four
exchanges open in the new 500 NPA.  Namely, 346, 367, 677, and now
288.

The FCC was to have given the "go ahead" at the end of November, but now
it looks like at lest the end of December before any final word will
come.

The number I called to get info from AT&T was +1.800.870.9222.  They
will reserve a number for you at no cost (and with no definite
guarantee) and they say they will call you when the service is
available to let you know if you can still have your number and what
all the catches are.

The service will cost anywhere from $1 to $7 per month plus an
additional charge for voice mail, and will allow calls to the 500
number to be forwarded to any number, virtually worldwide.

The caller will pay charges if he dials 1+500.  If the subscriber sets
up a PIN, callers can call 0+500 and reverse billing by entering the
PIN at the prompt (much the way Easy Reach works now).

The only questions I have are: what will the impact be on payphones
(especially COCOTs) and are any other IXCs offering a similar service?

Inquiring minds want to know ...


Todd Michael Hauser <[e-mail]>
Applications Programmer, Digital Express Group, Inc.
Home +1.703.812.TODD  Work +1.301.220.2020
+1 500 DOS BOOT <--The only number you need! (Pending FCC approval)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We have had a few small items about 500
service here in the past. I am going to be updating the archives soon
and probably those things will show up in the index when I do. I called
the number you mentioned above and they told me 500 service has not
started anywhere as of yet; they are still awaiting final approval to
turn it on. I have a couple Easy Reach numbers and got a letter from
AT&T some time ago saying once 500 service started my numbers would be
automatically converted unless I told them not to do it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (M.A. Kumar)
Subject: Information Wanted: Pulse Rate in India
Date: 12 Dec 1994 21:59:30 GMT
Organization: University Wisconsin- Madison


Hello,

    I am setting up a modem for a friend of mine in India and the
initialization requires the selection of proper pulse rate. Can
someone tell me from the following three which one is correct for
India:

1)    make/break ratio of 39% / 61% and 10 PPS (USA/Canada)
        [DEFAULT SETTING]
2)    make/break ratio of 33% / 67% and 10 PPS (UK/Hong Kong)
3)    make/break ratio of 33% / 67% and 20 PPS (Japan).

I will grately appreciate help from anyone about this.


Thanks.

M.A.Kumar.  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (James D. Murray)
Subject: Need Wire-Spring PBX
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 21:53:00 GMT


I am looking for an older model wire spring relay PBX with 100 lines
or less.  I need to emulate a Central Office and the newer digital
types just don't provide the proper switching I need.

I'm willing to go up to $5000US for one in working condition and
(hopefully) with a set of manuals. Please email or call and I'm in the
Los Angles area.


Thanks,

James D. Murray, Software Engineer
PairGain Technologies
12921 E. 166th Street
Cerritos, CA 90703 USA
Voice: 310.404.8811 x540
Fax:   [phone]
Email: [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (martin johnson)
Subject: Handshaking: Computer-Computer or Modem-Computer?
Date: 13 Dec 1994 13:02:35 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


Is handshaking, ie xon/xoff or RTS/CTS, just between a computer and
its local modem or is it passed on to the remote modem and remote
computer? Can a modem whose RTS goes low, pass the fact of that event
to the remote modem by sending a Xoff? If a remote computer sends a
Xoff thru its modem, and my local modem receives it, will it lower CTS
if xon/xoff is disabled?  Any enlightenment is appreciated. Ive been
using and setting up lots of communications equipment for at least ten
years, and just realized that I dont know the answers to the above!


Thanks,

Marty    [e-mail]
martin johnson      [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It can be either way you want it. My
modem has settings which allow for stopping things like Control-S and
working on them locally only, or working on them and passing them to
the distant end; my choice as configured.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (G WONG)
Subject: Home Office Hardware/Software
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Aston University
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 16:03:06 GMT


Could anybody tell me if I can use my PC to answer a phone with my
present data/fax modem to take care of all the calls? If not, which
modem is the best one with the voice capability?  I have a Hayes and
Zoom at the moment.

Thanks for your replies.


gareth

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

From: Julie Johnson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ameritech Entering LD Market?
Date: 13 Dec 1994 14:23:32 GMT
Organization: Fujitsu


I heard on the radio recently that Ameritech is awaiting approval
(today?) to enter the LD market. Can anyone enlighten me??

Please send response via email in case I have to travel unexpectedly.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's what they have been talking about.
Furthermore, they are faced with local competition from AT&T here in
the Chicago area. Nothing is like it used to be, is it?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Adiascar Cisneros)
Subject: PC Based Line Switching
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 14:54:56 -0400
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc.


Hi everyone,

I need help finding a device that will allow a PC to detect an
outgoing call (i.e. from inside a building) and decide which outgoing
line will be used for that particular call.

Please feel free to respond by e-mail. Any help will be greatly
appreciated.


Adiascar Cisneros   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Suha Hassan)
Subject: Internet Service to the Middle East
Date: 12 Dec 1994 15:06:22 -0500
Organization: The Ohio State University


    I am planning to provide Internet service in the Middle East
area.  The link will be satellite based. I would like to get answers
to a few questions.

    Which teleports are best for this link, how much would a T1
capable satellite teleport cost?

    Which satellites are better for use for Internet? We are
planning to lease a T1. Which satellites are more reliable? Does
anyone have contact information for companies that leases satellite
segments? Prices for a T1?

    Which companies offer down/up link in the US? Any recommendations
and prices?

    I appreciate any feedback you can provide.


Yours,

Suha Hassan

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

From: [e-mail] (John R. Galloway, Jr.)
Subject: What's Expected to Happen to PRI Rates in 95?
Date: 12 Dec 1994 19:31:54 GMT
Organization: Galloway Research


PacBell has filed their new PRI tariff (I THINK it changes the rate
for a PRI interface to the switched network from $162 for T1 access
plus $500 for PRI on that T1, to $395 for both) and I understand the
service availability date is something like June.  I have also heard
that with intralata competition being allowed as of 1/1/95, that
there are several companies poised at the starting gate to offer
cheap(er?) PRI services.

Does anyone have any deatils of these new services or service providers?

What are the details of the regulations on competition?  Can anyone
just offer whatever they want and the CPUC has nothing to do with it?
or is there still a lenghty filing process and approval needed?


internet    [e-mail]  John R. Galloway, Jr  795 Beaver Creek Way
applelink   D3413                  CEO...receptionist    San Jose, CA   95133
magicedge   BLIND MAN              Galloway Research     [phone] v
                             [phone] f

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

From: [e-mail] (Gina Chen)
Subject: Present and Future Technology of Telephone
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 10:08:13 -1000
Organization: Monta Vista High School


I am working on a project in my class that requires me to research on
the past, present, and future technology of telephones.  My questions
are:

1.  How does a simple telephone work?  What is its mechanism?
2.  What are some present telephone technology?  (I know for one video
    telephone.)
3.  What are some possible future telephone technology?
4.  Any general information about telephone would be greatly appreciated.

Please email to me at [e-mail]


Thank you very much.

<Gina Chen> [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You might begin by getting a copy of
the Telecom Frequently Asked Questions File from the Telecom Archives.
It should give you a lot of helpful information. You can access this
using anonymous ftp, gopher, and various other services. You want to
connect with lcs.mit.edu, then get into the telecom-archives directory.
You know Gina, I sure wish we had Internet when I was in high school.
It would have been a wonderful thing. When I was in high school very
few people had heard the term 'computer'; it certainly was not a word
used in regular conversation.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Cohan)
Subject: Have Parts For *OLD* NT SG-1
Organization: Los Angeles Free-Net
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 09:38:39 GMT


I finally removed the last of the SG-1's I installed many years ago. I
have a complete functioning SG-1 and a lot of spare parts including
1A2 that goes with it.

The equipment is in the LA area.

If anyone has an interest, please e-mail me directly. I think at this
point anyone willing to pick it up can have it!


Al

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Koppel)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 07:48:40 MST
Organization:  CARL Corporation (Atlanta) / The UnCover Company
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Routing to the Closest Point


The {Atlanta Journal-Constitution} of November 16, 1994 had a short
paragraph announcing:

"A new service approved by the state PUC will save consumers the
trouble of looking up the location of the nearest pizza parlor or
furniture store.  The service allows business with multiple locations
to select and advertise a single telephone number that is easy for
customers to remember.  Southern Bell will deliver calls automatically
to the business closest to the caller.  Southern Bell, which has
already begun this service in Florida, will charge businesses 12 cents
per call plus a monthly fee of $45 to participate."

Questions:

 1. How does Southern Bell make these geographical decisions?  Central
office prefixes? City limits?  County limits?

 2. Will the specific branches of a store still be accessible through
their own direct phone numbers?  (That is, I may actually want to call
a branch further from my home than the one that Southern Bell routes
me to.)


Ted Koppel * The UnCover Company * The CARL Corporation * [e-mail]

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

From: Clarence Dold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: 13 Dec 1994 06:38:59 GMT
Organization: a2i network


Paul Beker ([e-mail]) wrote:

> A better example of this is anyone who happens to be either very close
> to a cell site, or out in the country with a good phone.  You will not
> get handed off to another cell site.  Period.

My cellphone (Mitsubishi 1500), has a display mode that shows signal
strength and cell id.  Watching this as I drive around the valley
implies that I can go 10-15 road miles without switching cells.  Of
course, at other locations, I can go 10-15 miles without _finding_ a
cell, but that's a different story.  Cellular One has a map in their
office, noting where the towers are, so that you can make judgments
about coverage in your area.  I haven't seen the map, but I suppose it
shows the footprint of each cell.


Clarence A Dold - [e-mail]
                - Pope Valley & Napa CA.

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

From: Richard W. Sabourin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 08:34:10 -0500


This brings up something that I'm wondering about, as a cellular "newbie".

An office-mate and I just signed up with Nynex within the past three
weeks; we both bought Motorola DPCs from them, and they include a new
"feature" that I haven't heard of before: A four-digit PIN which must be
entered (followed by Send) after the desired number. (Calls to 911 and
customer service are excepted.)

Can somebody tell me a little more detail about what's going on? I
can't believe the PIN is going out as DTMF; but even if it's going out
as control data, can it be any harder to snoop and spoof than the ESN?

So, is the PIN check is implemented in the phone itself? Or does my
new flip phone implement PGP? :)


Thanks,

Rick S.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave O'Shea)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: 13 Dec 1994 18:02:25 GMT
Organization: WilTel
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Shawn Gordhamer ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Why does this only affect roaming?  I would think that New Yorkers
> would get their phone ESNs stolen just as often as roamers.  Or do
> criminals prefer roamers because it takes longer for the system to
> realize the phone is stolen?

Us New Yorkers do have to deal with this. Recently got a phone bill
with $230 worth of calls, all to the Bronx and Brooklyn. NYNEX was
polite enough to remove the charges (though, amusingly, I did keep the
$2 volume discount that the calls made me eligible for - go figure!)

NYNEX requires owners of phones that have been cloned to use a PIN
code to complete all chargeable calls, or have the phone number
changed. I imagine it will be only a few months until the number of
PIN-equipped phones is large enough to make it worthwhile for the
criminals to invest in the additional hardware to pick them up, so
this is probably just a stopgap measure.

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Schoendorff)
Subject: Re: Anyone Know of a Good Exchange For Home?
Date: 13 Dec 1994 09:26:30 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet


Doug Pickering ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Can anyone recommend a good telephone exchange?
> I need the following features, other would be nice.

> Make calls;
> Handle one or two telephone lines;
> Handle two to six extensions;
> Allow one extension to dial another with a voice modem/fax on it;
> And that's about it.

Take a look at a VODAVI system.  Nice, small, flexible key assignments
and can expand if needed.

Let me know if you can't find a rep.


Phillip A. Schoendorff
614-436-4115


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think we have discussed here in the
past a similar thing from Panasonic as well, but I forget the exact
name/model numbers.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Douglas H. Quebbeman)
Subject: Re: Anyone Know of a Good Exchange For Home?
Organization: IgLou Internet Services
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 15:34:31 GMT


ICV Corporation of Salem, NH., makes a 2-CO line/6-extension PBX; the
dealer price is $349.00. It works with POTS stuff so you won't need to
buy custom phonesets. They have larger systems as well.

[phone] (Voice)
[phone] (Fax on Demand)
[phone] (BBS)


Douglas H. Quebbeman ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Martin McCormick)
Subject: Oklahoma to Adopt Full Number Long-Distance Dialing in 1995
Organization: Oklahoma State University  Stillwater, OK
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 19:16:13 GMT


    Oklahoma will soon joine the list of states in which one must
dial all long-distance calls the same way no matter whether the number
being called is in the same area code or not.  For about six months,
it has been possible to dial either way, but the change becomes
official on January 1, 1995.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
OSU Computer Center Data Communications Group

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Channelling Phone Line Through a Leased Line
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 18:20:58 PST


Greg Tompkins said:

> Here is a little sketch of what I want to do.  I would like to know if
> it could be done.

> Location A                                   Location B

> [REGULAR PHONE LINE]----[LEASED LINE]--------[TELEPHONE]

> My whole purpose of doing this is to get away from paying LONG
> DISTANCE CHARGES.  Location A is long distance to/from location B.  I
> want to have a location A phone line in location B.  I have asked
> about this before, but others have told me that I need a MUX and a 56k
> line.  I would like to make this as inexpensive as possible.  The two
> locations are only 15 miles apart.  I called the phone company and
> they told me I had to get signalling and everything.  We don't have a
> PBX, either.  I'm not a phone expert, but I know that a lot of you
> are.  Could you please send me e-mail with a solution/help?  I would
> greatly appreciate it!

Where are you located?   Why don't you just get foreign exchange service?


Steve    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chuck Poole)
Subject: Re: Channelling Phone Line Through a Leased Line
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 23:20:53
Organization: Voiceware Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Greg
Tompkins) writes:

> My whole purpose of doing this is to get away from paying LONG
> DISTANCE CHARGES.  Location A is long distance to/from location B.  I
> want to have a location A phone line in location B.  I have asked
> about this before, but others have told me that I need a MUX and a 56k
> line.  I would like to make this as inexpensive as possible.  The two
> locations are only 15 miles apart.

If they are only 15 miles apart, an FX line may be cheaper than a
leased line and there is no equipment necessary.


Chuck Poole

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

From: [e-mail] (Derya Cansever)
Subject: Re: ISDN on DEC Alpha Computers
Date: 12 Dec 1994 21:48:46 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dale Farmer)
writes:

> Methinks DEC may be getting a little optomistic about how widespread
> ISDN availability is, or is there some deadline coming up that I
> haven't heard about?

DEC has a big European presence and ISDN is widespread in Europe.


Derya Cansever

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #445
******************************



Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01462;
          13 Dec 94 21:38 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26062; Tue, 13 Dec 94 15:22:14 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26040; Tue, 13 Dec 94 15:22:04 CST
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 94 15:22:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #446

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 13 Dec 94 15:22:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 446

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? (Ben Carter)
    Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? ([e-mail])
    Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? (John W. Barrus)
    Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? (P. Schoendorff)
    Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? (Clifton Sharp)
    Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? (Keith Jack)
    I Want Caller-ID. What's Wrong With it? (Mahboud Zabetian)
    Frequently Asked Questions About Caller-ID (Padgett Peterson)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. 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] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 1994 08:17:02 PST


[e-mail] said:

> would automatically *not go through*, and instead would receive
> intercept, phone-system-wide; the residential customer would have no
> choice.  This would force callers to use phone systems which pass the
> caller-id, and within a few months every major long distance outfit

Great idea! (Note my sarcasm.)  What about exchanges that CAN'T pass caller
ID?  Do those unlucky people on mechanical switches just wait for the phone
company to amortize the switch and replace it before they can call outside
of their switch again?

> Question holds: who would want to remain anonymous when calling a
> residential phone besides a prank caller, or someone cheating on his
> wife who doesn't want his wife to know?

Lots of people.  How about social workers, or battered women trying to hide
out from their husbands? What if I am calling someone from a friend's house.
SHould my friend's number get plastered all over that person's caller ID
box?

My impression from your message is that _you_ are the one with a problem
about anonymous calls.  So why don't you accept the burden of rejecting
them:  either don't answer the phone, order Anonymous call blocking, or get
one of those little devices to do it for you.


Steve   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin P. Carter)
Subject: Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 03:30:31 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> I believe people at their homes deserve to know who is bothering them,
> who is calling.

I certainly want to know who is calling me, and I wouldn't mind not
receiving calls from those who don't want me to know their phone numbers.

> Who wants to not admit who they are when calling a residential
> customer?  The only situation I can think of is those who are
> prank-calling someone else's classified sex or personals ad, ...

Other possibilities:

1. People soliciting donations for veterans organizations and other
   worthy causes.  They don't want you to know that they are the same
   ones that refused to leave messages on your answering machine.  Also,
   they don't want you to call them back at your convenence; they
   prefer to interrupt your dinner at their convenience.

2. Telemarketers both within and outside the law.  Their reasons are
   about the same as those discussed above.  In addition, the more
   crooked ones don't want you to be able to give their number to the
   police.

> ... businesses are the *only* ones who get their caller-id, and
> that's exactly what the states are trying to prevent with their stupid
> no-caller-id laws.

I think the basic problem here is that money talks, and the telcos are
listening to those (businesses) that pay lots of money per month.  As
a residential customer, I don't have much clout with GTE or Pac Bell.
I want privacy, and I can't get it.  Businesses want to invade my
privacy, and the telcos help them (for a price).

Neither GTE nor Pac Bell offers caller ID here in southern California,
even though it is now legal for them to do so.  The services they do
offer in response to residential customers' needs for privacy are
carefully designed to be ineffective, so as not to irritate the really
important (business) customers.


Ben Carter    internet address: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?
Date: 13 Dec 1994 04:38:35 -0500
Organization: URL:http://www.armory.com/~ulmo/ (see rivers.html for PGP key)


Me:
[...]
> I'm not advocataing taking away the right of liars to lie, but I'm
> simply making it harder for them to make up the story which they need
> to in order to carry their lie.  Is this who we're defending with *67?
> Yuck!

[...]
> Bradley

OEM:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since you are so concerned about liars
> using the telephone, isn't Ring Mate a sort of liar's tool itself?
> After all, aren't you choosing (when using Ring Mate) to make certain
> claims to the calling party such as I am not home if you called on
> line one, and am home if you called on the other side of the line, etc?
> Not that I care, but you seem so obsessed with people not being able
> to use the phone to play tricks ...  PAT]

Thanks for bringing this up.  You're partially right, of course.

However, I contend that I'm not necessarily lying under these conditions:

a) Using the different numbers to differentiate between advertisements
   somebody called, so that I may know which publications I should
   continue with;

b) Knowing something about what tone I should set depending on which type
   of call I'm getting -- first impressions, you know;

c) Prioritizing my life according to my needs; some days I may need
   love, others money.

Err, I guess I would have to call it "acting", which is lying after
all, perhaps you're right.  (I should quit while I'm ahead. :-) ) Ok,
so LA rubbed off on me in the wrong way.  I knew I should have never
gone there.

One feature I've always wanted is the ability to assign a new phone
number for each and every relationship with each and every person.
Thus, when my friend Affa calls me on the Affa-emergency number, I
know I should stop everything and answer it, but when my enemy Charlie
calls me on his emergency line I can safely ignore it once I ascertain
who it is.  I could even set it to the "Disconnected" intercept ...

This is an ultimate extention of Ringmate, really, kinda like
affording a T-1 with thousands of numbers (the T-1 being the major
cost I think, the additional numbers are fairly inexpensive according to
NYNEX).  Certain people could even have reverse charging set on the
line (800 numbers).

That way, you *never* have to change your number; the people you want
to drop off the face of the earth, you just toggle their phone number
connected bit, and they're gone.  That way if Mom gives your number to
every telemarketer and bill collector in the world, you can tell her
she does so at the peril of not being able to reach you herself,
because you'll never answer calls coming in on her number.  If you're
more dedicated, you'd give everybody a set of numbers, one being "give
this out to anybody on behalf of me", and you know that when you get a
call on that number, that it's from somebody who got it from person B,
and can orient yourself as to how to react to that person calling.  If
your mom did this, not only would the bill collectors have your voice
and go away, but your mom would still be able to get ahold of you.

All of these situations have happened to me.  It really stops being
lying and starts being a fact of life: you can't trust everybody who
gets your number.  I've known *plenty* of guys who I can't get rid of,
and plenty of guys who wish they could give me their number to "try"
me out and then toggle the number off if I didn't work out, but end up
being too afraid to even tell me their prefix lest I start autodialing
the range ...

Perhaps this is a phenomenon of a younger generation where numbers are
exchanged more freely and frequently, so mistrust is an important
element of life?

And in a business setting, authentification, context, and advertisement
information would be nice.

To do all of this, random numbers would have to be assigned for
personal relationships lest people start relationship-phreaking to get
ahold of someone via a different link number; perhaps public key
crypto the numbers?  Oh heck I'm getting futurish.  Also variable-length
numbers as in Europe.


 -u~

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

From: [e-mail] (John W. Barrus)
Subject: Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 11:19:47 -0500
Organization: Mitsubishi Electric Research Labs


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

> My idea covers two big concerns:

> 1. Residential customers would always receive the caller-id of the
> calling party, regardless of whether the calling party is business or
> residential, or even blocked via *67 or per-line blocking.  The phone
> system would enforce this; any number from "out of area" or "private"
> would automatically *not go through*, and instead would receive
> intercept, phone-system-wide; the residential customer would have no
> choice.  This would force callers to use phone systems which pass the
> caller-id, and within a few months every major long distance outfit
> and local phone company including cellular would be doing SS7.  I
> believe people at their homes deserve to know who is bothering them,
> who is calling.  This way, those who always want to know who is
> calling them will know.  Who wants to not admit who they are when
> calling a residential customer?  The only situation I can think of is
> those who are prank-calling someone else's classified sex or personals
> ad, which I think is one of the most abusive reasons to block caller id,
> and not a valid candidate for blocking.

Remember that there are social workers and other emergency workers who
must return calls from their homes when they are paged.  Many of these
people do not have business lines and cannot afford them.  Also, if
they are returning emergency calls when visiting a friends house, they
would not be able to call for fear that their friends number would
show up on the callee's CID box.

Some of the callers (for emergency services) harrass the people
returning their calls, and not giving out the social workers phone
number is the only way to prevent the callers from harrassing the
social worker at home.  Harrassment through voice-mail is much less
annoying and easier to ignore.

There are good reasons for blocking Caller ID in some instances.


John B.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh gee, social workers. Don't forget
lawyers. It seems to me this puts us commoners on a more equal footing
with them ... I had a lawyer once demand from me my home and business
number. I gave him my business number but did not want to give him my
home number. "I *must* have it," he exclaimed. What is your home number,
I asked him ... oh, I don't do business at home, he said, and I replied
neither do I. 'Touche' was his response. My heart really bleeds for the
folks who think they have the right to call you at home to conduct their
business but you have no right to disturb them with followups, etc.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Schoendorff)
Subject: Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?
Date: 13 Dec 1994 09:36:15 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet


[e-mail] wrote:

> Question holds: who would want to remain anonymous when calling a
> residential phone besides a prank caller, or someone cheating on his
> wife who doesn't want his wife to know?

How about someone that has a second line that they use for data and an
occasional outgoing call.  Too many people use caller ID as an
answering machine and just call the number back without even listening
to the message that you left.


Phillip A. Schoendorff
614-436-4115

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

From: [e-mail] (Clifton T. Sharp)
Subject: Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 05:22:37 GMT


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

> Question holds: who would want to remain anonymous when calling a
> residential phone besides a prank caller, or someone cheating on his
> wife who doesn't want his wife to know?

A doctor returning patient calls from his home to save time might not
want patients to have a home phone to call at every hour of the day or
night.

A person who receives a terse answering-machine message from an
unknown voice to call an unknown number.

A person who knows that (in your imaginary scenario) businesses who
really want my home phone number enough will have me call a residential
line so they can get it.


Cliff Sharp      WA9PDM
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you saying its okay for the doctor
to waste *your* time by being very late for appointments (while you
sit there waiting) and not allow you to waste his?  Sorry, but I do
not buy the argument, 'I am a professional and have a right to be
private at my home but you do not have a right to the same privacy
at home because you are only a commoner ...' If you want to talk to
me, you begin by introducing yourself, period.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (keith jack)
Subject: Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 08:02:12 GMT


[major edit about how call-blocking should not be allowed]

> Question holds: who would want to remain anonymous when calling a
> residential phone besides a prank caller, or someone cheating on his
> wife who doesn't want his wife to know?

Then I assume you write all of your correspondence on post cards
rather than putting them in an envelope?  After all, you have nothing
to hide.. :)

I know a lot of women that want to be able to call a person without
having to give out their phone number... :)


Keith Jack       [e-mail]          Author: Video Demystified
[phone]                      Editor: Digital Video Technology
ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/kj/kjack   Multimedia Independent Contractor


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The analogy of writing everything on
a postcard is not a good one. He does not use a party line with everyone
listening in, so by extension he does not need to write everything on
postcards for the mailman and others to read in the delivery process.
A better analogy would be does he put his return address on all letters
or identify himself in some way in all his written correspondence. Can
the person who receives his correspondence easily detirmine who sent
it and how to respond?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (mahboud)
Subject: I Want Caller-ID.  What's Wrong With it?
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 01:24:45 -0800
Organization: AG Group, Inc.


Hi.  I sent the following article to ba.general.  That is a newsgroup
here in the Bay Area region of Northern California.  We do not have
Caller-ID here.  I would like to have it.  I would like to find out
from those of you who have Caller-ID, what the Pros and Cons are.

Thank you for all responses ...

(Instead of Caller-ID, Pacific Bell offers three services:  last caller
redial, call block on ten numbers, and caller logging to enable tracing of
obscene or annoying calls.  Pacific Bell charges a monthly fee (~$4) for
each of these services.  In none of these services will you ever see the
number of the calling party, in order to protect their anonymity).

I am trying to figure out why caller-ID did not make it out here.  It
seems to me that the only people who would have problems with it are
those who are up to no good.

I have heard the scenario of the honest person calling different
retailers to price something and not wanting to give them his/her
phone number.  I think that caller-ID makes up for that many times
over by allowing you to block calls from all the annoying sales
people, including that retailer who got your phone # when you called
for pricing.

I also find it interesting that Pacific Bell managed to make the most
out of this deal by providing us with three pay services that would
have been free with caller-ID (with the right telephone sets at our
end).  So does anyone think that maybe Pacific Bell does not want to
provide caller-ID?

Please write me if you can enlighten me about the other side of this
issue.


Thanks,

Mahboud Zabetian   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 13 Dec 94 05:25:14 CDT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Frequently Asked Questions About Caller-ID


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is time to re-run this article by
Padgett which appeared earlier this year in the Digest. We will let
this be the authoritative answer to the commentaries running in this
issue of the Digest.  PAT]


               Frequently Asked Questions About Caller-ID
                            v1.1 Mar. 1994


        1) What is Caller-ID ?

        First ask "What is ANI"

        2) OK, What is ANI ?

        ANI  or Automatic Number Identification is a mechanism  by  which
        the different telephone companies determine what account is to be
        charged for a call, This information is passed between Telcos and
        was  originally  for  billing  purposes  and  predated  both  SS7
        (Signaling  System 7) and (C)LASS (Local Area Signaling  Services
        was the original AT&T designations, the "C" was added by Bellcore
        after  divesture)  services  which make CNID  or  Calling  Number
        IDentification as Caller-ID is more properly known, possible.

        Since  the  Telcos  had ANI, the decision was  made  to  make  it
        available  to  authorized  parties such as 911  service  and  law
        enforcement  agencies. ANI is also used to let a  Telco  operator
        know who is calling.

        More recently, ANI is used to report to 800 and 900  subscribers,
        who made the calls they have received, in the first case so  that
        the  800 subscriber knows who the charge is for, and so that  900
        number subscribers know who to charge.

        Thus  while ANI is similar to CALLER-ID and may provide the  same
        information,  they  are actually two different services  and  ANI
        information is not necessarily the same as what will appear on  a
        CALLER-ID display.

        3) Now (maybe) what is Caller-ID ?

        Caller-ID  is  a Telco offering that is a  byproduct  of  (C)LASS
        services.   In  this  case,  only  those  numbers   reported   by
        participating exchanges are returned, exactly which are and which
        are not is currently (March 1994) at the Telco's discretion.

        The  Federal Government has stated that it is their  intent  that
        nationwide  CNID be available by mid-1995. The full text of  this
        decision  may be found FCC Report No. DC-2571 issued on March  8,
        1994.

        The  biggest effect of the ruling is to mandate transport of  CPN
        (customer  provided number) information  between  interconnecting
        networks  eliminating  the effective  inter-LATA-only  limitation
        that exists today in most areas.

        Currently  there  are two types of Caller-ID.  The  first  (often
        referred  to as "basic" service) just returns the calling  number
        or an error message and the date/time of the call.

        The  second ("enhanced" Caller-ID) also may return the  directory
        information  about the calling number. At a minimum, the name  of
        the subscriber is returned (the subscriber is not the same as the
        caller, the phone company has no way to determine who is actually
        on the line).

        4) How is the Caller-ID information provided ?

        As  a  1200  baud, 7 data bits, 1 stop bit  data  stream  usually
        transmitted following the first and before the second ring signal
        on  the line. Note that this is not a standard Bell 212 or  CCITT
        v22 data format so a standard modem will probably not be able  to
        receive  it. Further, the serial information exists as such  only
        from  the  recipient's switch to the callee's  location.  Between
        carriers the signal exists as data packets.

        The signal is provided before the circuit is complete: picking up
        the receiver before the data stream is finished will stop/corrupt
        the transmission.

        Currently  there are two types of information returned: a  "short
        form" which contains the date/time (telco and not local) of the
        call  and  the calling number or error message. The  "long  form"
        will  also contain the name and possibly the  address  (directory
        information) of the calling phone.

        The  "short  form"  stream  consists of a  set  of  null  values,
        followed by a two byte prefix, followed by the DATE  (Month/Day),
        TIME  (24 hour format), and number including area code in  ASCII,
        followed  by  a  2s compliment checksum.  Most  modems/caller  id
        devices will format the data but the raw stream looks like this :
        0412303232383134333434303735353537373737xx
        or (prefix)02281334407555777(checksum)

        A formatted output would look like this:
        Date -   Feb 28
        Time -   1:34 pm
        Number - [phone]

        5) Can a Caller-ID signal be forged/altered ?

        Since  the signal is provided by the local Telco switch  and  the
        calling  party's line is not connected until after the  phone  is
        answered, generally the signal cannot be altered from the distant
        end.  Manipulation would have to take place either at the  switch
        or on the called party's line.

        However,  the foregoing applies only to a properly designed  CNID
        unit.  For instance the Motorola M145447 chip has a "power  down"
        option that wakes the Chip up when the phone rings for just  long
        enough  to  receive, process, and deliver the CNID  signal  after
        which it shuts down until the next call.

        Should  this  option be disabled, the chip will be in  a  "listen
        always" state and it is theoretically possible to "flood" a  line
        making a vulnerable box record successive erroneous numbers.

        I have received a report of a device called "Presto Chango"  that
        can  transmit  an extra ADSI modem tone after the call  has  been
        picked up that will cause a susceptible box to display the  later
        information. It was also reported to me that CNID boxes  marketed
        by  US-West  as their brand and made by CIDCO have been  used  to
        demonstrate the "Presto Chango" box.

        6) What is "ID Blocking" ?

        Most  Telco's  providing  Caller-ID have been  required  to  also
        provide the ability for a calling party to suppress the Caller-ID
        signal. Generally this is done by pressing star-six-seven  before
        making the call. In most cases this will block the next call only
        however  some  Telcos  have  decided  to  implement  this  in   a
        bewildering  array of methods. The best answer is to contact  the
        service provider and get an answer in writing.

        Currently this is supplied as either by-call or by-line blocking.
        By-Call is preferred since the caller must consciously block  the
        transmission   on  each  call.  By-Line  blocking  as   currently
        implemented has the disadvantage that the caller, without  having
        a second caller-id equipped line to use for checking, has no  way
        of knowing if the last star-six-seven toggled blocking on or off.

        Note  that  blocking  is  provided by a  "privacy"  bit  that  is
        transmitted  along  with  the CNID information and  so  is  still
        available  to the Telco switch, just not to the subscriber  as  a
        CNID  signal. Consequently related services such as  call  trace,
        call return, & call block may still work.

        7) What happens if a call is forwarded ?

        Generally,  the  number  reported is that of the  last  phone  to
        forward  the call. Again there are some Telco differences so  use
        the  same  precaution  as in (6). If the forwarding  is  done  by
        customer  owned  equipment there is no way of  telling  but  will
        probably be the last calling number.

        Note  that as specified, CNID is *supposed* to return the  number
        of  the  originating  caller  but this is at  the  mercy  of  all
        forwarding devices, some of which may not be compliant.

        8)  What happens if I have two phone lines and a black box to  do
        the forwarding ?

        If  you  have  two  phone lines or  use  a  PBX  with  outdialing
        features,  the reported number will be that of the last  line  to
        dial. Currently there is no way to tell a black box from a  human
        holding two handsets together.

        9)  I called somebody from a company phone [phone])  but  their
        Caller-ID device reported 555-1000.

        Often a company with multiple trunks from the Telco and their own
        switch will report a generic number for all of the trunks.

        There  is  a  defined  protocol  for  PBXs  to  pass  true   CNID
        information  on outgoing lines but it will be a long time  before
        all existing COT (Customer Owned Telephone) equipment is upgraded
        to meet this standard unless they have a reason to do so.

        10)  I  run a BBS. How can I use  Caller-ID  to  authenticate/log
        callers ?

        There  are two ways. The first utilizes a separate Caller-ID  box
        with  a  serial  cable  or  an  internal  card.  This  sends  the
        information back to a PC which can then decide whether to  answer
        the  phone  and  what device should respond. Some  of  these  are
        available  which  can handle multiple phone lines  per  card  and
        multiple cards per PC.

        The second (and most common) is for the capability to be built in
        a  modem or FAX/modem. While limited to a single line per  modem,
        the information can be transmitted through the normal COM port to
        a  program  that again can decide whether or not  to  answer  the
        phone  and  how.  There is a FreeWare Caller-ID  ASP  script  for
        Procomm  Plus  v2.x available for FTP from the  Telecom  archive.
        Most  such  software packages will also log each call  as  it  is
        received and the action taken.

        Of course for true wizards, there are chips available (one of the
        first  was  the Motorola MC145447) that can  recognize  the  CNID
        signal and transform it into a proper RS-232 (serial) signal.

        11) How is security enhanced by using Caller-ID over a  Call-Back
        service or one-time-passwords for dial-up access ?

        Caller-ID  has one great advantage over any other  mechanism  for
        telephone  lines.  It  allows the  customer  to  decide  *before*
        picking up the receiver, whether to answer the call.

        Consider hackers, crackers, and phreaks. Their goal in life is to
        forcibly penetrate electronic systems without permission  (sounds
        like  rape doesn't it ?). They employ demon dialers  and  "finger
        hacking"  to  discover responsive numbers, often  checking  every
        number in a 10,000 number exchange.

        If  they get a response such as a modem tone, they have a  target
        and  will  often  spend  days  or  weeks  trying  every  possible
        combination of codes to get in. With Caller-ID answer  selection,
        the  miscreant  will  never get to the modem tone  in  the  first
        place, yet for an authorized number, the tone will appear on  the
        second ring. Previously the best solution for dial-ups was to set
        the modem to answer on the sixth ring (ats0=6). Few hackers  will
        wait that long but it can also irritate customers.

        12) What error messages will Caller-ID return ?

        a) "Out of Area" - (Telco) the call came from outside the Telco's
        service area and the Telco either has no available information or
        has chosen not to return what information it has.

        b)  "Blocked"  or  "Private"  - (Telco)  the  caller  either  has
        permanent call blocking enabled or has dialed star-six-seven  for
        this call. You do not have to answer either.

        c) "Buffer Full" - (device manufacturer) there are many Caller-ID
        devices  on  the  market  and exactly how  they  have  chosen  to
        implement  storage is up to the manufacturer. This probably  mans
        that  the  divide has a limited buffer space and  the  device  is
        either losing the earliest call records or has stopped  recording
        new calls.

        d)  "Data  Error"  or "Data Error  #x"  -  (device  manufacturer)
        signal was received that was substandard in some way or for which
        the checksum did not match the contents.

        e)  "No  Data Sent" - (device manufacturer) Signal  was  received
        consisting  entirely of nulls or with missing information  but  a
        proper checksum.

        13) Why are so many people against Caller-ID ?

        FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, & Doubt or 10,000,000 lemmings can't  be
        wrong.  There  were some justifiable concerns  that  some  people
        (battered  wives,  undercover policemen) might be  endangered  or
        subject   to  harassment  (doctors,  lawyers,  celebrities)    by
        Caller-ID.  As mentioned above there are several legitimate  ways
        to  either  block  Caller-ID or to have  it  return  a  different
        number.  It  is  up to the caller. The  advantage  is  that  with
        Caller-ID,  for  the first time, the called party  has  the  same
        "right of refusal".

        Expect yet another Telco service (at a slight additional  charge)
        to  be  offered to return an office number for  calls  made  from
        home. Crisis centers could return the number of the local  police
        station.


        Compiled by Padgett Peterson. Constructive comments to:
        [e-mail]  Brickbats >nul.

        Thanks for additional material to:

        David J. Kovan
        Robert Krten
        John Levine
        David G. Lewis
        Karl Voss

        but the mistakes are all mine - Padgett (Ignorance is curable)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #446
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09530;
          14 Dec 94 16:36 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10139; Wed, 14 Dec 94 10:22:10 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10131; Wed, 14 Dec 94 10:22:07 CST
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 94 10:22:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #447

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 14 Dec 94 10:22:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 447

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Unlicensed Wireless Data Communication (Michael Chui)
    Great News for BellSouth ISDN (Ed Goldgehn)
    WilTel Service and Performance (Aaron Woolfson)
    Telecommuting and Urban Design/RE Dev (James Grossman)
    Cable Industry WWW Sites? (Bruce Klopfenstein)
    T1 + Ethernet -> Fiber (Joseph H. Allen)
    Help With Init String For Dialing (Roman Ratayczak)
    School Tech Award to San Carlos City and Schools (Brian Moura)
    Looking For References For Paging Systems (Thomas Y.C. Woo)
    SBMS - $5 "Roam Admin Fee" (Mark W. Earle)

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 America
On Line. 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, 14 Dec 1994 04:47:59 -0500
From: Michael Chui <[e-mail]>
Subject: Unlicensed Wireless Data Communication
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University


                Unlicensed Wireless Data Communication
              "Will All the Public Beaches Be Auctioned?"

The FCC will make three frequency allocation decisions that will
either enhance or severely limit the ways computers are used in
libraries, schools and other institutions. At stake is the
availability of frequencies for nonlicensed, no-charge wireless data
communications (Data-PCS) within buildings and on campuses, as well as
for low-cost wireless access to the Internet and other off-site
resources. If the FCC is to continue to provide, and even expand, the
bands for public nonlicensed communications, the education community
must express its interests and concerns. Otherwise, these bands are at
risk of being auctioning to fee-based commercial licensees.

     The FCC has been auctioning off a good deal of the available
spectrum; primarily, to voice services where the winning bidder
effectively purchases spectrum wholesale and resells it retail to the
public. Whether this is a good model for voice is not at issue here.
But, however, it is clearly a poor model for data, particularly local
area networks or mobile peer-to-peer computing. A school, library or
other nonprofit institution, could not use the low cost alternative of
wireless data if they had to pay $.35 a minute per device while the
network was in operation. Moreover, private, pay for service wireless
networks are built primarily for voice and can accommodate data at
only fairly low speeds. On the other hand, estimates to install wired
networks for all US public K-12 schools in the range from $18-20
billion. Unlicensed wireless data networks, in a nationwide clear 10
MHz band, could provide high speed (1 to 2 Megabits) transmission at
costs significantly lower than a wired network.

     We believe that unlicensed wireless can provide an important
alternative to wired networks for schools, libraries and other
institutions. Currently, a number of companies have been experimenting
and offering commercial products in the 900 and 2400 MHz bands.
Because these bands are also the home to industrial, scientific and
medical devices, they are interference laden causing the wireless data
devices to operate a lower speeds than a band dedicated to data
transmission. Accordingly, Apple and other computer companies have
been fighting for the past ten years to obtain a nation-wide clear
piece of spectrum for unlicensed data.

Priority One:  Fulfilling the Data-PCS band at 2390-2400 MHz.

     The most important task for the FCC is to provide
permanently-dedicated, exclusive spectrum for Data-PCS, in sufficient
quantity to allow modern computer communications. The FCC can do so;
it was recently given jurisdiction over several radio bands previously
used by the Federal government. Among those bands, the segment
2390-2400 MHz is particularly attractive for nonlicensed data
applications:

     * It is adjacent to the present 2400-2483.5 MHz "Part 15" band in
which the majority of industry development is now taking place;
therefore equipment can be readily extended to use it.

     * Because the band is not occupied, many measures required to
deal with interference in the traditional Part 15 bands will not be
required.  Data rates (bandwidths) can be increased and equipment
costs significantly reduced.

    The FCC is now seeking public comment about the best way to use
this band (2390-2400 MHz). Educators, librarians, public interest
groups and other information professionals should express support for
dedicating it to no-charge nonlicensed Data-PCS rather than to yet
more license-auctioned, fee-based services. Correspondence to the FCC
on this topic should refer to "ET Docket 94-32."

Priority Two: Retaining the Part 15 band at 2400 MHz.

     As noted above there are two public unlicensed bands available
for use without charged. While they are not optimal for wireless data,
the are very useful for experimentation and offering of lower speed
data transmission.  Of the two, the 2400 MHz Part 15 band is the more
important in that devices operating there are able to obtain higher
data transmission rates (although not as high as possible with a
dedicate 10 MHz of spectrum such as proposed above for Data-PCS). The
FCC has proposed auctioning off the lower 15 MHz (2402-2417 MHz), even
though acknowledging the severe impairment of the band. The FCC's
original inclination to retain this band for nonlicensed Part 15
operation should receive full support, expressed in letters to the
Commission on ET Docket 94-32.

Priority Three:  Preserving the "900 MHz" nonlicensed (Part 15) band.

The 900 MHz band has been the incubator for development of a wide
array of nonlicensed consumer and business products, including
cordless phones, utility meter readers and energy-saving control
systems, wireless earphones and speakers, handheld rental car check-in
and point-of-sale terminals, and first-generation wireless computer
networks. New networks offering low flat-rate wide-area data
communications are also being deployed nationwide in this band.
Millions of such unlicensed devices are in operation today and more
are being turned on daily. Obviously, retaining the 900 MHz band is
essential for low-cost products that consumers expect to continue
using.


The FCC has proposed to give a priority license -- meaning any
unlicensed device that interferes must leave the channel -- to a
vehicle location system. Unfortunately, the 20 year old technology
proposed is said to be very interference prone. Thus, most current 900
MHz unlicensed devices would be banned (subject to penalties of up to
$10,000 per day). We are not opposed to the service, which could be
quite valuable. The FCC should, however, require that effective
spectrum conservation technologies be applied as a condition for
permanently authorizing these stations. The monitoring services could
thrive in only a small segment (certainly no more than 4 MHz) of the
900 band and the millions of Part 15 products could continue to use
the remainder.

Public comment to the FCC on "Docket 93-61" is needed, calling for
restricting these preclusive monitoring stations to a small part of
the band, and for continuing to make the band available for
nonlicensed devices.

The Necessary Sum of the Parts.

Each frequency band being scrutinized by the FCC has important
characteristics that define nonlicensed wireless communications and
the ways we will or will not benefit from these technologies.  The FCC
also now has the opportunity to allocate additional dedicated,
exclusive nonlicensed spectrum to be available to all users. Each band
and each set of rules is part of an essential array of permanent
spectrum resources. If, however, the regulatory process continues as a
series of unconnected negative decisions as is possible without public
expressions of interest and concern, there will be no public spectrum
resources. All of the public beaches will be auctioned off.

Each of us can envision how we might use nonlicensed wireless communications.
Now we must convey our visions to the FCC. If we do so effectively,
the process will serve us well.

How to be heard:

The summary of the discussion above is that the FCC should be told
that there are compelling demands and values for nonlicensed wireless
bands, that cannot be met through licensed radio services. You should
ask the FCC to take every necessary step to fulfill these needs.

Your written comments to the FCC can be sent to:

Chairman Reed Hundt
Federal Communications Commission
Room 814
1919 M Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20554

You may also wish to describe your objectives to your elected
representatives in Washington and ask them to contact the FCC.

For further information: Jim Burger [[e-mail]], Director of
Government Affairs, Apple Computer, Inc. [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Great News for BellSouth ISDN
Date: 14 Dec 1994 06:34:10 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


I found out today that BellSouth just got approval for providing ISDN
through Foreign Exchange circuits at no additional charge to the
customer.

They previously had approval for no additional cost service when it
was provided from an alternate CO in the same serving wire center.
Now, even if your CO doesn't have it, you get it for the same price as
if it did.

Of course, this doesn't get around the mileage limitations for
service.  But it expands the number of homes and businesses that can
be served significantly.

If you want to know if you or your business qualifies for ISDN, or
just want additional information on pricing, hardware or ISDN ISP's in
your area send e-mail with your name, address and telephone number to:

                        [e-mail]

We take care of all aspects of implementing ISDN for businesses,
individuals, and even ISP's (on behalf of their customers).

We also provide turnkey ISDN implementation (hardware, pre-configure,
dial-in Async/Sync test connection sites, interface with BellSouth)
for those users that want a one stop shop - and we specialize in
Work-At-Home (telecommuting) and Internet Connectivity Solutions.


Ed Goldgehn                                     E-Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr. Vice President                              Voice:  [phone]
Open Communication Networks, Inc.               Fax:    [phone]
   An Enhanced Service Provier of BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.
    WWW Server for On-Line ordering and information coming soon.

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

From: [e-mail] (Aaron Woolfson)
Subject: WilTel Service and Performance
Date: 13 Dec 1994 15:47:55 -0800
Organization: University of the Pacific


I would like to hear anyone's experiences who has utilized the WilTel
network lately.  Our company has people PICed to WilTel and also is
presently submitting ASR's for T1's through their network, and some
really strange things have been happening lately which has bothered me
and placed some doubt in my mind regarding anyone other than AT&T for
some of our long haul services.

Approximately 3:35pm, ALL of the connections placed through WilTel
were abruptly cut off with a hard "CLICK" and I had to re-establish.
It would be fine if it were not for downloading multi-megabyte files
over slow analog modems.  Argh!!

Has anyone using WilTel had any experiences with Frame Slip (the
static stuff that occurs!) or echo cancellers not being properly
balanced?  If so, I would like to hear your experiences.


Thank you.

Sincerely,

Aaron Woolfson
CEO TelSwitch, Inc.
dba Delta Telecommunications

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

From: James Grossman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Telecommuting and Urban Design/RE Dev
Date: 13 Dec 1994 21:29:03 GMT
Organization: Grossman Family Properties


I am seeking information and research leads on telecommuting, home
office development, and home-based work and their impact on existing
communities and real estate development.  The problem I am having to
this point is that there is little quantified data on this trend.
There are many sources with anecdotal information and speculation
about what impacts these trends may have on urban planning,
"neo-traditional" community development, transportation systems,
migration to rural communities, etc., but little to back it up.
Please help with any suggestions and/or references.  I am preparing
materials for a University class I teach and a workshop for the Urban
Land Institute in 1995.

Please send any info to me at [e-mail], in addition
to posting here if it is appropriate.

TIA

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Klopfenstein)
Subject: Cable Industry WWW Sites?
Date: 14 Dec 1994 11:14:28 GMT
Organization: Bowling Green State University


The telephone industry is already well represented with company WWW
sites.  The only cable television site I am aware of is Cable Labs.

Where are the cablecos?  Is there a site that is updating them as they
come online?


Bruce C. Klopfenstein             |  [e-mail]
Department of Telecommunications  |  [e-mail]
Bowling Green State University    |  [phone]; 372-2224
Bowling Green, OH  43403-0235     |  fax [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph H Allen)
Subject: T1 + Ethernet -> Fiber
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 00:04:52 GMT


My company is upgrading both their computer system (my responsibility)
and their phone system (outside contractor).  In the process, we are
installing a cable between two sites.  Currently, this cable will
contain a fiber pair for linking two lans together and 75-pairs of
copper for the PBX.

The fiber costs $.45 per foot and the copper costs ~$1.10/foot.  The
distance is 3000 ft.

I plan on using these little $100 boxes which convert ethernet to
fiber and use some extra PCs w/linux as bridges.

I would like to know if there are boxes which take both ethernet and
T1 (or whatever signal a pdx is likely to have) and multiplex them
together onto the fiber so that the copper cable is not needed.  If
they exist, what are they called and how much are they?  I know next
to nothing about PBXs, so do you think this likely to be worthwhile?
Is it likely that the PBX can use a single T1 (or whatever) more
easily than seperate copper pairs?


[e-mail]  (192.74.137.5)  Joseph H. Allen

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

From: Roman Ratayczak <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help With Init String For Dialing
Date: 14 Dec 1994 13:36:13 GMT
Organization: Rechnerbetrieb Informatik - RWTH Aachen


To all people in Germany which have problems to dial immediately after
they had a busy Line.I've got a Creatix SG144 Modem and want to
know which letters I have to set in the init string so I can dial as
often as I want. Someone told me to try the combinatio AT*F or AT**F
but this went wrong.I hope that there is somebody who can give me a
hint for my problem.


Thanks

ROMAN RATAYCZAK    E-MAIL: [e-mail]

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

Date: 14 Dec 94 09:41:59 EST
From: Brian Moura <[e-mail]>
Subject: School Tech Award to San Carlos City and Schools


        San Carlos City/School Press Release

For More Information, Call:

Brian Moura, City of San Carlos
[phone]

Don Shalvey, San Carlos School District
[phone]

Costis Toregas, Public Technology Inc.
[phone]

                    For Release 9:00 A.M.
                    December 14, 1994


    SAN CARLOS CITY & SCHOOLS WIN NATIONAL AWARD
PTI Innovation Award for "Technology Goes to School" Program

    SAN CARLOS, CA -- December 14, 1994 -- The City of San Carlos and
the San Carlos Elementary School District announced today that their
Technology Goes to School program has won a national Technology
Achievement Award from Public Technology Inc. (PTI).  The award was
announced at a Public Technology Inc. (PTI) conference in San
Francisco and at last week's National League of Cities Annual
Conference in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

    The PTI Technology Achievement Contest drew over 250 nominated
programs from cities and counties throughout the United States.  Of
these nominated programs, 26 were selected as award winners by a panel
of public and private sector experts.

    At the awards ceremony in San Francisco, Public Technology Inc.
President Costis Toregas stated: "The winners of this years national
Technology Achievement Awards tap the power of technology to improve
service to citizens, cut operating costs, and enhance public revenues.
I applaud these agencies and their incredible imagination and daring
spirit.  Their vision has blazed a trail of innovation and success
which other cities and counties can now follow to bring better service
to the public."

    The PTI award for Innovative Management Partnership was given to
the City of San Carlos and the San Carlos School District for their
Technology Goes to School program.  Technology Goes to School is a
unique City/School partnership that helps both agencies make the most
of computer technology.  Under the program, the City of San Carlos
purchases computer hardware and software, develops training programs
and long term technology plans for both the City and the School
District.  By aggregating the school district's purchasing power with
its own, the City has purchased computer technology at lower costs,
saving both partners over $20,000 in the program's first nine months
alone.  In addition, the program has been involved in completing the
City Hall local area network, securing a $50,000 grant for a student
multimedia database to enhance the classroom experience, installation
of a fiber optic link to the City Senior Center and a training program
for top school administrators and principals called "Technology Boot
Camp."

    School Board Trustee Henk van der Schoor said that "The Technology
Goes to School program has been a very positive experience for the San
Carlos School District.  It has enabled us to take our existing
efforts to bring computer technology to the schools to the next level.
The exciting part is that the program is just beginning.  I think this
program is going to continue to pay dividends for the school district
and the school staff, teachers, parents and students in the coming
months."

    San Carlos Mayor Kevin Kelly stated "I am very pleased to accept
the award from Public Technology Inc. (PTI) on behalf of the City of
San Carlos.  This is the second year in a row that the City has
received a national technology achievement award from PTI.  (Last
year's award was for the "Cost Avoidance Reserve" cost cutting
program.)  I think that demonstrates the ability of this City Council
and the City staff in San Carlos to continue to deliver innovative
solutions to the problems that face our citizens.  I am also excited
about the fact that the Technology Goes to School program enables both
the City and School District to do more with technology while cutting
costs at the same time.  Achieving both of these goals at the same
time is truly impressive."


ABOUT PUBLIC TECHNOLOGY INC. (PTI)
==================================

    Public Technology, Inc. (PTI) is the non-profit technology
organization of the National League of Cities (NLC), the National
Association of Counties (NACo), and the International City/County
Management Association (ICMA).  PTI is made up of over 150 cities and
counties throughout the United States who have been invited to join
the organization in light of their track record of innovative
solutions to the problems of local government.  Through research by
its member agencies, PTI creates technology based solutions to
problems and advances the state-of-the-art in public management in
cities and counties nationwide.  The City of San Carlos was invited to
join PTI in 1988 and became a full member of the organization shortly
thereafter.


ABOUT THE TECHNOLOGY ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS PROGRAM
===============================================

    The annual PTI Technology Achievement Awards program is one facet
of a broader effort to encourage and honor innovation in local
government.  It is designed to spotlight the innovative ideas and
practices of America's most innovative cities and counties.

    The 1994 Technology Innovation Awards were judged by a national
panel of public and private sector experts.  This panel included Chuck
Anderson, ICMA Director of Central and Eastern European Programs;
Winifred Lyday, NACo Information Technology Consultant; Jeff Fletcher,
NLC Director of Public Affairs; Uly Ford, Vice President of Waste
Management, Inc.; and John Martin, Managing Editor of Governing
magazine.

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Y.C. Woo)
Subject: Looking For References For Paging Systems
Date: 14 Dec 1994 08:29:32 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin


Dear netters:

I am interested in finding out where I can get hold of the documents
that describe the following systems:

1. ERMES  (European Messaging System)
2. APOC (Advanced Paging operators code)
3. Motorola FLEX
4. Motorola TANGO

I would greatly appreciate if you can give me specific references for
the above and/or possible contact to obtain them.


Thanks,

Thomas Woo

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

Date: Tue, 13 Dec 94 17:57:00 EST
From: Mark W. Earle <[e-mail]>
Subject: SBMS - $5 "Roam Admin Fee"


In my bill this month with Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems was an
announcement that the Roamer Admin Fee is going up slightly.
Presently it's $3 for any month there is roaming. This is imposed on
top of any other roaming charges. The new rate is $5/month.

Geesh, I'm tired of paying through the nose to roam. This seems like a
giant step backwards.

Maybe this is how they're responding to the previously mentioned fraud
problem in NYC???


HoHoHO!

mwe    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #447
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23858;
          15 Dec 94 18:11 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02260; Thu, 15 Dec 94 11:14:25 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02253; Thu, 15 Dec 94 11:14:20 CST
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 94 11:14:20 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #448

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 15 Dec 94 11:14:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 448

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Digital Cellular and Fraud Prevention (Jason Hillyard)
    Air Exposure and Fraud (Jan Mandel)
    Telecom Notes From Mini-AIR Dec 94 (Randy Gellens)
    Caller-ID With Call-Waiting (Jason White)
    Roaming Wierdity (Gary Oliver)
    New Phone Numbers in Germany Planned! (Thomas Diessel)
    Information on Auto-Net (Jean Merrick)
    Re: ISDN on DEC Alpha Computers (Mike Durkin)
    Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? (John Levine)
    Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable? (Clifton Sharp)
    Re: T1 + Ethernet -> Fiber (Dan McDonald)

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 America
On Line. 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] (Jason Hillyard)
Subject: Digital Cellular and Fraud Prevention
Date: 15 Dec 1994 01:05:29 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Barbara


With all the uproar over cellular fraud, there seem to be more people
inquiring about the security of digital cellular systems.  There are
two digital cellular systems currently being deployed in the US, CDMA
and TDMA.  Both are designed to prevent the sort of fraud that plagues
the current AMPS cellular system.  This is accomplished by using an
authentication parameter called the Shared Secret Data (SSD) along
with the MIN and ESN.  The SSD is stored in the phone and at the
service provider.  It's never transmitted in the clear, so people
monitoring digital cellular traffic won't be able to read the SSD off
the air.  This should (hopefully) make cell phone cloning impossible.

 From what I've read of the digital cellular specifications, Both CDMA
and TDMA do authentication in the same way.  The point of the authentication
is to check that the SSD in the phone, corresponding to a certain MIN
and ESN, is the same as the SSD stored at the service provider.  The
SSD is a 128 bit number and is split into two 64-bit parts, SSD-A and
SSD-B.  SSD-A is used for authentication and SSD-B is used for voice
encryption.

A simple authentication transation works like this: First, the mobile
unit generates a 32-bit random number called RAND.  This number, along
with the MIN, ESN, and SSD-A are used as input to the CAVE authentication
algorithm.  The output of CAVE is an 18 bit quantity called AUTH.
Then the mobile sends RAND, MIN, ESN, and AUTH to the base (the
service provider).  The base looks up the SSD-A corresponding to that
MIN and ESN and also calculates AUTH.  If the AUTH quantities match,
the mobile is authenticated.

There are several other types of authentication messages, but they all
are basically the same as described above.  There are also procedures
for the base to update the SSD in the mobile and for the mobile to
authenticate the base.  There are even procedures so that dual-mode
phones can do this sort of authentication in analog mode.

Now suppose someone hacked the service provider's computer and snagged
a bunch of corresponding MIN/ESN/SSD data.  If the perpetrator could
figure out the details of programming this information into a phone
they could clone it, right?  Nope.  There is also a quantity called
COUNT sent along during authentication.  This 64 bit number is stored
by the mobile and the base.  It keeps track of how many times the
mobile has been successfully authenticated.  Every time the mobile is
authenticated, the base and mobile increment their COUNT by one.  If a
mobile tries to authenticate and COUNT is off by more than one, the
base can reject it.  So if a phone is cloned, the COUNT in the cloned
phone and the original phone will become mismatched as the phones are
used.

Now suppose someone managed to get hold of a very fresh MIN, ESN, SSD,
and COUNT, and were capable of programming all of this into a phone.
They may be able to clone a phone for a short time, depending on
whether the original phone is used and whether the service provider is
keeping track of COUNT.

That's a quick look at how authentication works in digital cellular.
In general, it's going to be a lot harder for people to clone phones.
But the security of these new systems still needs to be explored.


Jason

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Mandel)
Subject: Air Exposure and Fraud
Date: 14 Dec 1994 11:18:12 -0700
Organization: University of Colorado at Denver


The first time I saw cordless phones I found it unbelievable that the
trasmission goes over the air unscrambled, exposed to anyone who cares
to listed with a simple radio. Ditto with cellular phones -- doubly
unbelievable because cell phones had a microprocessor in them from the
very beginning, thus making some scrambling in principle easier and
chaaper.

I still find it unbelievable. The explosion of fraud resulting from
this is just as predictable as the explosion of viruses we now see on
DOS machines. A basic design flaw: no concern for security whatsoever.

Yes, who could predict viruses back in 1979? But to build an OS with
no concept of file protection is simply stupid. Who could predict the
current cellular mess? But to send confidential transmission (=phone
call and numbers) in the clear over the air with no safeguards
whatsoever is just as stupid.

In all cases, I believe we would be much better off if, at the beginning,
someone had brains enough to put in at least a very basic protection
mechanism - which can be improved as time goes on if need be.  It is
sad that the technology (simple audio scrambling for phones and
unix-style file protection for OS) did exist then...  and it would not
add to the cost too much.


Jan Mandel, Center for Computational Math, University of Colorado at Denver
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The reason not so much concern is given
to cordless phone fraud potential is because generally the range is
much, much shorter and limited. Although since listening to cordless
phones is so much easier -- no mods to be made to your scanner, and
the likelyhood of hearing complete conversations easily, even if only
those in your immediate vicinity most of the time -- peraps there
should be more concern given to this area also.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 14 DEC 94 18:18
Subject: Telecom Notes From Mini-AIR Dec 94


Saw the following items in the Dec 94 mini-AIR (The mini-Annals of
Improbable Research):

   "Book Review: The Nairobi Telephone Directory," by Tim Healey.
   This reference work has been deliberately constructed so as to
   encourage the contemplative life. Some, but by no means all, names
   are listed by forename rather than surname. Alphabetical order is
   enhanced in new ways (A,B,C,D,E,S,E,M,E,F,G,...). The Classified
   Section headings invoke long chains of "see also" references,
   often ending with nonexistent sections.

   Research reports that merit a trip to the library:

   "The Orthogonal-Random Waveform Dichotomy for Digital Personal
   Communications," Andrew J.  Viterbi, "IEEE Personal Communications,"
   vol 1, no 1, Q1, 94, pp.  18-24.  (Thanks to Pat O'Leary for bringing
   this to our attention.)


Randall Gellens       [e-mail]
[phone]        fax [phone]
Mail Stop MV 237      Net**2 656-6350

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

From: [e-mail] (Jason White)
Subject: Caller-ID With Call-Waiting
Date: 15 Dec 1994 07:34:12 GMT
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa (USA)


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

>               Frequently Asked Questions About Caller-ID
>                            v1.1 Mar. 1994
>
>        4) How is the Caller-ID information provided ?
>
>        As  a  1200  baud, 7 data bits, 1 stop bit  data  stream  usually
>        transmitted following the first and before the second ring signal
>        on  the line.

  I received an over-sized post card from US West a few weeks ago
announcing that persons with Caller-ID will be able to see
numbers/names of people nationwide starting mid-1995.  It was also
mentioned that Caller-ID would work with call-waiting; if you're on
the phone and get the call-waiting beep, you'd also see who was
calling you so you could "decide whether it's worth switching to the
other call."  My question is: how is this implemented.  I'd hate to
think that I'm going to have a 1200 baud data burst come roaring over
the line while I'm trying to talk.  Anyone know anything more about
how this?


   Jason D. White        Durham Center Operations Staff
 [e-mail]     Repeater Chairman, Cyclone Amateur Radio Club
Iowa State University    Ames, Iowa


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not sure how they plan to do that.
We do know that CID and call waiting are *partially* compatible in
this one sense: normally, the CID information is transmitted between
the first and second ring. In the event you are on a call, and get the
call waiting signal, you can let it 'ring' several times (where the
waiting call is concerned) and you will get the CID information once
you hang up between the first and second rings *you hear on your end*
once the original connection is gone. The catch is, do not 'flash' to
get the second call; finish your first call and (assuming the new
call chooses to wait and listen to ringing) once you have hung up then
sit there for two audible rings on your end to get the CID display.

Now I am told it is possible to also do this: so that the waiting
caller does not give up under the assumption there is no answer, you
do flash, but only long enough to say 'please hold', then you flash
back to the original conversation and finish it. Once finished with
that conversation then *hang up the receiver*. The wonderful telco
will give you a 'courtesy ring' (several of them as needed) to 'remind'
you that you left a party holding. Let it ring twice, or at least a
couple seconds after the first ring you hear. The CID will get
displayed, and you can choose to answer the call or treat it as
desired. So if it is a party you don't want to talk to, well, he
did hear you say 'please hold', but that's all he got from you.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 23:30:26 +0000
From: Gary Oliver <[e-mail]>
Subject: Roaming Wierdity


I live in the Mid Willamette valley in Oregon and have an account with
USWest Cellular here.  On my current phone (DiamondTel 22x) and the
previous one (DiamondTel 92T) a strange thing sometimes happens while
crossing from the GTE area north of here.  Occasionally while crossing
back to USWest territory after roaming in GTE-land, I will attempt to
make a call or access my voice mail or some other thing and will get a
message from GTE (note that my phone thinks I'm back in USWest
territory) saying "feature not available" or "dial a 1 first" etc.

So, to test this, the other day I set my phone to HOME ONLY, turned on
its status monitor (to show system ID) and waited as I was heading south
until just the moment the service available indicator came on.  At this
point I showed a signal strengh at the upper limit of the displayable
value so I assumed it would be acceptable to making calls.  I tried
to call my voice mail and received a GTE announcement that the feature
wasn't available, but at THAT TIME, the status monitor was displaying the
ID of my USWest service.

Is there something strange going on here with?  Do cellular carriers have
overlapped IDs at their boundaries?  Seems stupid to me too.

I called USWest 611 and asked.  They gave the standard answer - "must be
your phone."

I have yet to call GTE.

Is it my phone?  Since the "problem" has existed with two models from
the same manufacturere, I realize it could be a common problem.  But
the status monitor thing has me puzzled.


Thanks,

Gary Oliver   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Diessel)
Subject: New Phone Numbers in Germany Planned!
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1994 12:37:58 +0100
Organization: University of the Federal Armed Forces Munich


The German business magazine "Witschaftswoche" reports that the German
secretary of Post and Telecommunications has to decide about a new
telephone numbering plan. This is a prerequisite for the introduction
of competition in the German telephone market (planed for 1/1/98).
CEPT has made several suggestions for an Europe-wide numbering plan
(introducing "3" as the European country code). A decision has to be
made by the end of 1995. Germany has at the moment about 37 million
phone lines.


Thomas Diessel
University of the Federal Armed Forces Munich
Computer Science Department - D-85577 Neubiberg, Germany

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

Subject: Information on Auto-Net
From: [e-mail] (Jean Merrick)
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 94 23:18:00 -0600
Organization: The Lunatic Fringe BBS - Richardson, Tx - [phone]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jean Merrick)


         Auto-Net  Internet  Automation v3.0

AutoNet will be appearing in an Upcoming Internet BOOK from Que
Publishing.  Make sure and look for it!

***    New graphical, colorful interface!    ***

Added ability to specify PORT, PROVIDER, and SPEED inside Autonet.cfg
Current command sent to modem is now displayed on the title bar Now
has DIRECT CONNECT option for people with direct TcpIp access.

Main menu added;
Converted some windows to explosion-style windows;
Add graphical effects to some menus when they close;
Enhanced UQWK support for both personal and USENET group reading;
Added UPLOAD capability;
Added GETMAIL.1 and SENDMAIL.1 agendas, showing how to use UQWK for
offline mail reading/responding.

AUTONET OFFERS:

Download TERABYTES of Internet files without forcing you to sit in
front of your computer for hours.  FREE new file leeching.

Perform ARCHIE searches for files, at a variety of archie sites.

Mail your letters automatically, even to hundreds of recipients.

Allows super-advanced Internet access using a SHELL account. No
expensive SLIP/PPP accounts required.

Does FINGER searches quick and easy, and captures them into a
file of your choice.

Upload/Download files, FAX your associates across the Internet,
FINGER, .QWK packets, USENET mail, LEECH Internet sites, all without
being home!

Full mouse support, hammers at Internet sites that are busy;
Obtain the latest sports, weather, and daily info;
Uses personal "signature file";
Download Usenet BINARY files;
Post Usenet messages -- up to a thousand of them;
Fax people from the Internet;
"Enhanced" terminal mode, complete with hotkeys and menus.

Find the latest new files and games ... WHILE YOU'RE NOT HOME!

Learn how to navigate the Internet with AutoNet's TEACH mode.

Use an advanced scripting language to complete all your tasks.

Get updates to your favorite programs automatically - direct
from their support Internet site.

Access the Internet with super-speed.  You cannot type as fast
as AutoNet can stuff the keys for you!

Get a free TRIAL copy from local bulletin boards (filename AUTONT30.ZIP):

FREQ:  AUTONET   from   1:124/7017
or mail:   SEND AUTONET   to   [e-mail]

AVRock - no login needed!  [phone]
Hogard Software Solutions  [phone]
Blues Cafe [phone]
MindLink   [phone]
TechLine   [phone]

Internet:      wuarchive.wustl.edu  /pub/MSDOS_UPLOADS/utils

The author may be contacted:  [e-mail]   CompuServe: 71441,2723


The Lunatic Fringe BBS * 214-235-5288 * 3 nodes * Richardson, TX*
UseNet,ILink,RIME,FIDO,Intelec,LuciferNet,PlanoNet,U'NI-net and more!
Free 30 Day Trial Subscription * Upload/Download on First Call!!

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

From: Mike Durkin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ISDN on DEC Alpha Computers
Organization: Digital Equipment Computer Users Society
Date: 15 Dec 94 06:41:22 -0500


Dale Farmer writes:

> Today I was building a DEC Alpha workstation for a customer and
> noticed on the back a little jack labeled ISDN, and packaged with it

Might be related to this recent press announcement ...

  DigiBoard Announces Communications Support for Digital Equipment
    Corporation's Line of High-Performance Alpha Computer Systems

MINNEAPOLIS, November 21, 1994 -- Digital Equipment Corporation and
DigiBoard today announced asynchronous serial communications support
for Digital's new generation of open AlphaServer systems running
Microsoft's Windows NT V3.5 and Digital's DEC OSF/1 V3.0 operating
systems.  Also being announced is DigiBoard's support for ISDN and
X.25 for Digital's 64-bit Alpha systems running Windows NT V3.5.

             ====================================
All Digital Partner News releases are archived on ftp.digital.com in the
/pub/Digital/info/pr-news directory.

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

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1994 06:49:44 -0500
From: [e-mail] (John Levine)
Subject: Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?


> Question holds: who would want to remain anonymous when calling a
> residential phone besides a prank caller, or someone cheating on his
> wife who doesn't want his wife to know?

Very few people want to remain anonymous when calling a residence.
But since we're talking aboud Calling Number ID, anonymity has little
to do with it.  It doesn't ID the caller, it IDs the line from which
the call is placed.  Can you really say that you never, ever, make a
call when it's none of the callee's business where you're calling
from?

The standard example is a doctor whose answering service screens the
calls but returns patients' calls from home when they call evenings
and weekends.

Or you're a lawyer or consultant visiting client A, and you use the
phone to call client B to let them know you're coming over.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail]
Primary perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies"

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

From: [e-mail] (Clifton T. Sharp)
Subject: Re: Idea: Residential Always Gets CID; Business Blockable?
Organization: as little as possible
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1994 06:47:53 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Clifton T. Sharp) writes:

> A doctor returning patient calls from his home to save time might not
> want patients to have a home phone to call at every hour of the day or
> night.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Are you saying its okay for the doctor
> to waste *your* time by being very late for appointments (while you
> sit there waiting) and not allow you to waste his?  Sorry, but I do
> not buy the argument, 'I am a professional and have a right to be
> private at my home but you do not have a right to the same privacy
> at home because you are only a commoner ...' If you want to talk to
> me, you begin by introducing yourself, period.   PAT]

The very last time I had contact with my doctor was a time when I had
suddenly gotten very sick with an infected chest.  His office said he
had left for the weekend; I expressed an urgency about reaching him,
and they contacted him.  Had he not called me from home, he wouldn't
have had time to make his plane.

Now, as it happens, he doesn't particularly care whether people do get
his phone number through CNID.  But in this particular situation, if
he _did_ care, I would have ended up with a $300 emergency room bill
instead of the $8 pharmacy bill under the originally proposed
scenario, since he wouldn't have been able to block CNID delivery
under it.


Cliff Sharp   WA9PDM
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan McDonald)
Subject: Re: T1 + Ethernet -> Fiber
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 18:58:19 PDT
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Joseph H Allen) writes:

> My company is upgrading both their computer system (my responsibility)
> and their phone system (outside contractor).  In the process, we are
> installing a cable between two sites.  Currently, this cable will
> contain a fiber pair for linking two lans together and 75-pairs of
> copper for the PBX.

> The fiber costs $.45 per foot and the copper costs ~$1.10/foot.  The
> distance is 3000 ft.

> I plan on using these little $100 boxes which convert ethernet to
> fiber and use some extra PCs w/linux as bridges.

> I would like to know if there are boxes which take both ethernet and
> T1 (or whatever signal a pdx is likely to have) and multiplex them
> together onto the fiber so that the copper cable is not needed.  If
> they exist, what are they called and how much are they?  I know next
> to nothing about PBXs, so do you think this likely to be worthwhile?
> Is it likely that the PBX can use a single T1 (or whatever) more
> easily than seperate copper pairs?

Sure.  There are lots of muxing techniques.  Probably you'd run a
single T3 and dedicate 10 Meg to the data, and the other 35meg to
voice, giving you about 350 phone lines.  But, the equipment to do
that will cost much more than the cost of the copper cable ...

On the other hand, if you just add two more pairs of fiber, you can
run a T3 or even an OC-3 between your PBX's.  If you make one a master
and the other a slave, you can link them together as a single
manageable unit.  The cost of adding a couple of fibers, and
eliminating a copper cable with all of the lightning protectors and
tails, blocks, installation, etc, will probably come out low enough to
be able to afford a couple of fiber cards for your PBX with enough
change to afford a couple of real fiber bridges (please write for
recommendations as to brands - I'd need more information as to your
needs).


Daniel J. McDonald                 home: [e-mail]
Telecom Designer                   work: [e-mail]
Industrial Design Corporation      pots: 1.503.653.6919
Disclaimer:  my views are my own and no one else's

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #448
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24074;
          15 Dec 94 18:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03217; Thu, 15 Dec 94 11:48:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03207; Thu, 15 Dec 94 11:48:02 CST
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 94 11:48:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #449

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 15 Dec 94 11:48:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 449

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Routing to the Closest Point (Tim Gorman)
    Re: Help Converting V&H Coordinates to Longitude and Latitude (W. Ritchie)
    Re: TAP, Pager Information Wanted (Kevin Kadow)
    Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute (Travis Russell)
    Re: T1 + Ethernet -> Fiber (John Rice)
    Re: POCSAG Paging Protocol - Documentation (Frode Weierud)
    Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (Bill Weaver)
    Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone? (Eric Tholome)
    Information About MNP 10/EC (Enhanced Cellular) (Stephen Palm)

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 America
On Line. 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 Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Cellular Roaming in New York Suspended
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1994 13:08:15 GMT
Organization: Oppedahl & Larson


In article <[e-mail]> Richard W. Sabourin
<[e-mail]> writes:

> This brings up something that I'm wondering about, as a cellular "newbie".

> An office-mate and I just signed up with Nynex within the past three
> weeks; we both bought Motorola DPCs from them, and they include a new
> "feature" that I haven't heard of before:  A four-digit PIN which must be
> entered (followed by Send) after the desired number.  (Calls to 911 and
> customer service are excepted.)

> Can somebody tell me a little more detail about what's going on?  I
> can't believe the PIN is going out as DTMF; but even if it's going out
> as control data, can it be any harder to snoop and spoof than the ESN?

> So, is the PIN check is implemented in the phone itself?  Or does my
> new flip phone implement PGP? :)

This was throughly flogged in alt.dcom.telecom a couple of weeks ago.

The phone itself plays no role in this PIN code dialing other than as
a way to generate DTMF digits.  So no, the check is not implemented in
the phone itself.

The ESN and phone number of the phone get communicated on the control
channel, and that the PIN code is communicated via DTMF on a voice
channel.  Apparently most phone cloners lack the intelligence and/or
equipment to monitor both channels.  They only have equipment and
intelligence, supposedly, to obtain the ESN and phone number from the
control channel.

The benefit here is to the cellular companies, since they can reduce
(they claim, eliminate) cloning and thus eliminate having to write off
the cost of the unauthorized calls.  Of course, to do this they have
to steal ten seconds here and ten seconds there from you and me,
forcing us to dial the PIN codes.


Carl Oppedahl
Oppedahl & Larson, patent law firm
[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 94 00:42:38 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Routing to the Closest Point


[e-mail] (Ted Koppel) writes in Telecom Digest No. 445 writes:

> The {Atlanta Journal-Constitution} of November 16, 1994 had a short
> paragraph announcing:

> "A new service approved by the state PUC will save consumers the
> trouble of looking up the location of the nearest pizza parlor or
> furniture store.  The service allows business with multiple locations
> to select and advertise a single telephone number that is easy for
> customers to remember.  Southern Bell will deliver calls automatically
> to the business closest to the caller.  Southern Bell, which has
> already begun this service in Florida, will charge businesses 12 cents
> per call plus a monthly fee of $45 to participate."

> Questions:

> 1. How does Southern Bell make these geographical decisions?  Central
> office prefixes? City limits?  County limits?

> 2. Will the specific branches of a store still be accessible through
> their own direct phone numbers?  (That is, I may actually want to call
> a branch further from my home than the one that Southern Bell routes
> me to.)

I suspect you will find these decisions are made based on zip codes.

If you know the direct number of the store they should be reachable. I
know of no way this is being done that would prevent this.

This is probably being done using AIN (Advanced Intelligent Network).
While it sounds complicated it really isn't. Somewhere in the network
the number being called hits an AIN trigger. This could be done based
on the ten digit number in the toll tandem offices. When this trigger
is hit, the switch sends a query to a data base somewhere. The query
would include data like the called number, the calling number, and
whatever the SS7 TCAP message and AIN feature allows. The database
then looks up the called number and based on time-of-day/day-of-week/
calling-nbr-zip-code/etc determines the forwarding number and returns
it to the switch that started the query.

This really isn't any different than the 800 database operation in use
today. It just has a fancier name.


Name: Tim Gorman   E-mail: [e-mail] (Tim Gorman)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Help Converting V&H Coordinates to Longitude and Latitude
Date: 15 Dec 1994 04:24:07 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, C. Edward Chow <[e-mail].
uccs.edu> writes:

> I am working on a project that needs to convert switching nodes'
> locations expressed in terms of V&H coordinates to those in
> Longitude and Latitude coordinates.  I checked with telecommunications
> references in the library but can not find the definition of telephone
> network V&H coordinates.  Can someone help pointing to the right
> references or explain it?  Thanks.

As I recall the V&H system is based on the overlay of an orthogonal
grid on a equal area projection of North America. This map projection
results in equal map distance between all points that are equal by
great circle distance. The grid is rotated about 30% from the map
north/south. As I recall the numeric values are such that 16 bit fixed
point arithmetic is convenient for calculations of distance which work
out to abount .1 mile.

As you probably know by now you will need to know the exact type of
equal area projection used by the system and its reference points. The
conversion is trivial from V&H to map space and a bit complex from map
space to Lat & Log.

I saw a licensed program once to do this but unfortunately I can't
remember where and in any case the license terms were Dracoian.

You may find the an article on the system in a very old issue of the Bell
System Technical Journal.

Sounds like a good project for a student to put in the public domain.

Hope this helps.


Wally Ritchie   Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin Kadow)
Subject: Re: TAP, Pager Information Wanted
Organization: Ripco Internet BBS, Chicago
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 1994 06:55:12 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, martin johnson <martyj@mrcnext.
cso.uiuc.edu > wrote:

> I am trying to get a automatic paging function into my PC.  I intend
> to use KERMIT scripted to use TAP, Telocator Alph- numeric Protocol.
> The problem is, I cant locate a copy of the TAP protocol. Does anyone
> on the net know where I can get this, or for that matter, any paging
> service protocols?  If anyone has already done this with KERMIT, I
> would of course appreciate any suggestions.

I have a DOS program that automatically sends alpha pages, and a copy
of the TAP protocol (with comments on some inconsistencies). The
program is called 'ACS Page' and until you register it prepends
***UNREGISTERED*** to all pages sent.


[e-mail]    Kevin Kadow

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

From: [e-mail] (Travis Russell)
Subject: Re: 1200 Bell Atlantic Workers Suspended in Labor Dispute
Date: 14 Dec 1994 21:19:48 GMT
Organization: Tekelec, Inc.


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

> As to Pat's statement about the company's draconian reaction to this
> situation, this is NOT the first time in the very recent past that the
> company has reacted this way. We'll go back to the 'shoe incident' of
> Oct 5th this year, when we were only given 12 days notice previous to
> that date to purchase a pair of steel-toed safety shoes, and we were
> told that we must be wearing the shoes when we reported for work on
> Oct 5th. So because of shortages at stores due to high demand, a small
> number of employees reported to work without the shoes anyway, and
> they were suspended without pay. Gee we don't see a pattern here do we?

It's been awhile since I have had to deal with Bell as an employer,
but I remember a similar situation with safety glasses. The company
safety policy stated that safety glasses were to be worn by all
employees whenever a tool was used, regardless of the type of tool. If
this was ignored, the penalty was a day off without pay.

Sounds like the shoes were a safety violation, regardless of the time
given to purchase them. I am kind of surprised at the short notice,
but Bell was always good at creating policies quickly and expecting
them to be enforced just as quickly.

I could cite other instances of "safety violations" that were clearly
beyond the control of the employee. Thats just how Bell works. Glad I
am out!!


Travis Russell    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Rice)
Subject: Re: T1 + Ethernet -> Fiber
Date: 15 Dec 94 03:30:22 CST
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Joseph H Allen) writes:

> My company is upgrading both their computer system (my responsibility)
> and their phone system (outside contractor).  In the process, we are
> installing a cable between two sites.  Currently, this cable will
> contain a fiber pair for linking two lans together and 75-pairs of
> copper for the PBX.

If you are going to be in the facilities for a significant length of
time, don't limit yourself to 1 fiber pair and 75 copper pairs. A year
or three down the road, you'll be kicking yourself. Compared to the
installation costs, the cost of the cable is not significant. Put in
6-12 fiber pairs and 300-600 copper pairs.

> The fiber costs $.45 per foot and the copper costs ~$1.10/foot.  The
> distance is 3000 ft.

What's the installation cost ?

> I plan on using these little $100 boxes which convert ethernet to
> fiber and use some extra PCs w/linux as bridges.

> I would like to know if there are boxes which take both ethernet and
> T1 (or whatever signal a pdx is likely to have) and multiplex them
> together onto the fiber so that the copper cable is not needed.  If
> they exist, what are they called and how much are they?  I know next
> to nothing about PBXs, so do you think this likely to be worthwhile?
> Is it likely that the PBX can use a single T1 (or whatever) more
> easily than seperate copper pairs?

For PBX extensions, the economics of putting in mux/demux says copper
is cheaper, until you get into the line capacity that justifies a
remote switching equipment and trunking. That plus the 'trend' is
toward digital PBXs and phones. This is fine till you want to put in a
modem line and find out that you can't run it over the digital line
from the PBX. At that point you'll be glad to have a copper pair to
run a POTS line over for your modem.

We originally ran T-1 between two buildings to serve remote extensions.
When we 'burried' cable to support a fiber network link, we found that
the costs more than justified putting in 600pairs and ripping out the
t-1s'. The biggest cost was digging the trench :-), and ours wasn't as
long as yours will be.


John Rice   K9IJ     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Frode Weierud)
Subject: Re: POCSAG Paging Protocol - Documentation
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: CERN European Lab for Particle Physics
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1994 07:06:28 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Marek
Ancukiewicz) writes:

> Does anybody know how could I get some info on the protocols used in
> in Motorola pagers? As far as I know they are called POCSAG and are
> not proprietary to Motorola. I would be grateful for any help,
> particularly for references to documentation.

Here we go again! Would it not be an idea to get this on the FAQ?

To my knowledge Motorola are using their own protocols going under the
names GOLAY and FLEX.

The specification for POCSAG or CCIR Radio-Paging Code No.1 (RPC1) is
given in CCIR Recommendation 584-1 : "Standard Codes and Formats for
International Radio Paging".

The protocol for the GOLAY paging standard, together with codes used
in Japan and the Swedish Radio-Paging system is given in CCIR Report
900-2 : "Radio Paging Systems".

Another somewhat more general recommendation is CCIR Recommendation
539-2 : "Technical and Operational Characteristics of Future International
Radio-Paging Systems".

The recommendations and the report are to be found in Recommendations
of the CCIR, 1990, Volume VIII which can be obtained through the ITU
in Geneva, Switzerland or in sales outlets in the different countries.

    Internatinal Telecommunication Union
    Place de Nations,
    CH-1211 Geneva 20,
    Switzerland.

    Phone: [phone]
    Fax  : [phone]


Frode Weierud        Phone    [phone]
CERN, SL        Fax    [phone]
CH-1211 Geneva     23    E-mail    [e-mail]
Switzerland        or    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Weaver)
Subject: Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?
Date: 14 Dec 1994 21:08:58 GMT
Organization: DigiLite Inc.


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

> Larry Schwarcz <[e-mail]> writes:

>> I'm trying to see if it's possible to have a cellular phone that is
>> NOT activated with any carrier and still use it to call 911 in
>> emergencies.

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You probably could do it, but you must
>> bear in mind that to purchase an unactivated cell phone in most places
>> you will wind up paying $200-400 more for the phone than if you have it
>> turned on to some carrier.

Then Higdon said:

> Not in California. Service providers and phone vendors are
> specifically prohibited from in any way linking the sale of the phone
> to the activation of service. Although a number of dealers have tried
> some sleazy tricks to avoid selling phones without activation ("sorry,

To which TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response:

> I hear a rumor that in order to bring California more in
> line with other states where cell phones are concerned, instead of the
> stores giving reduced prices with activation -- illegal there -- the
> carriers will begin offering a 'gift to new subscribers' equal to the
> discounted amount. And really, that is what is happening now in other
> parts of the country. RS and the other dealers are not *really* giving
> you a phone for free or for $25 or whatever ... yes, that's what they

> What they can say is 'all phones are $300 ... and upon your decision to
> sign up with the carrier, the carrier will give you a gift of $275
> in exchange for your one/two year contract with their service.'

Another sleaze trick. Why don't the PUC force the cellular carriers to
reduce their duopolistic high prices to more accurately reflect the
air time charges cost.  The constant reducing of the "new phone
activations" only serves to bring on new customers, while continuing
to rip off the existing customer base in the prices they pay for air
time.  In point of fact, the carriers would not continue to reduce the
price of the phone through sleaze pricing activites, unless, there
were legitimate price reductions available for them to take. But
instead of passing these cost savings on to the consumer, the carriers
continue to overcharge.  While still giving the phones away.  If they
would act like the free market, they would reduce their prices for the
airtime, and let the phone manufacturers compete on the features and
prices of their equipment. Then we could see some innovative changes,
and faster growth. Of course, the profits of the cellular carriers
would be less per customer served, but thats the way the econometric
model is supposed to work in a free economy.


Bill Weaver  [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Re: 911 From Unactivated Cell Phone?
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1994 06:09:17 +0200


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

> For next: I hear a rumor that in order to bring California more in
> line with other states where cell phones are concerned, instead of the
> stores giving reduced prices with activation -- illegal there -- the
> carriers will begin offering a 'gift to new subscribers' equal to the
> discounted amount. And really, that is what is happening now in other
> parts of the country. RS and the other dealers are not *really* giving
> you a phone for free or for $25 or whatever ... yes, that's what they
> ring at the register, but the fact is the carrier they go through is
> paying them the difference after the fact. So the stores in CA cannot
> say to you, 'this phone is $25 with activation and $300 without activation.'
> What they can say is 'all phones are $300 ... and upon your decision to
> sign up with the carrier, the carrier will give you a gift of $275
> in exchange for your one/two year contract with their service.'

Interestingly enough, the same kind of thing is happening right here,
in France:

Just like in California, it is  illegal, here, to combine activation and
handset sells.

Until very recently (understand: until GSM arrived), the cellular
phone business was not even close to a mass market, so nobody cared
about this, but it is becoming one.

So, after selling handsets at their real price, some stores started
advertising them for a ridiculous price (around $100, or free), as
long as you got activation also. Other stores did complain that this
was illegal, but it seems that the government doesn't care about this,
since no action has be taken against these practices, that are indeed
becoming more and more frequent.

More recently, some stores which apparently do not want to be illegal,
but do not want to lose business either, are now offering the very
same deal as Pat describes: you pay the phone at its normal price, but
the carrier gives you a gift which approximately matches the price of
the handset.

As far as I remember, there are a couple of subtle differences with what
Pat describes:

the shop still advertises the combined price (i.e. handset price -
carrier gift);
you end up paying the real price of the handset when they ring it at the
register; and
the gift is a check that you'll have to cash at your favorite bank.


Eric Tholome                  | displayed with |               private account
23, avenue du Centre          | 100% recycled  |   [e-mail]
78180 Montigny le Bretonneux  |___  pixels! ___|      phone: [phone]
                    France        \________/     fax: same number, call first!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh yes, indeed, it will have to be
strictly arms-length; that is the California carriers will simply quit
giving the money to the dealers to make up for the phones they sold at
a loss (as noted, in California illegal to force this issue on the
consumer) and start giving the money to the consumer directly instead.
But they probably won't, under the law, be able to tie the two together
saying 'here is a rebate for the phone you purchased'. Instead they
will probably have to say 'dear valued customer, in exchange for the
new contract you signed with us, here is a gift for you; a check for
$xxx which you can deposit in your bank or whatever.' ...   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 94 07:07:22 JST
From: [e-mail] (Stephen [kiwin] PALM)
Subject: Information on MNP 10/EC (Enhanced Cellular)


ROCKWELL'S NEW MODEM DSPs BREAK THROUGH DATA-OVER-CELLULAR LIMITATIONS

NEWPORT BEACH, Calif. (Nov. 14, 1994) -- Rockwell Telecommunications
today announced modem DSPs providing cellular-specific signal-
processing technology optimized for data cellular communications.
Rockwell is applying its digital-signal processing expertise to handle
the necessary signal conditioning for data-over-cellular transmissions.
Rockwell's Cellular Optimized Processor (COP) technology will maximize
data throughput with transmission reliability superior to existing
solutions.

Rockwell's COP technology is designed to overcome the hindrances of
the analog cellular network.  Common cellular-network impairments --
frequent cellular base-station handoffs, dropouts, call interference,
fading, echo and other types of signal distortions -- require signal-
conditioning techniques not addressed in traditional landline modems
using  protocol-only solutions.  Rockwell's COP modem data pump
recognizes the impairments and quickly recovers the signal.  The new
COP technology will provide significant performance improvements when
connected  to a standard landline modem and dramatic improvements when
it appears on both ends of the connection.

"The difficulty with using traditional landline modems with cellular
phones is that these modems were not designed to deal with the
frequent and sudden changes in an analog cellular network," said
Armando Geday, business director, Rockwell Modem Systems. "By
combining our COP technology with an enhanced error correction
protocol to maximize overall throughput, we can now give users what
they need for data cellular applications."

Rockwell and Microcom have worked together to improve the ubiquitous,
adverse-channel MNP 10 protocol. The result, MNP 10EC(tm), is a total
system solution which incorporates complementary enhancements to the
existing MNP-10 protocol while combining Rockwell's new COP data
pumps.  The data pump deals with physical connection issues.  The
protocol's primary responsibility is to identify and correct data
errors, and to optimize data throughput by making speed and packet-
size adjustments based on signal quality and error performance.

"Because the MNP 10EC protocol is compatible with the massive installed
base of Rockwell modems implementing industry-accepted MNP 10," Geday
said, "the user gains a clear benefit over proprietary cellular
solutions requiring modems with the same non-standard scheme on both
sides of the connection."

Rockwell is implementing the new COP technology into V.32bis and
higher speed modem products.

                               - - -

MICROCOM AND ROCKWELL JOINTLY DEVELOP MNP 10EC FOR CELLULAR DATA
RELIABILITY

Nov. 14, 1994 -- Recognizing the needs of the mobile communications
marketplace, Microcom and Rockwell have developed enhancements to the
Microcom Networking Protocol(tm) Class 10 (MNP(r) 10) to further
optimize modem performance over circuit-switched cellular networks.
The new data cellular technology, MNP 10 Enhanced Cellular(tm) (MNP
10EC(tm)), is the culmination of the combined modem-technology
leadership from Rockwell and the protocol expertise of Microcom.

MNP 10EC offers five primary benefits to users, including:

Higher ratio of initial modem connections -- Users get connected and
stay connected.

Quicker initial connections -- Time between initial line connection
and data transmission has been lowered by shortening the initial
billing delay and speeding up the initial modem handshakes.

Backward compatibility to both MNP 10 and LAPM -- Users will see
increased connectivity and overall throughputs even if MNP 10EC is on
only one modem.

Greater call completion ratio -- Fewer data connections are dropped;
connections fall forward to the highest speed possible more quickly.

Faster data throughputs -- Provides higher average throughput
speeds, lowering cellular charges and increasing user productivity.

Early independent tests indicate that MNP 10EC connects up to 25
percent better than ETC and exhibits 30 percent higher throughput
rates.

MNP 10EC works with Rockwell's recently announced digital signal
processors, Enhanced Cellular data pumps, by integrating complementary
cellular enhancements to the market-accepted MNP 10 protocol which was
originally developed for noisy landline conditions.  The analog
circuit-switched network poses particular impediments to cellular data
applications.  Initial enhancements to MNP 10 addressed many of these
obstacles; MNP 10EC is a "third generation" protocol.  It is not only
optimized to work with the Rockwell Cellular Optimized Processor (COP)
technology, but takes advantage of Microcom's broad experience in
adverse channel protocol development.

"Microcom intends to use Rockwell's new data pump technology and
implement it with MNP 10EC in its products," said Greg Pearson, senior
vice president of technology management for Microcom.  "We see these
combined technologies as appropriate for use across our product line,
from our TravelCard line of PCMCIA modems to Microcom's HDMS(tm)
central site modem pool."

"MNP 10EC will be deployed and accepted rapidly throughout the industry
due to Rockwell's market leadership and the large installed base of
MNP 10 modems," said Armando Geday, business director, Rockwell Modem
Systems.  "providing the user with immediate improvement in cellular
applications and decrease in communications expense."

Microcom develops, markets and supports high-speed modems and remote
access solutions for PC users delivering secured access to information
and resources residing anywhere on the corporate network or remote PC.
Microcom products include Carbon Copy(tm) remote control software,
LANexpress(tm) remote LAN access systems, DeskPorte(tm), TravelPorte(tm)
and TravelCard(tm) high-speed modems, HDMS(tm) dial-in network management
systems, and Microcom Bridge/Router(tm) remote internetworking solutions.


Editorial contacts:

David Powers   [phone]   [e-mail]
Eileen Algaze  [phone]   [e-mail]

                                -----

Stephen [kiwin] Palm                        TEL (Voice mail): [phone]
Rockwell - Digital Communications Division                   COMNET: 930-1564
Japan Engineering Design Center      (JST=PST+17hours)   FAX: [phone]
  [e-mail]   [e-mail]   [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #449
******************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25037;
          15 Dec 94 19:48 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05488; Thu, 15 Dec 94 13:34:04 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05479; Thu, 15 Dec 94 13:34:01 CST
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 94 13:34:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V14 #450

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 15 Dec 94 13:34:00 CST    Volume 14 : Issue 450

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Unlicensed Wireless Data Communication (Wayne Stargardt)
    Re: Cable Industry WWW Sites? (Yves Blondeel)
    Re: Rochester Tel Open Market Plan (Robert Levandowski)
    Re: Telecommuting and Urban Design/RE Dev (Stuart Brainerd)
    Re: Caller-ID With Call-Waiting ([e-mail])
    Re: Apartments Getting Into the PBX Business (David G. Cantor)
    Re: Pager Advice Wanted (Lyle E. Dodge)
    Re: PacBell Not Aiming to "Please" (Spencer Sun)
    Preliminary Planning For ISLIP'95 (Mehmet Orgun)

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 America
On Line. 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]
Subject: Re: Unlicensed Wireless Data Communication
Date: 15 Dec 1994 01:16:02 GMT
Organization: Pinpoint Communications, Inc.


Michael Chui <[e-mail]> wrote a long submission entitled:

>                  Unlicensed Wireless Data Communication
>                "Will All the Public Beaches Be Auctioned?"

Several of Michael's statements sound as if they are declarations of
fact, when actually many of them are statements of opinion. Other
"facts" or opinions do exist on these issues, and I would like to
advance a few of them here.

>       The FCC has been auctioning off a good deal of the available
> spectrum; primarily, to voice services where the winning bidder
> effectively purchases spectrum wholesale and resells it retail to the
> public. Whether this is a good model for voice is not at issue here.
> But, however, it is clearly a poor model for data, particularly local
> area networks or mobile peer-to-peer computing.

The appropriateness of the licensing of spectrum has nothing to do
with whether the use is for voice or data communications. After all,
many wireless PBXs today operate almost exclusively in the Part 15
bands, and they are doing almost exlusively voice. The real
distinction is whether the communication service requires mobile
(i.e., moving, not just portable) communication across a sizable
geographic area. In such instances, peer-to-peer architectures are not
workable; an infrastructure must be constructed and access to the
spectrum must be coordinated. The licensed service provider is the one
that constructs the infrastructure and coordinates its use among many
contending users. This need arises whether the communications is voice
or data, and in fact there are a number of licensed, wide area, data
only networks in operation (e.g., RAM, ARDIS) providing service
optimized for data communications.

> Moreover, private, pay for service wireless networks are built
> primarily for voice and can accommodate data at only fairly low
> speeds. On the other hand, estimates to install wired networks for all
> US public K-12 schools in the range from $18-20 billion. Unlicensed
> wireless data networks, in a nationwide clear 10 MHz band, could
> provide high speed (1 to 2 Megabits) transmission at costs
> significantly lower than a wired network.

The "speed" or data throughput rate of a radio wireless data network
is a function, fundamentally, of the bandwidth or the amount of
spectrum available for the service (refered to in the industry as
Shannon's Limit).  That most current private, pay-for-service wireless
data networks have fairly low speeds is a result of 1) the limited
amount of spectrum available to them, and 2) the regulatory
requirement to break it down into channels sized only for voice
communication.  Any service provider who had access to 10 MHz could
provide a very high speed data optimized service, whether they charged
for it or not (in fact, Pinpoint will provide a 400 Kbps service on an
8 MHz channel optimized for automatic location services).

But no magic is being performed by the unlicensed wireless data
communications services to which Michael refers. Shannon's Limit
still applies -- only so much total data can be stuffed through the
spectrum at a time. Today these unlicensed devices deliver high
data rates to any individual user either by 1) transmitting over short
distances so that the spectrum is not shared with many other users
(e.g., wireless LANs), or 2) operating over wide areas in bands in
which there is currently limited  competition for the spectrum, as is true
in the Part 15 bands today. If we did really connect up all the schools
and start running high speed data services intensively through the
spectrum, the actual throughput to any one user would decline
dramatically. As a voice analogy, this is what happened in the
Citizens Band (CB) radio spectrum in metropolitan areas. The
wireline counterpart would be if everyone in a geographic area
connected to a single segment Ethernet, the actual throughput to
any individual user would be a small fraction of the "rated"
throughput of the network.

> Priority Three:  Preserving the "900 MHz" nonlicensed (Part 15) band.

> The 900 MHz band has been the incubator for development of a wide
> array of nonlicensed consumer and business products, including
> cordless phones, utility meter readers and energy-saving control
> systems, wireless earphones and speakers, handheld rental car check-in
> and point-of-sale terminals, and first-generation wireless computer
> networks. New networks offering low flat-rate wide-area data
> communications are also being deployed nationwide in this band.
> Millions of such unlicensed devices are in operation today and more
> are being turned on daily. Obviously, retaining the 900 MHz band is
> essential for low-cost products that consumers expect to continue
> using.

> The FCC has proposed to give a priority license -- meaning any
> unlicensed device that interferes must leave the channel -- to a
> vehicle location system.

Actually, the FCC has authorized five (5) classes of users in the 900
MHz ISM band. The primary (highest priority) user of the band is
Industrial, Scientific and Medical equipment (hence, ISM). Second
priority are goverment radio-location services (mainly military
radar), third are commercial radio-location services (the automated
vehicle location services to which Michael refers), and fourth are
amateurs. The lowest priority are the unlicensed Part 15 devices about
which Michael is concerned. While the rules for automated vehicle
location services were issued in 1974, the rule establishing Part 15
devices was not issued until a decade later. From the beginning the
FCC has been explicit that Part 15 devices have no recourse from
interference from higher priority services, or even from each other,
and that they could only have access to the band by tolerating such
interference. The vast majority of Part 15 devices are engineered to
do just that.

> Unfortunately, the 20 year old technology proposed is said to be
> very interference prone. Thus, most current 900 MHz unlicensed devices
> would be banned (subject to penalties of up to $10,000 per day). We
> are not opposed to the service, which could be quite valuable. The FCC
> should, however, require that effective spectrum conservation
> technologies be applied as a condition for permanently authorizing
> these stations. The monitoring services could thrive in only a small
> segment (certainly no more than 4 MHz) of the 900 band and the
> millions of Part 15 products could continue to use the remainder.

I believe that Michael is refering to a specific automated vehicle
location (AVL) service operator in these comments, the Teletrac
division of AirTouch. Teletrac has primarily complained to the FCC
about interference from Automated Vehicle Identification (AVI)
services, another commercial radio-location service, and has not asked
the FCC for any additional protection from Part 15 devices. Teletrac
has been in commercial operation for years in several major cities,
including Los Angeles, sharing the spectrum with a presumably
significant population of Part 15 devices.

Pinpoint and other companies are planning to offer other AVL services
in competition with Teletrac. Pinpoint in particular has engineered
its network to presume a large number of Part 15 devices in the
environment and to survive the interference they would cause. In
addition, the Pinpoint network achieves very high performance
(location accuracy, data throughput) by utilizing an entire 8 MHz AVL
band, as allowed under the current rules. After all, the market
provides us adequate incentive to employ the "effective spectrum
conservation technologies" Michael would like to see.

In summary, there is no danger of the vast majority of Part 15
devices, including all of the consumer appliances of which I am aware,
being ejected by AVL operators.

An additional question arises as to whether AVL operators actually do
cause harmful interference to Part 15 devices (although this is
permitted under the long-standing FCC rules). There is significant
debate between the two camps on this issue. Teletrac, Pinpoint and
others are confident that interference from AVL operations will be
undetectable to the majority of Part 15 devices, especially relative
to the significant background "noise" in this band. The Part 15
community, which have been well represented at the FCC in this docket,
have to date refused to participateint actual cross-interference field
tests. Pinpoint and Teletrac have had outstanding offers to conduct
tests for some time.  It appears that the Part 15 community prefers to
settle this issue on misperceptions or innuendos rather than facts.

And finally, returning to Michael's first paragraph:

> The FCC will make three frequency allocation decisions that will
> either enhance or severely limit the ways computers are used in
> libraries, schools and other institutions. At stake is the
> availability of frequencies for nonlicensed, no-charge wireless data
> communications (Data-PCS) within buildings and on campuses, as well as
> for low-cost wireless access to the Internet and other off-site
> resources. If the FCC is to continue to provide, and even expand, the
> bands for public nonlicensed communications, the education community
> must express its interests and concerns. Otherwise, these bands are at
> risk of being auctioning to fee-based commercial licensees.

There is a concept in economics call "opportunity cost." In essence,
this concept states that the cost of an asset or resource is the price
it would fetch (or the returned earned) in its most valuable employ in
an open market transaction. While the unlicensed frequency bands may
look "free", the opportunity cost is what they would actually fetch in
an open market (like the auctions). We, the taxpayers, pay that cost
by foregoing the revenue which could be earned by auctioning them off.
There is a deeper philosophical issue here, reflected by Michael's
"public beaches" analogy. Should the government be in the business of
subsidizing the communications desires of educational institutions out
of the pockets of the rest of the taxpayers? Is this the "best" use of
the spectrum? The claim of the educational community on this spectrum
and on this subsidy is open to debate, in my opinion.


Wayne Stargardt    Pinpoint Communications   [e-mail]

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

From: Yves Blondeel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cable Industry WWW Sites?
Date: 15 Dec 1994 10:37:02 GMT
Organization: FUNDP, Namur, Belgium


[e-mail] (Bruce Klopfenstein) wrote:

> Where are the cablecos?  Is there a site that is updating them as they
> come online?

There is a European site -- from a cable magazine; not an operator.

Inside Cable Magazine (United Kingdom)
http://scitsc.wlv.ac.uk/university/sles/sm/incable.html

If you find other cable TV web servers, would you please post them to
this group?


Yves Blondeel    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Levandowski)
Subject: Re: Rochester Tel Open Market Plan
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 94 04:52:11 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Chris
Calley) writes:

> Phillip Dampier ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> New telephone directories and bill inserts are heralding the upcoming
>> introduction of competition in residential local telephone service
>> early in 1995.  Rochester will be the first major city in the country
>> with multiple local service providers serving both residential and
>> business customers.

> Some questions:
> How will the _new_ local carriers get dialtone to the subscribers?  Will
> they be using the infrastructure already in place, i.e. piggybacking off
> of Rochester Telcos. network, or will they have to duplicate everything
> from scratch including re-wiring the neighborhoods?  I'm curious as to
> how how multiple local providers will coexist.

My understanding, from the pamphlets I've gotten with bills, is that
RochesterTel is going to have two divisions: One regulated, that owns
the network and sells regulated phone service; and one non-regulated,
that sells phone service and enhanced features (Centrex, call waiting,
etc.).

So, as the plan first went, yes, other competitors would have to buy
time in RochTel's wires in order to sell dialtone to their customers.

What RochTel didn't count on at first was Greater Rochester
Cablevision rewiring their entire metropolitan network with two-way
fiber optics. GRC is now planning to offer local phone service, using
their own fiber network which is currently used for cable TV and
radio.

(It seems like GRC has bandwidth to waste.  Since the upgrade, new
channels have been popping up left and right, they added digital cable
radio, and their news station (GRC 9) has live news feeds from remote
sites that are sent back to the studio over the fiber distribution
network. I've even heard rumors that they may be offering flat-rate,
dirt-cheap 56Kbps TCP/IP connections in the near future.)


Rob Levandowski
Computer Interest Floor associate / University of Rochester
[e-mail]     [Opinions expressed are mine, not UR's.]

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

Date: Wed, 14 Dec 94 23:29 CST
From: [e-mail] (Stuart Brainerd)
Subject: Re: Telecommuting and Urban Design/RE Dev


In reponse to a posting by James Grossman:

> I am seeking information and research leads on telecommuting, home
> office development, and home-based work and their impact on existing
> communities and real estate development.  The problem I am having to
> this point is that there is little quantified data on this trend.

An excellent source of hard data on telecommuting is available through
the City of Los Angeles Dept. of Telecommunications.  Their General
Manager, Susan Herman, gave a dinner talk at the National ISDN Users'
Forum earlier this year on the subject of the city's experiences with
telecommuting.  She is, incidentally, an excellent speaker.

A report is available through the City office (they give out a phone
number without area code, as 485-2866) or by calling JALA
International, Inc. at 310-476-3703 (JALA was commissioned by the city
to generate the report).  The way area codes change these days, I
can't guarantee 310 is still accurate (the report is dated March,
1993).  The size of the trial is hard to pinpoint exactly, but on the
order of 200 to 400 workers.

My company, located in the Chicago area, is involved with
telecommuting solutions using ISDN, an excellent technology in terms
of performance and economics for telecommuting applications.  One of
the more interesting products about to hit the market is the
Planet-ISDN II board with PPP (point-to-point protocol) drivers,
supporting simultaneous AppleTalk and Internet protocol suite (TCP/IP)
protocols.  PPP, particularly with ISDN, is quickly emerging as the
industry standard protocol for remote LAN access and Internet access.
A host of low-cost ISDN plug-in boards and external terminal adapters
are emerging in the market, as well as high-performance hosts ("remote
access servers") supporting both ISDN and analog modem dial-up.  This
combination of economics and performance will be the technology "push"
the telecommuting market needs to move forward strongly in 1995 and
1996, while social, legislative and commercial forces provide the
market "pull".


Regards,

SYNAPSE USA       ISDN Products and Solutions
Stuart Brainerd   Tech. Info. : 312-871-1466
[e-mail]   Fax         : [phone]
                  Orders      : 800-454-ISDN

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

Subject: Re: Caller-ID With Call-Waiting
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 94 13:17:54 EST
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am not sure how they plan to do that.
> We do know that CID and call waiting are *partially* compatible in
> this one sense: normally, the CID information is transmitted between

In Florida, for call-waiting/CID purposes only, I got last *69 along
with my CID.  Southern Bell actually reads-off the number along with
allowing you to dial it, when you dial *69.  This way, as long as I
didn't get another call-waiting before I was finished with the first
party, I could go back and see who it was that was calling.


Ron

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Apartments Getting Into the PBX Business
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1994 13:19:40 -0800
From: David G. Cantor <[e-mail]>


In TELECOM Digest, Volume 14, Issue 437, John Lundgren states:

> . . . many larger apartment complexes are getting a PBX. . .  as of
> Jan 1, anyone [in California] can get into the business of
> furnishing dial tone.

It was roughly two years ago when the California PUC turned over
responsibility of telephone wiring in an apartment complex to the
owner.  By PUC regulations, the owner is required to provide at least
one working line from the telco point of demarcation to each
apartment.  The telcos simply stopped maintenance of the usual rat's
nest and left it for the apartment management.

In their mailing-insert on this matter Pac Tel said that either the
management or the tenant could pay the usual rate for the telco,
interior-wiring, maintence plan.  I assume that management can require
that the tenant pay for the wiring by putting that requirement in the
laese.

BUT this plan stops whenever a tenant stops telephone service (usually
by vacating the apartment).  The owner or new tenant may reinstate the
plan.  The problem is that the most likely time for problems to occur
is when a new tenant moves in and orders telco service, perhaps with
more lines and perhaps with jacks at different places.


David G. Cantor            Department of Mathematics
[e-mail]     University of California
            Los Angeles, CA 90024

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

From: [e-mail] (Lyle E Dodge)
Subject: Re: Pager Advice Wanted
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 1994 05:17:29 GMT
Organization: Walla Walla College


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

> Hi.  I'm not very well versed in modern telephone technology, but I have
> decided to buy my girlfriend a beeper (or are they called pagers now?)
> for Christmas.   We live in the Seattle area.

Great area.  I live there too.

> It would have to have a monthly fee that's very low (I don't mind if
> the unit is expensive to buy, because I'm paying for that, but she
> will be paying the monthly fee so that should be QUITE low), a display
> that can light up so you can read it when it's dark, the ability to
> vibrate (or do something quietly) instead of beep so it doesn't bug
> people, and the ability to store a few numbers in case several people
> call in a row.

Most pagers support the above features.  You will of course want to
get a Motorola pager.  They are by far the best, hands down.

> I would also like (and perhaps here is where some advice would come
> in) the ability to send some sort of message with the phone number.
> This could be as simple as the pager allowing me to type more than
> seven digits so the first seven digits would be the phone number she
> should call and the rest are a code indicating generally what the call
> is about and how urgent it is (i.e. 44 for it's just to chat, 77 for
> the cat died, etc.).  Is there some way to type a space or dash
> character so the person can tell where the phone number ends and the
> code begins?

The Motorola "Memo Express" supports several messages.  The memo
express has two basic operations.

1) Digital.  Dial an service number, tone, key in your callback
number.  The number can be more than seven digits if you wish.  If you
only use seven there is a '-' between the third and fourth digits.  If
you key in tons more, there is not.  You could key in your phone
number, and have the eighth and ninth digits represent your code.
Whatever, that is up to you.

2) Alpha.  With special service you can call up and have an actual
text message sent to the pager (120 characters).  Here at the college
we are able to send email to an address on our LAN and have the body
of the message sent to the pager.  I doubt pager service providers
provide that kind of service.  The pager was about 160 bucks for us.
We also have the Bravo, which may suit your needs better.  It offers
beep/vibrate modes (ooh, exciting), and lit up display, but only has
support for digital, no alpha.

> What sort of pager should I get, and where could I get it the most
> inexpensively?  Is there some neat new feature I should look for in a
> pager?

Get a Motorola, definately.  Grab a Seattle phone book, I know they
are HUGE, and look up "Telephone Service", or "Pagers" and find a big
company.  Usually the ones that have been around for a long time
usually have better services.

Best of luck.


Lyle Dodge    Telecommunications
Walla Walla College  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Spencer Sun)
Subject: Re: PacBell Not Aiming to "Please"
Date: 14 Dec 1994 21:42:27 -0800
Organization: Gizmonic Institute
Reply-To: [e-mail] (S. Spencer Sun)


In <[e-mail]>, David Leibold <[e-mail].
ca> writes:

[directory assistance operators no longer saying "please" after
 "what city"]

> Seems some critics, including Judith "Miss Manners" Martin, don't like
> PacBell's triumph of efficiency over politeness. PacBell, meanwhile,
> claims the new please-less greeting saves $5M/year and 0.5 seconds per
> call, to keep the entire greeting within a 1.2 second limit. Yet, the
> current average call times are slightly longer (19.6 sec, versus the
> previous 19.35 sec).

I heard from a friend (always a sure sign of reliable information, eh? :-) )
that, in fact, even the operator's greeting is now recorded and played
automatically before the operator comes on the line to take your request.
For what reason I don't know.

Does someone know if there's any truth to this?


S. Spencer Sun / Network Computing Devices, Z-Code Software Division


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, this is correct in many places. Here
in the Chicago area Ameritech has experimented with having the operator's
voice pre-recorded on a small chip which holds about two seconds of
recording. It goes something like this, "Operator Jane, may I help you?".
This is intended mainly to save the operator's voice; to make less talk
necessary on her part. When the operator responds to a call that message
is played automatically. You can even get these devices for business
phones and receptionists who answer a large number of calls daily. When
the phone rings, just press the start button then lift the receiver. By
the time you get the phone to your ear it has given its little speech;
all you do is sit there and listen to what the person on the other end
says. They can be wired through the second pair in the phone via the
handset so they start by themselves when the receiver is lifted if you
want. I guess you would wire them through the A/A1 leads probably. These
were in the Hello Direct catalog (1-800-HI-HELLO) at one time.

To illustrate how refined the process of being an operator has become,
consider the directory assistance operator: she sits there wearing a
headset. There is no need to push a button to answer a call since the
call distributor hands her the call automatically. She knows there is
a call on the line since she hears a click in her headset and breathing
on the other end of the line. At that point her recorded voice has
already answered the call. The person on the other end asks for whatever
it is he wants and she types on a keyboard to pull up the record. She
puts the cursor on the desired record and hits another key. This causes
the computer's voice to read off the number to the caller. After two
recitations of the number, the computer adds that, 'if you need further
assistance, an operator will return ...'. In this example, our operator
is long gone, now handling still another call. If the caller stays on
the line, he will 'recall' to the first available operator; not necessarily
the one who handled his call originally. She will get the screen on her
computer automatically which was referenced the first time around. For
a large percentage of the calls to directory assistance, the operator does
not speak at all, at any time in the connection. Although she has a key
on the console to dump the caller if he is obnoxious, normally when the
caller disconnects on his own it automatically leaves the console with
no further effort on the operator's part. On a typical day, the very
instant one caller hangs up (click! dead earpiece) a new call will be
handed to the operator (click! live earpiece, breathing, noise in the
background). If traffic is slow, there may be five or ten seconds of
silence between callers. All day long, the operator may say ten words
of actual speaking to callers, in unusual circumstances, or where she
has to ask the caller to spell a name, etc.  An operator is expected
to handle 80-100 calls per hour in this fashion, or 600-700 calls per
shift.

When I was at the credit card sales authorization office twenty years ago,
although we did not have the speech modules at that time, the nine to
eleven thousand calls received each 24 hour period were expected to be
handled in 20-30 seconds each with a minimum of spoken words. They began
looking at speech modules right after they moved to Des Moines in 1975.

When I get a case where the recording on the front end is really lousy
(there was a lot of background noise when the operator logged on and
made her recording that day, etc) I tell her about it ... "operator
you should remake your recording, it sounds terrible ..."     PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 15 Dec 94 11:17:03 +1100
From: [e-mail] (Mehmet Orgun)
Subject: Preliminary Planning For ISLIP'95


Hi all,

It is time to get cracking with the organization of ISLIP'95.
At this stage, I would like to ask people a couple of questions.

_______________ Are you able to attend ISLIP'95 in Sydney? (YES/NO)
        (If NO, please state the reason)

_______________ Are you able to attend ISLIP'95 in late May/June?
        (give your preferred dates)

Please reply as soon as possible.


Cheers,

Mehmet A Orgun, Department of Computing, Macquarie University
        Sydney,  NSW 2109,  Australia
        Tel: [phone],  Fax: [phone]
        E-mail: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V14 #450
******************************