Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1995.volume.15/vol15.iss001-050

Internet Message Format | 1995-01-23 | 1MB

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22247;
          4 Jan 95 0:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27151; Tue, 3 Jan 95 20:12:06 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27144; Tue, 3 Jan 95 20:12:02 CST
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 95 20:12:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #1

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 3 Jan 95 20:12:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 1

Inside This Issue:                        Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Happy New Year! Administrivia, et al ... (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    UC Berkely Short Courses on Broadband and Wireless Comm (Harvey Stern)
    21 LEC's Violate Comm Act, Ordered To Pay Damages (Alan Boritz)
    Washington Telecom News ([e-mail])
    Need Some Basic Leased Line Information (William E. White)
    "High-End" Phone Products (Sohail Malik)
    Bell Atlanta-PA Insert Disclaimer (Peter M. Weiss)
    Memorized Area Codes (Stephen Denny)
    Direct Rate Negotiation (VN) (Glenn Foote)
    Finland Data Transmission (Jack Pestaner)
    Personal Communcications (Arndt Ritterbecks)
    Script Translation for TDD/TTY Use ([e-mail])
    Cell Phone Programming (Alex McPhail)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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, 3 Jan 95 19:36:57 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Happy New Year! Administrivia, et al ...


First of all, happy new year to everyone. I hope 1995 is a good year
for you, and I certainly hope it is better for me than 1994, which
was not one I want to repeat anytime soon.

To close out the old year in the style to which I seem to have become
accustomed, I discovered that the program I use to update the mailing
list was malfunctioning, and had been in a clever, devious and barely
discernable way for about a month or more. Quite a few people who had
requested addition to the mailing list had not been added, and folks
who requested deletion were still getting copies. I spent quite a bit
of time manually adding and deleting a few hundred entries over the
past couple of days. I *think* everything is now up to date.

    If you are still getting copies of the Digest and have
    previously requested deletion, please advise me personally.

    If you have previously requested addition to the list and
    have not been added, also let me know.

    (I hear astute readers asking: if that was the case, then
    how would they see this message to know they were supposed
    to ask again?  Well, they see it on Usenet in the telecom
    newsgroup, or one of the other various places where the
    Digest is distributed. We are getting former Usenetters in
    droves. Lots of folks there are going strictly with the
    privately maintained, moderated e-journals.)

The Telecom Archives has also been updated. It was getting to be
a mess with outdated files and it was very disorganized. A new
section of the Archives is devoted to the dozens of book reviews
which have appeared here in the Digest over the past couple of
years.

    Suggestion: not all the reviews which appeared here have
    necessarily been ported to that directory. If you wrote a
    review or a book which was discussed here, check out the
    Archives and make sure you are included. If not, and you
    want to be, let me know.

George Gilder has been established in a main directory at the
Archives. Previously his writings were mixed in with other reports
and essays.

The index of authors and subjects in TELECOM Digest has been updated
to include all of 1994. You can use these interactively via the
Telecom Archives Email Information Service with the SEARCH command
or you can pull the entire files, your choice. The index goes back
only to 1989. I'd like to go back further, but I need some professional
help in figuring out how to extract the desired information from those
old files.

By now you should have received a copy of the new 1995 Table of Contents/
Index which was distributed earlier Tuesday evening. If not, then ask
for a copy.

I am told we might have a newly revised telecom FAQ by the end of
February, and we might have some updated area code and country code
files soon also.

In other news:  I decided to bite the bullet and as of January 1, 1995
my official employer is The TELECOM Digest, a not-for-profit educational
activity registered in Cook County, Illinois. Whether or not I get
paid any salary depends upon you, my ultimate employers. I guess you
know what that means without further elaboration.

Let's get on with this, the first issue of the new year.


Patrick Townson

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: UC Berkely Short Courses on Broadband and Wireless Communications
Date: 4 Jan 1995 01:18:38 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley


U.C. Berkeley Continuing Education in Engineering
Announces 3 Short Courses on Broadband Communications, Wireless Networks

MODERN TELECOMMUNICATIONS:  Wide Area Networks, Personal
Communication Systems, Network Management and Control, and
Multimedia Applications
(March 2-3, 1995)

This course is designed as a gentle but comprehensive overview of
telecommunications including current status and future directions.
This course traces the evolution of telecommunications, starting from
its voice roots and progressing through local, metropolitan, and wide
area networks, narrowband ISDN, asynchronous transfer mode, broadband
ISDN, satellite systems, optical communications, cellular radio,
personal communication systems, all-optical networks, and multimedia
services.

Lecturer: Anthony S. Acampora, Ph.D., Professor, Electrical
Engineering, Columbia University.  He is Director, Center for
Telecommunications Research. He became a professor following a 20
year career at AT&T Bell Laboratories, is an IEEE Fellow, and is
a former member of the IEEE Communications Society Board of
Governors.

SONET/ATM-BASED BROADBAND NETWORKS: Systems, Architectures and
Designs
(March 29-31, 1995)

It is widely accepted that future broadband networks will be based on
the SONET (Synchronous Optical Network) standards and the ATM
(Asynchronous transfer Mode) technique.  This course is an in-depth
examination of the fundamental concepts and the implementation issues
for development of future high-speed networks.  Topics include:
Broadband ISDN Transfer Protocol, high speed computer/network
interface (HiPPI), ATM switch architectures, ATM network
congestion/flow control, VLSI designs in SONET/ATM networks.  This
course is intended for engineers who are currently active or
anticipate future involvement in this field.

Lecturer: H. Jonathan Chao, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Brooklyn
Polytechnic University.  Dr. Chao holds more than a dozen patents
and has authored over 40 technical publications in the areas of
ATM switches, high-speed computer communications, and
congestion/flow control in ATM networks.


NETWORKS FOR DIGITAL WIRELESS ACCESS:  Cellular, Voice, Data,
Packet, and Personal Communication Systems
(March 6-8, 1995)

This comprehensive course is focused on the principles, technologies,
system architectures, standards, and market forces driving wireless
access.  At the core of this course are the cellular/microcellular/
frequency reuse concepts needed to enable adequate wireless access
capacity for Personal Communication Services (PCS).  Presented are
both the physical-level issues associated with wireless access and the
network-level issues arising from the inherent mobility of the
subscriber. Standards are fully treated including GSM (TDMA), IS-54
(North American TDMA), IS-95 (CDMA), CT2, DCT 900/CT3, IEEE 802.11,
DCS 1800, and Iridium.  Emerging concepts for wireless ATM are also
developed.  This course is intended for engineers who are currently
active or anticipate future involvement in this field.

Lecturer: Anthony S. Acampora, Ph.D., Professor, Electrical
Engineering, Columbia University.  He is Director, Center for
Telecommunications Research. He became a professor following a 20
year career at AT&T Bell Laboratories, is an IEEE Fellow, and is
a former member of the IEEE Communications Society Board of
Governors.

For more information (complete course descriptions, outlines,
instructor bios, etc.) send your postal address or fax to:

Harvey Stern
or Loretta Lindley
U.C. Berkeley Extension/Southbay
800 El Camino Real Ste. 150
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

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

Subject: 21 LEC's Violate Comm Act, Ordered To Pay Damages
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 95 16:28:13 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


 From ftp.fcc.gov:

NEWS Report No. DC-594     COMMON CARRIER ACTION           December 23, 1994

   DAMAGES AWARDED FOR LEC VIOLATIONS OF RATE OF RETURN PRESCRIPTION

    In response to complaints filed by several long distance
carriers, the Commission has determined that 21 local exchange
carriers (LECs) have violated the Communications Act by earning in
excess of the rate of return for interstate access services prescribed
by the Commission for the period January 1, 1989, through December 31,
1990.

    The complainants, with the LECs about whom they complained in
parenthesis, are American Network Exchange et al.  (Pacific Bell);
Cable&Wireless et al.  (GTE California, GTE Florida, GTE North -
Indiana, Michigan, Missouri and Wisconsin, GTE Northwest, Contel West
Rate Group, Contel East/South Rate Group, New York Telephone,
BellSouth, Ameritech, US WEST); Call-America (US WEST); LDDSMetromedia
Communications (United Telephone Company of Florida, United Telephone
System - Midwest, Centel - Texas, Centel - Virginia, Cincinnati Bell);
MCI Telecommunications Corp.  et al.  (New York Telephone, BellSouth,
Ameritech, East Ascension Telephone Co., Cincinnati Bell, Southwestern
Bell); and WilTel, Inc.  (Pacific Bell).

    The Commission awarded monetary damages, plus interest, for
the defendants' violations but allowed the defendants to offset the
complainants' damages to the extent that the complainants purchased
access services from the defendants during the period in question at
rates that produced earnings below the Commission's prescribed levels.
After taking into account these offsets, the Commission has ordered
the LECs to pay monetary damages amounting to $3,435,968, exclusive of
interest.  The highest single damages award is against US West in the
amount of $926,779.  US West is also liable in the aggregate for
$1,236,709, the highest aggregate damages awarded against any
defendant in this proceeding.

    Action by the December 23, 1994, by Memorandum Opinion and
Order (FCC 94-339).  Chairman Hundt, Commissioners Quello, Barrett,
Ness and Chong.

                    - FCC -

    News Media contact: Susan Lewis Sallet and Maureen Peratino at (202)
418-0500.
    Common Carrier Bureau contacts: Donna N. Lampert at [phone] and
Colleen Heitkamp at [phone].

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

[e-mail]  or  uunet!drharry!aboritz
Harry's Place (drharry.UUCP) - Mahwah NJ USA - [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (enews)
Subject: Washington Telecom News
Date: 3 Jan 1995 11:42:55 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


The featured article from the December 26 issue of WASHINGTON TELECOM NEWS
looks at the market problems faced by American telecom companies. Here
is an excerpt from "THE `ALLURING PARADOX' OF U.S. TELCOS AND FOREIGN
MARKETS."

     According to the Economic Strategy Institute's (ESI) Crossed
Wires: How Foreign Regulations and U.S. Policies Are Holding Back the
U.S. Telecommuni-cations Services Industry, "The dearth of U.S.
participation in key foreign markets can be explained by prohibitive
government regulations that restrict U.S. firms from exploiting their
competitive advantage in telecommunications services."

     The report's principal author, ESI Managing Director Larry
Chimerine, added that foreign barriers have resulted in a $4 billion
trade deficit in phone services and lost opportunities to pursue more
that $288 billion in potential revenues.

     Although some of the deficit may be attributed to the fact that
there is more traffic originating in the United States resulting in
more access charges to foreign telco providers, more than half of that
deficit -- $2.1 billion -- is because of overpayments for that access.

     "Foreign [companies] use this mechanism to overcharge U.S.
consumers and discriminate against the U.S. by charging significantly
more for terminating calls from the United States than for calls
originating in other countries, despite small cost differentials,"
said the report's co-author, research associate Erik Olbeter.

ESI's Recommendations to Remedy the Situation

     To rectify the situation, the ESI recommends that the United
States complete the deregulation of the domestic market, which would
place pressure on foreign governments to liberalize their own under
threat of reciprocal restricted market access.

     In addition, the government must adopt a proactive, incentive-
based strategy to open foreign markets.  "The U.S. already has one of
the most open telecommunications markets in the world, allowing
foreign competitors to pursue cellular properties and partnerships,"
Chimerine said.  "If progress is not made, the FCC should consider the
home of a carrier when reviewing applica-tions."  This approach
probably would not hurt U.S. companies in the long run.  "We don't
have much to lose because we're not there anyway," Chimerine said.
"At some point, we have to stand up and do what's right for the U.S.
economy."

     Finally, ESI's Olbeter suggested instituting a cost-based, non-
discriminatory international settlement system to determine settlement
rates on international phone traffic.

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

So begins this issue's featured article from WASHINGTON TELECOM NEWS.

This article and others from WASHINGTON TELECOM NEWS and additional
publications can be viewed at no charge on The Electronic Newsstand, a
service which collects articles, editorials, and table of contents
from over 220 magazines and provides them to the Global Internet
community.

Access to The Electronic Newsstand is available 24 hours a day, 7 days
a week via Gopher, an information navigation and retrieval technology
from the University of Minnesota.

For those without a local Gopher client program, The Electronic
Newsstand provides a telnet account which will allow you to use a text
based Gopher client to access our service.

To access The Electronic Newsstand,

    via Local Gopher Client:

        Hostname:    gopher.enews.com
        Port:        2100

    via the Gopher Home Menu at U of Minn:

        Other Gopher and Information Servers/
          North America/
            USA/
              General/
            The Electronic Newsstand (tm)

    via Gopher Link Information:

        Name=The Electronic Newsstand
        Type=1
        Port=2100
        Path=1/
        Host=gopher.enews.com

    via Telnet:

        Hostname:     gopher.enews.com
        Loginname:    enews
        Password:    <not required>

    via World Wide Web:

        URL:        http://www.enews.com

    via electronic mail:

        Send a blank email message to [e-mail]
        to retrieve files.

We are also available for America Online users in the Gopher area
under Literature and Books.

If you have any suggestions on how we might improve this service, or
need more information, please email [e-mail].

    --The Electronic Newsstand Staff


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is a really great service which I
have always been happy to help publicize. They've gone to a lot of
effort and work to prepare a very nice system. Check it out.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (William E. White)
Subject: Need Some Basic Leased Line Information
Organization: Ohio University, Computer Science Department
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 21:45:27 GMT


A friend and I are interested in getting a leased line to a commercial
internet service provider, and have some basic questions that we
haven't found decent answers to yet.  Specifically, we've contacted
OARNet, and received information on ISDN, 56Kb, LVT1, and T1
connections.  However, our understanding is that we need to provide
the local loop to the nearest OARNet site -- in our case Columbus
(we're in Athens, about 100 miles from Columbus).

Specifically, what do we *do* to provide this local loop?  I'm
assuming it's done through our local telco (GTE -- ugh!), but are the
costs based on how far it is to Columbus, or how far it is from our
site to the phone company?  And if the latter is true, would it make
sense to find a cheaper provider than OARNet that might be further
away?

Thank you for your suggestions; my knowledge of telecom stuff is very
limited.  Heck, I'm not even sure what a T1 line *is*, other than
1.5MBps and around $2.5K per month from OARnet.


Bill White   [phone]     | [e-mail]
44 Canterbury, Athens OH  45701  | finger for PGP2.2 block
http://oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu/personal/bwhite.html (check it out!)

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

From: [e-mail] (Sohail Malik)
Subject: "High-end" Phone Products
Date: 3 Jan 1995 03:20:23 -0500
Organization: Alif International


I'm looking to purchase a telephone with the following features:

    2 or 3 lines
    Conference facility
    Speaker phone capability
    Hangable on the wall
    Cordless

I have not found too many of these on the market, at least not from my
favorite manufacturers (AT&T and Motorola).  In particular, the confer-
ence facility needs to be high quality (many I've tried make it hard
for the conferenced parties to hear each other).

Would anyone be able to recommend particular brands/models that fit
these requirements?  Also, are there any mail-order places or
magazines that specialize in these types of things that I should look
at?


Thanks in advance,

Sohail

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 10:06:52 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bell Atlanta-PA Insert Disclaimer


Found in my Bell Atlantic-PA December bill:

"You cannot use Caller ID blocking to block your number when you call
an 800 or 900 number.  The number goes to the company who provides
this service.  We do not have a way to block your number when you call
an 800 or 900 number.

You should know that some companies use your number for marketing and
other reasons.  However, after April 12, 1995 the FCC has said that
they must first ask you if they can use this information for other
purposes."


[e-mail] (Penn State U)

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Denny)
Subject: Memorized Area Codes
Date: 3 Jan 1995 19:15:07 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corporation, Plano, Texas USA


In the small tourist town of Pigeon Forge, Tennessee, located at the
foothills of the Great Smoky Mountains, is an amusement park named
Dollywood.  It is owned by the well-known singer Dolly Parton who
originated from Pigeon Forge.

At one of the large theatres at the park, there is a fellow who does
an audience warm-up act for a show.  As part of his act he has the
audience call out their favorite area codes and he tells them their
location.  He is quite good and is virtually never stumped.  I suspect
that with all the area code splits, he is going to have his hands full
keeping up!


Stephen Denny             [e-mail]
DSC Communications Corp.
Plano, TX, USA            **Standard Disclaimer**

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn Foote)
Subject: Direct Rate Negotiation (VN)
Date: 3 Jan 1995 01:13:34 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet


     I need to find out how major telecom providers are charging for
High Volume Services.

     For example, if a company is (or is thinking of) using a Virtual
Network (or the like) and is generating well in excess of 150,000 long
distance (48 states only) network hours per month, (plus another
20,000 hours of inbound 800) can that company reasonably expect to
negotiate rates with the common carriers?  If not, at what point, in
your opinion, would direct rate negotiations be considered?

     Does it make any difference in any negotiations if the general
types of calls are short, ie; less than 90 seconds for about 80% of
the calls.  And to what extent does the Time of Day enter into the
picture.

     In general, what cost per minute should any discussion ask for?
Is $0.125 too high, is $0.085 too low?

     Also, What starts the timer?  Initial Dial Tone (assuming direct
access to LD carrier), End Of Dialing Sequence, Start of Ringing, or
Answer by the Called Party.

     And, what ends the timer? Hang up of Called Party, Central Office
indication to Common Carrier, Hang Up of Calling Party, or some
combination thereof.

     Feel free to use E-mail to respond to this one ....


Thanks,

Glenn L Foote ...... [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Pestaner)
Subject: Finland Data Transmission
Date: 3 Jan 1995 03:48:44 GMT
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute


We have been communicating to a site in Finland with autoranging 14.4k
modems.  On a good day we can run at 9600, but typically at 2400.  We
have tried AT&T, MCI, and IDB (all are direct digital connections
through our PBX), but all seem to be extremely variable.  We use
NetBlazer modems, same model, on each end.

This is really expensive, and we want to move to a more reliable
service, as we expect to have longer hold times of three to five hours
a day.  I checked on a 56k DDS, but cost was about $9K per month.

Are there any satellite solutions, or packet solutions that anybody
knows of?  BTW, we also tried x.25 from Sprint, but service went down
often, and Sprint just has the WORST customer service for problem
solving.


Thanks,

Jack

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

From: [e-mail] (Arndt Ritterbecks)
Subject: Personal Communcications
Date: 3 Jan 1995 19:15:24 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Eurolab Deutschland GmbH
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Hello out there!

I'm a diploma student at the Ericsson Eurolab in Germany. My final
thesis' topic is:

"Adaption And Implementation Of UMTS DDB Concepts For PSCS".


The goal of the third generation telecommunication system UMTS is the
integration of all telecommunication networks taking into account user
and terminal mobility.  PSCS is a service concept wherein a service
provider offers personal communication to an end user. That means:
users are able to organize communication to their own preferences.
PSCS can be seen as an improvement and continuation of the UPT ideas
(UPT: Universal Personal Telecommunication).  Both, UMTS and PSCS, are
parts of research projects of the European Community.

One of my tasks is to develop a database concept for PSCS. For it I
have to find all required data to realize PSCS, e.g. data necessary to
support the capabilities of different terminals. One of my points of
interest is: are there any conventions or standards holding data of
users or terminals in a database?

Because information about these and related topics is hard to find I
would be very pleased about anybody helping me to find newsgroups,
mailinglists, ftp servers, WWW URLs, institutes or email-addresses of
persons occupied with one of the following topics:

UMTS, UPT, PCS, intelligent networks, personal communications,
terminal data.


Thank you for any help!!!

Arndt

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

From: [e-mail] (Prime perf)
Subject: Script Translation for TDD/TTY Use
Date: 03 Jan 1995 10:35:31 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Prime perf)


Could someone direct me to a script translation service, preferably in
the Washington-Baltimore-Richmond area, that can translate information
scripts for use on an automated information line accessed by TDD/TTY
users?  Obviously, I would prefer it if you can recommend a service
provider that you have used.

Please email direct.

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

From: [e-mail] (Alex McPhail)
Subject: Cell Phone Programming
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 04:45:27 GMT
Organization: TeraScope Research


Does anyone have information about how to program your cell phone to
change your phone number, etc.


Thanks in advance,

Alex McPhail   TeraScope Research
[e-mail]
Voice:  [phone]
Fax:    [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh, I'm sure we have all that information
among the various readers here. It would help if you would tell us the
kind of phone you have. You might also check out the Motorola programming
file in the Telecom Archives and the other articles in the cellular
sub-directory there. And let's keep it on the up and up, please.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #1
****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22648;
          4 Jan 95 1:10 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28198; Tue, 3 Jan 95 21:04:04 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28191; Tue, 3 Jan 95 21:04:01 CST
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 95 21:04:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #2

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 3 Jan 95 21:04:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 2

Inside This Issue:                        Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (Pat Clawson)
    Pinouts on RS232 and Echoed Back Characters (Dave Thompson)
    Erlang Capacit ([e-mail])
    Phone Fraud - PBXs (Paul Murray)
    Phillipines Service Downtime (Al Niven)
    Netcom in Boston Brea (Vidur Kapoor)
    Cellular Direct Number (Sanjay Hiranandani)
    It's Not Tenex Anymore ... (Chris Cappuccio)
    Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Christian Weisgerber)
    How Can I Encrypt a T-1? (Quinn Lanus)
    Where Does ISDN Fit In? (Daniel Ritsma)
    Need Information on IS-54 (Dharshana P. Jayasuriya)
    What Magazines do You Read? (Patrick Sukhu)
    Information Wanted on Munich32 Chip (Matthew P. Downs)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: Pat Clawson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax
Date: Mon, 2 Jan 95 21:00:58 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


January 2, 1995

An Open Letter to Our Colleagues In the Online Communications
Community:

The announcement by CompuServe and Unisys that users of the GIF image
format must register by January 10 and pay a royalty or face lawsuits
for their past usage, is the online communications community's
equivalent of the sneak attack at Pearl Harbor.

The announcement of the CompuServe-Unisys GIF Tax on December 29,
during the lull between Christmas and New Year's Day, was clearly
timed to cause maximum damage while an unsuspecting public celebrated
the holidays.

We at TeleGrafix Communications have no quarrel with those who seek to
protect their intellectual property and profit from it.  Indeed, we
are in business to do the same.  We believe those who develop software
are entitled to reap financial rewards from their labors.

But in our opinion, the timing and circumstances of the CompuServe-
Unisys action indicates this is a shakedown of the online communications
community by two powerful corporations, rather than a reasonable
effort to protect intellectual property.

The GIF format has been in widespread public use since 1987.   Its
widespread use and royalty-free licensing has been encouraged by
CompuServe for years.  Neither CompuServe or Unisys have made any
significant improvements to GIF or its underlying LZW algorithm and
compression process to justify charging for what has been free.

Giving GIF users only 14 days to comply with sudden, unexpected
demands to pay the private CompuServe-Unisys GIF Tax or face
prosecution for past usage of what had been promoted for seven years
as free, open standard software is unconscionable. It is especially
outrageous since CompuServe and Unisys admit in writing that they
decided to require licensing SIX MONTHS AGO in June, and didn't
announce it to the public until now.

According to the CompuServe-Unisys GIF licensing agreement, the
settlement of the patent dispute was executed on June 21, 1994.
CompuServe agreed to implement the agreement "as soon as reasonably
practicable and in no case later than six (6) months after the date
this Agreement is executed..."  That six month period ended on
December 21, 1994 -- but CompuServe did not make the licensing terms
public until December 28.  Indeed, CompuServe appears to have violated
the terms of its own settlement agreement with Unisys.

While many of the messages we have read online in reaction to the
CompuServe-Unisys GIF Tax decree express both dismay and disbelief,
virtually none have analyzed the actual provisions of the licensing
agreement.  It is in this area that TeleGrafix Communications wishes
to contribute to the dialogue.

In our opinion, the CompuServe-Unisys licensing agreement is both
illogical and overly broad.  Let's examine some of its key provisions.
All quotes cited are directly from the agreement.

1. CompuServe will license Developers who want to use GIF technology.
The term "developer" is defined as "the other undersigned party to the
agreement," and it seems to apply to ANYONE who contemplates distributing
any product that uses the GIF format.

2.  Developers will be licensed to sell or distribute "Products" that
"use and exploit GIF ... solely within the Field of Use."  The term
"Field of Use" is defined as "primarily for accessing the CompuServe
Information Service and for manipulating and viewing data received
through the CompuServe Information Service."  The licensing agreement
further defines the term "Products" as being "software that is
developed or distributed ... which is designed for and used primarily
for accessing the CompuServe Information Service and for manipulating
and viewing data received through the CompuServe Information Service."

IT APPEARS THAT THE ONLY LAWFUL USE OF GIF WILL BE FOR COMPUSERVE-RELATED
PRODUCTS.  Using GIF images in any other manner, such as on CD-ROMs or
bulletin board systems, is prohibited.  Most of the thousands of
products that have used GIF in some manner are henceforth contraband.

3. Developers may no longer "use, copy, modify or distribute the GIF
specification, except as expressly permitted by CompuServe."  This
states that the GIF specification can no longer be shared, published
or uploaded in any manner without the express consent of CompuServe.

4. Members of the public are prohibited from using any software
product containing GIF until they have become a REGISTERED user of the
product.  The customer also must agree to use the product "primarily
for accessing the CompuServe Information Service and for manipulating
and viewing data received through the CompuServe Information Service."
This virtually eliminates the concept of freeware or shareware
containing GIF capabilities, since prospective customers can no longer
try out these software products without registering them first.

5. Software developers must pay $1.00 for a license to use GIF, PLUS a
fee equal to the GREATER of 1.5% of the selling price of the product,
or $0.15 per "Disposition."  Disposition is defined as "the sale,
lease or license or any other grant of rights to a Product or any new
Product."  All royalties must be paid quarterly.  Noncommercial and
freeware usage of GIF technology is NOT exempted from the royalty
requirement.  Because the royalty provisions and definition of
"Disposition" are so broad in scope, it appears that a GIF Tax payment
may be due to CompuServe-Unisys each time a GIF image is transmitted
via BBS or Internet.  The operators of a BBS or World Wide Web site
with hundreds or thousands of GIF images online could easily be
bankrupted by these licensing requirements.

6. CompuServe must be notified of ANY new product using GIF when it is
first offered to customers.

7. Persons using GIF must keep records of its use, and CompuServe has
the right to audit those records every year upon seven days notice.
Persons using GIF must pay the cost of the audit if a royalty
underpayment of 10% or more is discovered, along with 12% interest on
any underpaid royalties.

8. Even if the patent is later found by the courts or the U.S. Patent
Office to be invalid and unenforcable, or if the patent expires, any
developer must "return all copies of the GIF specification and any
confidential information of CompuServe then in its possession or
control to CompuServe, (ii) stop using the Licensed Technology, and
(iii) stop distributing Products."  This states that EVEN IF THE
PATENT IS OVERTURNED OR EXPIRES, YOU MUST STOP USING OR DISTRIBUTING
GIF.

9. Even though CompuServe has publicly disseminated the text of the
agreement it wants GIF users to sign, the terms of the agreement are
to remain confidential.  This is illogical, to say the least, since
they have posted it for public download on their own system.

10. Developers have to indemnify and hold CompuServe harmless for any
damages if their CUSTOMERS somehow use GIF technology in a way not
permitted by the licensing agreement.

11. Unisys has the right to enforce the agreement, as well as
CompuServe.  Further, Unisys has the right to pursue legal action or
seek damages against Developers even after the agreement has
terminated.

TeleGrafix Communicatons Inc. will not sign such a licensing
agreement.  We think most other software developers, BBS sysops and
Web site operators also will refuse to sign.

We encourage our colleagues in the online communications community to
evaluate the CompuServe-Unisys action, and to lodge appropriate
protests directly with those companies.

We believe that the CompuServe-Unisys GIF Tax drives a stake through
the heart of Internet development.  It will cripple the World Wide
Web, NCSA Mosaic, and other Internet multimedia technologies that rely
heavily on GIF imaging.

Fortunately, we at TeleGrafix Communications do not depend on GIF
imaging in our new RIPscrip 2.0 online multimedia technologies.  We
chose to implement the JPEG image format and only recently decided to
add GIF support as a convienience to our customers.  Due to the
restrictive conditions of the CompuServe-Unisys GIF Tax and licensing
agreement, we must now reevaluate our plans for supporting GIF use in
the upcoming release of RIPscrip 2.0.

While our company hopes to profit financially from our advanced
RIPscrip 2.0 technology, we will not demand royalties from those who
have used the freeware versions of our earlier RIPscrip 1.54 products
and/or technical specifications.  The RIPscrip 2.0 specification also
will be made public for third-party use after it is finalized.

We expect that the CompuServe-Unisys action will spell the death of
GIF as a commercially viable technology, shifting the attention of the
online communications community to JPEG imaging.


Sincerely,

Pat Clawson
President & Chief Executive Officer
TeleGrafix Communications Inc.
Huntington Beach, CA

Voice: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
BBS: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The folks at America OnLine must be
a bit disgruntled by this news also since a large number of users
on that system have GIFs on file for display to the persons they
are talking to in the chat rooms, etc. I don't know how many times
I have been on Compuserve, for example in the CB program and had
someone ask me if I had a GIF of myself they could view, etc. This
does seem like very bad news for the online community.   PAT]

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

From: Thompson, Dave <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pinouts on RS232 and Echoed Back Characters
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 95 02:46:00 PST


I've been out of the office and am amazed to see no followup to this, so:
In Telecom DIGEST 14.422, 21 Nov 1994 02:07:33 -0500, William Ono <wmono@
helix.net> asks:

> 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).

Partly from memory and partly from McNamara 1ed 1977 (!)  (one of the
few books unpacked after a recent office move) the RS-232 (now -D)
STANDARD, to which an "RS-232 style port" should comply IN RELEVANT
PARTS, was:

 1 Frame Ground
 2 Tx data (SD)
 3 Rx data (RD)
 4 Request To Send
 5 Clear To Send
 6 Data Set Ready
 7 Signal Ground
 8 Data Carrier Detect
11,12 apparently used by Bell 202C but not standardized
14 Secondary aka Reverse Tx Data
15 Tx clock from DCE
16 Secondary/Reverse Rx Data
17 Rx clock from DCE
20 Data Terminal Ready
22 Ring Indicator
24 Tx clock from DTE

You should also find this somewhere in the manual for almost any
decent external modem or indeed serial card.

> 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?

Yes, you can just connect RD to SD, IF:

1) For a direct cable, the out + back distance = 2 * length (and the
load of the two receivers combined) does not exceed the source
(computer?) end line-driver capacity, typically 50-100ft for faster
speeds (19.2, 38.4) and up to thousands of feet for 300, 1200 etc.;
for modems or other active equipment each end must already be able to
drive a good signal to the other, which is all that is needed, but
unless the modems etc. are regenerating (e.g. an ISDN line through a
TA) or error-correcting, any noise or timing distortion created on the
way out will be added to (probably doubled) on the way back, which may
be too much for correct/reliable transmission; AND

2) You DON'T send any data in at the remote end, that is, the ONLY
data sent back on SD is that received on RD.  If you try to connect RD
plus a local RS232 driver to SD, the (actually or virtually) remote
driver and the local one will fight each other to death.  Thus the
only practical use I can see for this is if you are sending a data
stream to an output-only device (such as a printer or recorder) which
is too dumb to detect and report errors, and you want to confirm that
the correct data reached it: if the computer receives an echo that is
the same as it sent, either the data actually reached the device's
input port correctly, or any errors that occurred on the output path
were matched by exactly complementary errors on the return path, which
is possible but quite unlikely.

However if the echo doesn't match it doesn't mean that the data was
definitely NOT delivered correctly, only that it's doubtful; the error
could have occurred only on the return path.  Also, just because the
data was delivered to the end of the cable doesn't assure it was
necessarily printed correctly or whatever.  And this assumes your
computer's serial interface is set up so that it doesn't drop input
characters as a result of buffer shortage or software timing problems
(causing spurious mismatches), and doesn't echo its input back to its
output (as terminal port drivers do on many systems, giving an
infinite loop).

If you want to return an echo of the received data and also send in
data, you need at least to convert the RS232 to and from logic levels
e.g. TTL and run them through an AND gate (assuming logic "true" =
RS232 "mark"); but with this simple implementation, assuming you are
sending characters in the normal fashion (ASCII) if you try to send in
data (e.g. begin typing on the terminal) while receiving, the
(serialized) characters (codes) will be be garbled; this is effectively
what happened in the old days of current-loop Teletypes for telegraph/cable.

An alternative would be if both(?) pieces of equipment support some
control signals (typically DTR/DSR or RTS/CTS/DCD) and the cable is
wired, or modems etc. are capable, to pass them through (e.g. modems
use true switched carrier so DCD output at the remote end follows RTS
at the computer end).  You could then use a couple of logic gates or a
2-1 multiplexer to feed into the SD driver either the received
(computer) data or the locally generated data depending on which has
its "control" line active, optionally with provision to arbitrate the
contention if both are active simultaneously.

The next level would be to deserialize RD and echo the characters back
into the send serializer, which would typically mean OR'ing or
selecting (multiplexing) the UART parallel output, or a buffered copy
of it, with the e.g. keyboard data lines, into the UART parallel
input, probably with interlock/overrun logic to prevent trying to send
while the UART is busy/full.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 19:46:00 +0100
Subject: Erlang Capacit


I am looking for information about Erlang Capacity Calculations for
land line based telecom networks. My main question is this:

In cellular, typical system design is according to Erlang B or Erlang
C traffic tables, and designed for 2% blocking (.02 G.O.S., Grade Of
Service).

Is this the same for land line?, local PSTN? long distance trunks?
international trunks? etc. Any information or source of information
for this would be useful.


Dan Goldberg

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Murray)
Subject: Phone Fraud - PBXs
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Paul Murray)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 23:01:46 GMT


Last year the TV show, 60 minutes, did a feature on phone fraud in the
US.  They estimated it was costing US phone customers, especially
businesses with PBxs, billions of dollars because of fraudulent use by
hackers.  More recently, CBC Radio in Canada did a news story on phone
fraud in which they said a Ministry of the Ontario government had been
hacked for $50,000 in one month.

Is this becoming a major problem for business everywhere?

I'd be interested to hear of incidents as I may know of a solution.


Paul J. Murray


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is a very major problem. Let's hear
your solution.    PAT]

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

From: Al Niven <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phillipines Service Downtime
Date: 4 Jan 1995 02:22:02 GMT
Organization: Video, Voice, ~ Data, Inc.


Anybody with ATT service to the Phillipines that experienced downtime
between 12/3/94 and today please email or call collect at:

310-273-5891 or
310-273-5175 or
310-453-1414 (ask for Mike Lieber at this number)


Thank You.

Al Niven,    Video, Voice, & Data, Inc.
212-714-3531


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What's going on, if you don't mind
discussing it here?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (vidur kapoor)
Subject: Netcom in Boston Area
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 16:26:34 GMT


I would like to know the telephone number (voice) for Netcom in the
Boston area.


Thanks,

Vidur

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

From: [e-mail] (Sanjay Hiranandani)
Subject: Cellular Direct Number
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 16:06:45 -0500
Organization: Cornell University Network Resources


A while ago someone on this group posted a number for Cellular Direct
and/or some other mail order source for cellular phones and accessories.
Does anyone still have those numbers handy?

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Cappuccio)
Subject: It's Not Tenex Anymore ...
Date: 3 Jan 1995 19:24:36 -0500
Organization: Public Access in Ft. Lauderdale - SatelNET [phone]


I haven't seen anything on comp.dcom.telecom about this before so I
will explain what I know ... 10XXX codes are being changed to 1010XXX
(e.g. AT&T @ 10288 is now 1010288) and new carriers are being assigned
to 1015XXX to 1016XXX.  I don't know how the rest of it is going to be
assigned, but this change is quite interesting.  It was planned
sometime in 1993 and I don't know when it was actually implemnted, but
it already works if you dial 1010XXX around Michigan (at least with
Ameritech, I don't know if some of the smaller 'alternative' carriers
in mid-michigan have adapted to this yet).  I imagine that 10XXX
dialing will be discontinued sometime in the future (or at least there
will never be any 101XX codes)  If anyone else has information on
this subject, please post it!


Peace,

Chris

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

From: [e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber)
Subject: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 00:14:43 MET


What kind of noise/distortion does American-style bit-robbing cause to
voice band signals transmitted through PCM channels?

(The reason I ask is that I wonder how much bit-robbing affects V.34
modems.)


Christian 'naddy' Weisgerber, Germany     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Quinn Lanus)
Subject: How Can I Encrypt a T-1?
Organization: The Signature Group
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 02:47:45 GMT


I have a requirement which calls for encrypting the data which crosses
our T-1.  I would prefer this to occur "transparently" with respect to
existing equipment installed.

Has anyone heard of a product which can do this?


Thanks in advance,

Quinn Lanus    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 02:11:06 EST
From: Daniel Ritsma <[e-mail]>
Subject: Where Does ISDN Fit In?


When talking about telecommunications in computer-networking, people
often talk about t-1,2,3 or other type of line that specifically
define the bandwith of the connection.

What about ISDN, how do you fit that in these terms?  What is the
standard bandwith of ISDN, and how is it when you only use it for
computer-data transfer when we speak about t-1s.  Is it like an 15kHz
analoge line, that is used for Radio Signal transfer.

In short when do I use ISDN, over other alternatives?


Thanks.

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

From: Dharshana P. Jayasuriya <[e-mail]>
Subject: Need Information on IS-54
Date: 3 Jan 1995 15:44:52 GMT
Organization: University of Trondheim, Norway


I would appreciate very much if someone can recommend a good book or
some other material which has sufficient information on the architecture
and protocols of the US digital standard IS 54.

Is it possible to buy a copy of the standard itself? (I mean not the
whole thousands of pages but a summary.) Or is it strictly proprietary?


Thanks in advance,

Dharshana Jayasuriya,
Dept.of computer systems and telematics,
Norwegian Institute of technology,
Trondheim, Norway

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

From: [e-mail] (Patrick Sukhu)
Subject: What Magazines Do You Read?
Date: 2 Jan 1995 00:38:28 GMT
Organization: Ingress Communications ([e-mail])


What are some of your favorite telecom magazines that you read?

Thanks,

Patrick


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You mean of course, in addition to
everyone's favorite, TELECOM Digest?   :)    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
Subject: Information Needed on Munich32 Chip
Date: 3 Jan 1995 14:26:28 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


I need some help with a chip made by Siemens the Munich32.  We are
trying to run it in HDLC and have some problems.  If any one has used
this, any pointers would be appreciated.


Matt

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #2
****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23168;
          4 Jan 95 2:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29538; Tue, 3 Jan 95 22:13:03 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29531; Tue, 3 Jan 95 22:13:00 CST
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 95 22:13:00 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #3

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 3 Jan 95 22:13:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 3

Inside This Issue:                        Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: FM Subcarrier For Data Transmission (Gene Retske)
    Re: FM Subcarrier For Data Transmission (Wm. Randolph Franklin)
    Re: 19 Inch Network Relay Rack (Evan Gamblin)
    Re: 19 Inch Network Relay Rack (Mike Morris)
    Re: 19 Inch Network Relay Rack (Robert Hazen)
    Re: 19 Inch Network Relay Rack (Scott Falke)
    Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T (Jim Hupf)
    Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Cellphone Radiation Danger? (Steven King)
    Re: Cellphone Radiation Danger? (Alan Shen)
    Re: Watching the Area Codes Split (Sean E. Williams)
    Re: Watching the Area Codes Split (Mike Morris)
    Re: '500' Numbers Finally Available (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Prepaid Telephone Debit Cards (Gerry Gollwitzer)
    Re: Newbridge Channel Bank (Ethan Henry)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: Gene Retske <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FM Subcarrier For Data Transmission
Date: 3 Jan 1995 14:02:48 GMT
Organization: Tachyon Communications Corporation -- Tach-Net


PAT, you wrote:

> In my phone box in the basement there are pairs going back to the
> telephone exchange ... a distance of some three thousand feet. So let's
> attach the antenna from our old Philco receiver turned transmitter to
> one of the pairs <wink> ... no one will ever know the difference, seriously.
> RF can travel on the phone pair; it gets along fine with telco's thing.
> So we found an idle pair and hooked it up.

This may work, but did you really connect the output of a tube type
receiver to telephone pairs?  This is very dangerous and, in my
opinion, irresponsible.  If the DC blocking capacitor in this old
receiver were to short, which is highly likely, you could deliver a
lethal shock to an unsuspecting telephone worker.

I normally enjoy your commentaries, but I object to you publishing
information that could be so deadly!  Please think about how many
children and unsophisicated adults could read this and jeopardize
someone's life.


Shame!

Gene Retske


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, for all of about 30 minutes. You
are correct it is not a very good idea. I certainly would not put up
something like that on a regular or permanent basis.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)
Subject: Re: FM Subcarrier For Data Transmission
Date: 4 Jan 1995 01:40:52 GMT
Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)


Ramsey, and possibly other kit makers, sell kits to decode SCA
transmissions.  The Ramsay ones cost from $28 to $60.  The lo end is
for only an SCA kit.  The hi end is for an FM receiver kit also, and a
case.

I bought a Ramsey kit for a lo powered FM transmitter, to transmit my
CD player around the house, and was quite satisfied with it.  It was
better than Heathkit, IMHO.  If I'd known about their TV transmitter
kit, I wouldn't have had to pull coax thru my heating ducts.
According to Ramsey, these things are legal provided you don't
interfere with anyone.

Ramsey Electronics
793 Canning Parkway
Victor NY 14564
[phone]

I found out about them from a 373-line list posted to sci.electronics
some time ago.  If you'd like it, to minimize traffic on this group, I
put it up on the Web.  It's accessible indirectly from my home page,
or directly at:

http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/wrf/mailorder_electronics


Wm. Randolph Franklin,  [e-mail], [phone];  Fax: -6261
ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA
More info: (1) finger -l [e-mail] (2) http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/wrf.html

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

From: [e-mail] (Evan Gamblin)
Subject: Re: 19 Inch Network Relay Rack
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 12:50:25 -0500
Organization: Mary Ellen Carter Salvors Inc.


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

> I need help of a person who know a US or Canadian supplier (name and
> phone number) for the following type of equipment: Standard 19 inch widths
> open frame rack (network relay rack with universal EIA hole spacing)
> certified for earthquake Zone 4 (california).

Saunders Brothers in Santa Fe Springs, CA: 310 945-1038 voice, 698-6510 fax.


Evan Gamblin, RCDD
The Halifax Group
903-275 Sparks St
Ottawa, Ontario K1R 7X9 Canada

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: 19 Inch Network Relay Rack
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 02:38:33 GMT


Call Harris-Dracon in Chatsworth, Calif.  Don't know the number of the
top of my head, but 818 information should have it.


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ
PO Box 1130   Arcadia, CA. 91077
ICBM: 34.12N, 118.02W  Reply to: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Hazen)
Subject: Re: 19 Inch Network Relay Rack
Date: 03 Jan 1995 19:05:05 -0800
Organization: Pacific Northwest Net


[e-mail] wrote:

> I need help of a person who know a US or Canadian supplier (name and
> phone number) for the following type of equipment: Standard 19 inch widths
> open frame rack (network relay rack with universal EIA hole spacing)
> certified for earthquake Zone 4 (california).

Pardon?  Nobody at Northern Telecom knows where to obtain these?
Really?  Naaaahh...  :)

If you don't have answers by 1/9/95, remind me via email.  I'll be
back to work then where I can look up our suppliers.

We sell equipment into California that has been certified to Bellcore
TR-EOP-000063 zone four seismic requirements.  I'm sure I can help you
out.


Bob

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jan 95 13:35:41 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Scott Falke)
Subject: Re: 19 Inch Network Relay Rack
Organization: CSU Stanislaus


Two manufacturers of 19" racks are:

    Hoffmannn Engineering @ 612 421-2240 fx-1556, and

    Hammond Manufacturing @ 716 631-5700 fx-1156.

As for seismic rating, Hoffmann makes a lot of specials, but any
rating would be absolutely dependent on the rack load; i.e., what's
mounted in it.  This may have to be indpendently determined by a third
party, meaning mucho bux.

If you can't get anywhere on this, *as time permits* I would be
willing to do some minor research on the subject.


[e-mail]

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

From: Jhupf <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 20:20:23 EST
Organization: News & Observer Public Access


On Thu, 29 Dec 1994, Alan Boritz wrote:

Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

>> I would recommend to the father that he call his local telephone
>> company and tell them to switch service back to MCI; don't even
>> mention this check to the son; assuming anyone even notices, if AT&T
>> complains, ask for a copy of the signed order from the subscriber.

This is not necessary -- I got to the local telco before they made the
change! As suggested below at the time I put the local telco on notice
NOT to make any changes in my LD carrier without my authorization (for
what good that will do, but they are on written notice to that effect.)

> And who's going to pay for the PIXC change?  His lazy son? <g>

The son is not lazy, he has two jobs and is paying off $22,000+ in
student loans -- he appreciated getting teh Xmas present from AT&T (;->

>> The son is not the subscriber and has no authority to change the
>> service.  It is not your position to prove you didn't authorize it,
>> it's theirs to prove they have an authorization from someone who can
>> issue the authorization.

That's what I told my phone company and they understood where I was
coming from.

> But it's not going to stop AT&T from issuing ANOTHER PIXC change just
> like the did the first unauthorized change.  The subscriber should
> first issue an order to the local telco to not accept account changes
> from anyone but HIM.

As I said above I did that before the bogus change could be put in
effect!

>> Or just ignore the whole thing and dial 10222 to get MCI before every
>> call, which is what I used to do when I wanted to use AT&T on the line
>> I had switched to MCI in order to get the free bag from them; I dialed
>> 10288 to get AT&T before calls, or I just use the other line which is
>> still on AT&T.

It's not in me to ignore anything like this, and besides how would I
be able to accumulate more MCI Points to get me a free Round-Trip
Coach-Class ticket on American Airlines (;-> while I rack up all of
the Friends and Family savings!

> Absolutely do NOT ignore it.  Slamming is a sleazy way of doing long
> distance business, and no one should have to put up with it.  State
> public utilities regulatory agencies are usually interested in
> investigating such incidents.  The father should file a simple
> complaint against his local telco requesting that they be ordered to
> change his PIXC back to the original LD carrier, that AT&T be charged
> for all costs associated with the PIXC changes, and that the local
> telco be ordered to refund to the subscriber any additional long
> distance charges (and lost discounts) due to the unauthorized change.

Even though there was nothing to complain to the state about the local
phone company -- they were very cooperative with my concerns and I
guess the fact that they may be facing direct local competition in my
area may have had some influence on wanting to make sure I was a happy
camper!  (For other reasons it is my intention to drop them like a hot
potato(e) when the new phone company makes their first contact with
me!)  I did drop a note to the state about this matter for whatever
that is worth as well as sending a copy to the FCC, again for whatever
tha is worth.  I also will be discussing it with a consumer affairs
specialt in the State Attorney General's Office of Consumer Protection
early in the New Year when I meet with her concerning some sleezy
advertising practices the local Cable company has been into - (Since
the new phone company is running a fiber optic line, I wonder if I
might be able to dump the Cable company too???  (8->>> The thought
that I might be able to give it to two "Evil Giants" with one stone!)


Jim Hupf   Permanently Unemployed by Choice
[e-mail]   [e-mail]  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 15:29:53 PST


John D. Borrows said:

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

>> Now my son is one of those adult children who happened to return to
>> our empty nest.  He takes full advantage of his return to the nest
>> including the use of MY telephone, he doesn't now have a phone he can
>> call his own, nor for that matter has he ever been a customer of any
>> phone company.  But still Ray Drake in his generosity has decided to
>> give him 40 bucks for Christmas -- hold on there are strings seems when
>> the kid cashed the check he changed _MY_ LD carrier from MCI to AT&T!
>> This annoyed me because I'm happy with MCI and don't want AT&T as my
>> LD carrier!

> WAIT, where your LD goes is a matter between you and your local
> telephone company.  They will presubscribe you to whomever you direct
> them to.  All you have to do is contact them and tell them you want
> MCI.  There may be a charge for the change.  They are not in a
> position to arbitrate any dispute between you and AT&T (or you and

It may be a matter between the LEC and the customer, but as soon as
AT&T finds out that the Easy Access carrier has been changed, they
will issue an order to change it right back.

I would call the LEC (in my case Pacific Bell) and tell them AT&T is
"slamming" your line.  When they hear "slam" they take your complaint
very seriously.  Tell them you want a password on your account, and
not to authorize any changes made without that password.

You might want to call AT&T up and tell them you don't appreciate them
slamming your line.  (Their ears perk up nicely when they hear "slam"
too).


Steve    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven King, Software Archaeologist)
Subject: Re: Cellphone Radiation Danger?
Date: 3 Jan 1995 15:25:00 GMT
Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There has been discussion of this topic
> here in these very columns in the past. Generally speaking, it is a
> non-issue. It takes a lot more power than a cellphone antenna can
> radiate before it matters. If John Higdon sees this, he may well decide
> to respond. He did so the last time this topic arose here. He has worked
> around RF radiation for years, and lots of it at that.   PAT]

So, PAT, is this an argument *for* or *against* brain damage due to RF?

(Just kidding, John.  This one was too good to let by. :-)


Steven King <[e-mail]> -- Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When this came up last year, someone said
John Higdon had a bald head caused by his hair falling out which was
caused by his proximity to the radiation, etc. John protested that he
did not have a bald head.  PAT]

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

From: Alan Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellphone Radiation Danger?
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 14:40:23 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On 29 Dec 1994, Chuck Campbell wrote:

> Someone told me that cellular telephones have antenna radiation
> danger, being in such close proximity to the brain.  Is there any
> discussion or literature regarding such claims, or can they all be
> immediately dismissed as garbage?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There has been discussion of this topic
> here in these very columns in the past. Generally speaking, it is a
> non-issue. It takes a lot more power than a cellphone antenna can
> radiate before it matters. If John Higdon sees this, he may well decide
> to respond. He did so the last time this topic arose here. He has worked
> around RF radiation for years, and lots of it at that.   PAT]

Let's just say this. Your microwave is more powerful then your cellular
phone. The TV gives of EMR. Your computer; a cop using a radar gun.  I'm
not trying to sound mean or anything, and that isn't what I'm trying
to imply here.

If you are going to live in fear of radiation, reality says that you'll
never escape it.

If using a portable phone with the antenna two or so inches (about six
cm for your metric people <G>) away from your brain putting out 0.6
watts (this is according to US Standards. I know other standards put
out 10X that much) is going to give you a BRAIN TUMOR, then don't use
one!

We're thoroughly aware of the fact that it may not be healthy for you.
We're taking a chance. Why don't you just buy a mobile phone and put the
antenna 20 feet away from you. That'll *technically* get rid of anyone's
radiation worries.


Daniel Kao

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

Date: 3 Jan 1995 14:49:36 -0500
From: Sean E. Williams <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Watching the Area Codes Split


John Lundgren wrote:

> Someday there might just be a database that has your name, and the number
> associated with it, and all people will have to do is punch up your name,
> and not have to worry about a number.  And it will be current.

Just like the internet Domain Name System.  It could have been implemented
years ago, and then we wouldn't be having all the problems associated
with the NANP -- your neighbor could be in a different area code, and
you wouldn't even have to know or care, so long as you could remember
his name!

How about a system which provides a menu of available options?  Start
out by entering a person's name.

Okay, so there are thousands of "Jim Smiths" in the US.  At first, you
are presented with the one who lives closest to you (the city / street
would be displayed) or you could specify a specific location at the
start if you are calling a "Jim Smith" who lives several states away.

When you finally select the appropriate "Jim Smith", a menu appears
listing the following options: home, cellular, pager, fax, data, etc.
Select the option you wish, and you are connected to that service.

I don't know much about ISDN, but it's probably capable of doing this
right now if the appropriate software were to be written.


Sean E. Williams ([e-mail])
Harrisburg Area Community College, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA
Mobile/Voicemail/Pager: [phone]  FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: Watching the Area Codes Split
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 02:36:44 GMT


[e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> Neal McLain <[e-mail].
> edu> writes:

>> My question: given that all three cities are centers of rapidly-growing
>> metro areas, why not a three-way split:

>>     Nashville retains 615.

>>     Knoxville gets 423.

>>     Chattanooga gets something else.

> Suppose area code 666 is to be asigned somewhere, maybe in the Bible
> Belt.  (there's some sort of connection with 666 with the devil).
> Just imagine all the complaints you'll hear if this happens.

The perfect location for area code 666 is Washington DC.  Give the
entire code to the federal government.  Keep all the non-goverment
stuff in the old area code.


Mike Morris   WA6ILQ
PO Box 1130   Arcadia, CA. 91077
ICBM: 34.12N, 118.02W  | Reply to: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We went through this once before, a couple
years ago, and someone posted a list of all the places where the 666
exchange appeared around the USA, in which area codes, etc, and if there
were any special users such as centrex accounts, etc on them. It seems
to me somewhere some government offices were on 666 in that area code;
maybe it was the IRS, I'm not sure. In Chicago, MONroe, MOnroe-6 and 666
has been a working exchange on the west side of Chicago for seventy
years or more. In the old days when it was Monroe (and in fact there is
a central office named for it, called 'Chicago-Monroe') no one seemed to
notice it. Now pronounced 'six six six', a few people get sore about being
assigned to it. Until they changed to the new number 312-TAXICAB a couple
years ago, the Yellow/Checker Taxi radio dispatch office had the longest
term number of any business in Chicago: 666-3700, which they held for
seventy-plus years along with their other number of equal longevity for
radio dispatched cabs, CALumet-6000. In my collection of pictures from
Chicago's past, I have a picture of a Model-J Ford, taken about 1915,
with the inscription on the side, 'Yellow Taxicab Service, Monroe 3700'.
The devil you say!   :)   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: '500' Numbers Finally Available
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 15:53:48 GMT


Jack Hamilton ([e-mail]) writes:

[regarding 500 service from AT&T]

> - They count the number of times per day you change the forwarding phone,
>   and if you exceed that number something happens (I don't know what).

How can the number of times per day you change the forwarding phone
exceed the number of times per day you change the forwarding phone?
Was Jack trying to say that they impose a limit?  Does anybody know
what it is?


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerry Gollwitzer)
Subject: Re: Prepaid Telephone Debit Cards
Date: 03 Jan 1995 16:57:17 GMT
Organization: Exec-PC


Kevin J. Sullivan ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I'm looking for information on setting up a business selling prepaid
> calling cards.  Is there anyone who knows what you need to do this?  I
> have heard it is relatively easy, however I'd like to know some
> specific details.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you'll find there are so many
> people doing this -- as well as selling long distance in general through
> various multi-level marketing schemes -- that the profit margin is very
> very thin.  I think you will work long and hard hours for a very small
> commission.  PAT]

Hmmm ... we are finding the prepaid calling card programs to be very
lucrative, especially for fund raising and company promotions.


Gerry


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, let me know which company you are
selling for, and something about the profit you are making on them if
you don't mind. I may start handling it again.    PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jan 95 14:31:03 EST
From: [e-mail] (Ethan Henry)
Subject: Re: Newbridge Channel Bank
Organization: Crosskeys Systems Corporation


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

> [e-mail] (Michael Tague) wrote:

>> where is the Newbridge company located (or phone number)?

> The listing in the new Dallas Yellow Pages shows the following:
> [deleted]
> I think this is the home office.  If not they should be able to give
> you the number.

Gosh, I hope it's not the home office. The engineers are going to have
an awfully long commute from their homes in Ottawa ...

Newbridge's HQ is in Kanata, Ontario, but here is a list of their
sales offices I got off of a '4602 MainStreet' poster.

UNITED STATES
Newbridge Networks Inc
593 Herndon Parkway
Herndon, Virginia
U.S.A. 22070-5241
Tel. [phone]
     1 703 834-3600
FAX  [phone]

CANADA
Newbridge Networks Corporation
5580 Explorer Drive
Suite 100
Mississauga, Ontario
Canada L4W 4Y1
Tel. [phone]
FAX  [phone]

LATIN AMERICA
ASIA PACIFIC & RUSSIA
Newbridge Networks Corporation
600 March Road
P.O. Box 13600
Kanata, Ontario
Canada K2K 2E6
Tel. [phone]
FAX  [phone]

There's also an address in the UK.

Newbridge has (I believe) local sales offices in various large cities,
but I don't know anything about these.

DISCLAIMER: Don't believe my email address, I don't work for Newbridge.
Nice company though it is, I work across the street, at Crosskeys.


Ethan Henry  [e-mail]
CrossKeys Systems Corporation

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #3
****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24683;
          4 Jan 95 3:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01122; Tue, 3 Jan 95 23:29:11 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01114; Tue, 3 Jan 95 23:29:07 CST
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 95 23:29:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #4

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 3 Jan 95 23:29:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 4

Inside This Issue:                        Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: British Telecom Information Superhighway (Yves Blondeel)
    Re: Portability of 800 Number When Bill Not Paid (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Re: Telephone Tariffs for 1995 California (John Covell)
    Re: What is a T1 Line? (James Carlson)
    Re: Handshaking: Computer-Computer or Modem-Computer? (Alain Fontaine)
    Re: NYNEX Ringmate and Modems (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Flat Rate Cellular Phone Service (Jim Hupf)
    Re: Need Info on LD Marketing to College Students (Benjamin L. Combee)
    Re: Its Here Again! FCC/Modem Tax (Jerry Whelan)
    Re: Information Wanted on NEC 2000 Switch ([e-mail])
    Re: GSM in U.S. (Lynne Gregg)
    Re: How to Find Your Number (Greg Tompkins)
    Looking for Pager Operators for Tampa/Ft. Myers Area (Mark Huang)
    Phone Card Reader Wanted (Keith Jason Uber)
    Last Laugh! IBM Buys Episcopal Church (John Shaver)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: Yves Blondeel <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: British Telecom Information Superhighw
Date: 3 Jan 1995 12:32:20 GMT
Organization: FUNDP, Namur, Belgium


[e-mail] (Henrik Bergqvist) wrote:

> In article [e-mail], Yves Blondeel <[e-mail]>
> writes:

>>  The prohibition only applies to the delivery of entertainment
>>  services directly to residential customers as end-users in a local
>>  loop. The conveyance of signals within the network, for example to
>>  cable TV head-ends and also to individual business users, is permitted.

> What is the definition of entertainment services?

There is no formal definition of entertainment services. This is left
to interpretation by the regulatory authorities (Department of Trade
and Industry and Office of Telecommunications - OFTEL). These two
authorities have shied away from formulating rigid definitions.

Relevant reading material on this subject:

March 1991 White Paper (see my previous posting).
OFTEL Annual Report 1993 (available from OFTEL for 15 pounds).

> Is there a difference in the regulation between point-to-point
> services and broadcast services?

There is no formal distinction from a *telecommunications* regulatory
point of view. However, a broadcasting service would fall under the
specific broadcasting regulations in addition to telecoms regulations.
The Independent Television Commission (ITC) would be involved.

> What would the regulatory issues be if the PTO (i.e. BT) only made
> the bit transport service to the residence and another company
> provided the actual service (e.g. videoserver)?

In my opinion, in the case you suggest, the PTO would NOT be providing
"entertainment services in their own right" since it would have no
involvement on the entertainment side.

I invite comments on this opinion.


Yves Blondeel   [e-mail] (e-mail address will change)

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

From: [e-mail] (Judith Oppenheimer)
Subject: Re: Portability of 800 Number When Bill Not Paid
Date: 3 Jan 1995 15:22:18 -0500
Organization: The Pipeline


Portabilty isn't in the regs.  Portability was an FCC ruling in
response to a carrier application.  There is nothing in the original
ruling about billing disputes.

Beyond that, it depends who the carrier in question is, and the tariff
(contract with the customer) under which they operate.

For example, the AT&T tariff says 800 portability can only be blocked
if there is in excess of $1000 in UNDISPUTED billing unpaid.


J. Oppenheimer, [e-mail]
Interactive CallBrand(TM)

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

From: [e-mail] (John Covell)
Subject: Re: Telephone Tariffs for 1995 California
Date: 3 Jan 1995 03:32:29 GMT
Organization: University of San Francisco


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(John Lundgren) writes:

>> Where might I find a listing of the new tariffs that will be effective
>> 1995?  Is there a California PUC Web site?

The CPUC has only a gopher site so far as I know: cpuc.ca.gov


John Covell       McLaren School of Business
University of San Francisco    <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (James Carlson)
Subject: Re: What is a T1 Line?
Date: 3 Jan 1995 13:17:52 GMT
Organization: Xylogics Incorporated
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Joseph H Allen) writes:

>> In article <[e-mail]>, James Carlson  <carlson@xylogics.
>> com> wrote:

>>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
>>> writes:

>>>> These filters are not to limit your modem
>>>> speeds, but to protect you 64 kbps channel from others.  So you don't
>>>> hear the cross talk on your line!

>>> Not quite; there's no way one DS0 can interfere with another, and
>>> there's no such thing as cross-talk at the digital level.

>> Wrong; digital is always a statistical quantity in this analog world.
>> Cross-talk certainly is possible between digital lines.  If you put
>> two wires next to each other, there is always some amount of
>> cross-talk between them.  As the cross-talk interference increases,
>> the probability of a pulse being screwed up (or the digital error
>> rate) increases.

I'm afraid you'll have to re-read what I wrote.  There is no such
thing as "cross-talk" at the *digital* level.  One DS0 channel cannot
affect another within a T1 line; there just is no path for this to
happen.  Any signal at all can be carried on a DS0, and the others
will be blissfully unaware that it exists.  They are separated in
time.

Of course, digital signals are carried in the analog world, and, thus,
the analog representation of the digital signal is possibly subject to
cross-talk.  This could increase the error rate if you've got multiple
physical wires which are magnetically or capacitively coupled.  But it
won't appear as "cross-talk" in the traditional sense, since it would
affect clock recovery and framing as well as the encoded data.

>> In fact Pulse Code Modulation (digital) without any error detection
>> has almost the same interference properties as FM radio.  If two FM
>> stations are close, there will be noise.  If they are really close,
>> you'll hear both stations at once and lots of noise.

The two are very different.  PCM is a digital signal; if you can
recover it from the noise on the line, you'll get a "perfect" copy of
the data.  Line hits will produce a decidedly non-analog type of
noise, with random data points being generated.  To produce
traditional "cross-talk" effects, you'd have to do an arithmetic
average on the values of the data points between two lines.  This is
highly unlikely to occur.

If you had two AMI lines next to each other, you'd need to have the
extraneous cross-talk signal exceed the pulse detection threshold of
the receivers in order to be able to detect *anything* at all.
Anything below this value would simply be invisible at the digital
level.

FM, due to the nature of analog demodulation techniques, exhibits a
capture effect.  If two signals are broadcast on the same frequency,
the "louder" signal will be heard to the exclusion of the "quieter"
signal.  You won't hear both stations at once.  If the received
amplitude of the two signals are varying with respect to each other,
then all sorts of interesting effects (depending on the type of
demodulation used) occur, but hearing both at once isn't one of the
options.

>>> The analog filters are there to prevent aliasing, which is an objectionable
>>> beat frequency which appears in the spectrum when the Nyquist limit is
>>> exceeded by any component of the signal.

>> There's a 4KHz low pass filter before the A/D converter for this.

Right.  And it has nothing to do with cross-talk, which was the poster's
original assertion.

>> There's also a ~100KHz low-pass filter between the A/D converter and
>> the line to limit the edge rate of the digital pulses.  Cross-talk is
>> more severe at higher frequencies, so limiting the unnecessary high-
>> frequencies caused by fast edges helps reduce cross-talk.

Any filter placed in the DS0 data path after quantization and before
multiplexing has no effect on the bandwidth of the signal that the
user of that DS0 sees.  This has nothing to do with the poster's
original statements.


James Carlson <[e-mail]>            Tel:  [phone]
Annex Software Support / Xylogics, Inc.               [phone]
53 Third Avenue / Burlington MA  01803-4491     Fax:  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alain Fontaine)
Subject: Re: Handshaking: Computer-Computer or Modem-Computer?
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 10:14:52 +0100
Organization: Universite Catholique de Louvain


In article (Dans l'article) <[e-mail]>, jon_sree@
world.std.com (Jon Sreekanth) wrote:

> Fascinating. If I understand right, the second parallel interface was
> required because any character sent on the first would just get modulated
> and sent out on the phone line, instead of being interpreted as a
> command?

Exactly. There was nothing but an frequency-modulated oscillator behind the
serial interface (or a more complicated circuit in modems faster than V.23,
but still a circuit and no intelligence).

> And the intelligent modem breakthru was to make a moded modem, to be
> in command mode initially, go into data mode upon carrier detection,
> and drop out upon carrier loss or upon seeing the infamous escape
> sequence? Is this how Hayes got their start?

Right.

In article (Dans l'article) <[e-mail]>, jlundgre@
kn.PacBell.COM (John Lundgren) wrote:

> whatever, the dropping of the RTS may not really mean no carrier.  It
> may just mean to stop sending data from the modem to the PC, and the
> carrier may not be affected.

In this case, I would call the signal 'Ready to receive' (ITU V.24
circuit 133) instead of RTS. The fact that it is still on pin 4 of an
ISO2110 physical interface notwithstanding ... just call me a nitpicker.


AF

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: NYNEX Ringmate and Modems
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 13:17:31 PST


John Lundgren said:

>> I've called Pac Bell several times and asked when I can get ringmate/
>> <pick your choice of other names> and they tell me they have no idea.
>> I tell them what it is and they say that the system can't do it.  I
>> tell them that it has been available all over the country for over a
>> year and they are speechless.  Is there any other "magic words" I can
>> use to enlighten them?  If it helps any I'm northeast of downtown L.A.
>> by about 12 miles, in the 818-447 exchange.

> Ask for a supervisor and pursue the issue.  Ive heard it called distinctive
> ringing, but it might be called something else by P.B.  Whatever you
> do, don't give up if you get the same 'idunno' from the stupidvisor.

Distinctive Ringing is a _very_ different service; you select up to ten
numbers, and your phone will ring with a different cadence when any
one of those 10 people call you.  Sort of like a poor man's Caller ID.
As I posted previously, Pac Bell does not offer "Ringmate" because
they perceive that there is a shortage of numbers.


Steve     [e-mail]

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

From: Jhupf <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Flat Rate Cellular Phone Service
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 20:32:19 EST
Organization: News & Observer Public Access


On Thu, 29 Dec 1994, Lawrence The Dreamer Chen wrote:

> I don't know how wide spread the service is, but up here (Canada) they
> have packages where you get unlimited weekend calling, and for $10 a
> month more you get unlimited evening calling (7pm-7am).

CelularOne of Triangle here in the Triangle in North Carolina offers
full local access on weekends for $10 a month.  We were considering
going for it until we realized we had an accmulation of more than 575
minutes of local calling credit we haven't been able to use during the
past 14 months.

Between this balance of "bonus" time and the 60 minutes included in
our calling plan we are able to Call, Talk, listen and home rate roam
without any significant reduction in our accumulated balances.

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin L. Combee)
Subject: Re: Need Info on LD Marketing to College Students
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 20:24:26 -0500
Organization: ROASF Atlanta
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> I'm researching a magazine article on how the long distance companies
> market their services to college students. You would be helping me
> considerably by providing me with any of the following information:

> o     The size (budget, number of employees) of AT&T's, MCI's or Sprint's
> student marketing departments.

> o     Any recent promotions, giveaways or advertising targeting college
> students.

> o     Any weird, frightening or amusing stories or incidents related to
> this subject.

Hello.  I'm down at Georgia Tech, and we've seen a number of different
marketing schemes.

MCI has been doing a lot: just recently, they came along with lots of
other companies to do a Campus Fest where they were pushing their
1-800-COLLECT line.  Also, around Thanksgiving, they were handing out
hundreds of cards that each gave ten minutes on 1-800-COLLECT using a
special code.

My roommate last year had a Sprint calling card, and he got several
promotions.  For Halloween, he got a postcard with a mask on one side
that said he could make unlimited free long distance calls for one
hour on Halloween night.

Tech itself has contracted with Sprint for the LD service in all the
dormatories.  Most rooms only have local service turned on, but if you
want, you can get LD enabled but only with Sprint as your carrier.
The housing department gets a kickback on any Sprint calls made from
the rooms.

I hope these help you out.  If you've got more questions, let me know.


Name=Ben Combee
E-Mail=[e-mail]
URL=http://www.gatech.edu/acm/combee.html

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

From: [e-mail] (Jerry Whelan)
Subject: Re: Its Here Again! FCC/Modem Tax
Date: 3 Jan 1995 18:47:41 GMT
Organization: Brookhaven National Lab, CCD


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, he did not mark it 'not for
> publication' and in any event, I think it does us good to air out
> this thing once in awhile and re-emphasize the nonsense of it all.  PAT]

'Not for publication' ...

Take a look at Brock Meeks's `CyberWire Dispatch' at:
http://cyberwerks.com:70/0h/cyberwire/cwd/cwd.94.12.09a.html

The root of the dispatch tree is at:
http://cyberwerks.com:70/1/cyberwire

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

From: [e-mail] (Chazworth)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on NEC 2000 Switch
Date: 3 Jan 1995 00:35:03 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


In article <[e-mail]>, Jason Davis <jasondav@delphi.
com> writes:

> I just installed one, nice system.  This one was equiped with 256
> ports and three T1 interfaces.  SMDR and voice Mail also. Great looking
> rack mounted with patch panels.

In the interest of keeping this string going: Have you or anyone
installed the Ethernet card on the 2000IVS yet?  Let me know, I am
curious as to how it works, or may work.

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GSM in U.S.
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 09:46:00 PST


[e-mail] recently inquired about GSM support in the U.S.

   Recently McCaw's New York operation, Cellular One began an
International Roaming service involving GSM phones.  One TD responder
to the original post pointed out that there are NO cellular carriers
supporting GSM on their U.S. systems.  This is absolutely correct.
However, if you choose local service with Cellular One in New York,
you can retain your GSM unit and can have your GSM calls (if you roam
back in Europe) billed back to a single account -- your Cellular One
account.

If you have questions about this service you can talk to cathy.oshea@
mccaw.com, reply to me, or contact the Cellular One office near you.


Best regards,

Lynne Gregg

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Tompkins)
Subject: Re: How to Find Your Number
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 19:31:18 GMT
Organization: Teleport


What is a number beside the 1-800 thing that I can dial?  I thought
there was one from the local exchange.  I can dial 311 and it gives me
my phone number.


GREG


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It varies from one community to the next.
It even varies from one central office to the next in the community. When
one gets published or widely known, it gets changed soon thereafter. From
time to time here in the Digest we have had lists of these things that
had been collected from all over the USA, but time and again about half
the numbers on the list were incorrect by the time the list got printed.
Really, the only way to find out about this is to ask locally in your
own community. The one I gave earlier of 1-800-MY-ANI-IS seems to be the
only one that works from anywhere and has been in service for awhile.
Our old faithful 1-577-your last four for ringback does not even work
here in Skokie any longer as of a month ago.    PAT]

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

From: Mark Huang <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking for Pager Operators for Tampa/Ft. Myers Area
Reply-To: <[e-mail]>
Organization: National Institutes of Health
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 15:04:30 GMT


Hi, all:

    I'm looking for paging system operators interested in 929MHz licenses
for Tampa/Fort Myers area.

    Please call [phone] or e-mail: [e-mail]. Thx!


Mark L. Huang, Ph.D.
E-mail: [e-mail]
E-mail: [e-mail] (expire: 31 January, 1995)

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

Date: Tue, 03 Jan 1995 10:53:31 EDT
From: Keith Jason Uber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone Card Reader Wanted


Pat,

    Firstly - thank-you for your newsgroup/archives/digest -
fantastic reading!

    I am looking for an article on building a Phone Card Reader
that connects to a pc. I saw it two or three days ago when browsing
gopher or WWW (I can't remember) and thought "That's cool ... but
Australia doesn't use Smart-cards for their phones".

    The very next day, I met a German exchange student who gave me
a German phonecard! Subsequently I've spent about four hours searching
through veronica, wwww etc with no luck.

    Any help or direction would be great ... I intend to modify it
to use it as an electronic key to start my car!


Thanks again,

keith


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, it sounds like an interesting
application if it can be done. Let us know how it progresses.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 03 Jan 95 11:02:51 MST
From: John Shaver <[e-mail]>
Subject: Last Laugh! IBM Buys Episcopal Church


For Immediate Release

 The Chairman of IBM announced today that, in response to Microsoft
Corp.'s acquisition of the Roman Catholic Church, IBM has bid for and
acquired the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of
America for $1 billion.

 "We are the oldest and most prestigious computer company in the
world," he said, "and we cannot be seen to be lagging behind in the
race for preeminence in the religious software and hardware markets.
We have tendered an offer to the Most. Rev. Edmund Browning, Presiding
Bishop of the Episcopal Church and Pamela Chinnis, President of the
House of Deputies of General Convention, and they have recommended
acceptance to the shareholders / communicants."

 The Episcopal Church is one of the oldest and most respected
denominations in the United States.  Many current and former
officeholders, including many Presidents, have been communicants.
Although its membership was declining in recent years, the latest
figures show a slight increase in membership.  A combination with IBM
will probably be beneficial in terms of putting "fannies in the seats"
in Episcopal Churches across the United States.

 There will also be great benefits to IBM in terms of international
connections through the Episcopal Church.  The Church is one of the
most senior members of the international Anglican communion by way of
its separation from the Church of England after the Revolutionary War
and the consecration in 1784 of its first Bishop, Samuel Seabury.  IBM
hopes to gain a foothold in the international religious business
through these connections, and perhaps tender a bid for the entire
Anglican Communion by the time of the next meeting of the world
Anglican bishops in London in 1998 (Lambeth Conference).  The
Archbishop of Canterbury, The Most Reverend George Carey, could not be
reached for comment.

 IBM and Episcopal Church are "good fit"

 IBM has had the distinction of being the first and, up until several
years ago, the most successful computer company in the world.  It was
founded by Herman Hollerith, the inventor of the computer card, in the
late 1800, and concentrated on business machines such as adding
machines and typewriters until the invention of the computer in the
1940. They invested heavily in this new technology, and became rich
from selling and maintaining them in the 1950's through 1980's.

 However, IBM's stodgy corporate culture prevented it from taking
advantage of newer technology.  It almost entirely missed the value of
personal computer technology in the late 1970's, allowing other
companies to use processes it developed to make so-called "clone"
personal computers.  It therefore lost out on the billions of dollars
spent on this technology over the past 15 years.

 IBM has recently spun off its typewriter and printer businesses and
concentrated on PC building and software, and has even resorted to
layoffs for the first time in its history.  The slogan, "No one was
ever fired for buying IBM" has become a bitter joke in the business
world.

 The Episcopal Church was, for a long time, considered the most
successful of the Protestant Churches in terms of wealth and power.
Many of the rich and famous swelled its numbers, and its liturgy was
noted for its archaic beauty as much as its treasury was noted for its
gilt-edged bonds.

 However, in recent years, with the dying-off of the elderly rich and
the fall in the birth rate among the bluebloods who remained, the
Episcopal Church has suffered both a decline in numbers and in
influence and wealth.  Notwithstanding the slogan, "The Episcopal
Church Welcomes You," numbers have only recently begun to increase
again as the Church begins to be seen as a place where outcasts can
take part in its life.

 Along with IBM, the Episcopal Church has had to resort to layoffs to
balance its budget, and the merger will allow both organizations to
trim even further their personnel costs.  IBM's chairman said today,
"We have been known as the place where the white-coated mystics take
charge of computers in sealed rooms.  As a direct result of this
merger, our white-coated mystic roster will be cut by half and merged
with the ordained ministry of the Episcopal Church.  After all, they
also wear white garments when celebrating their mysteries.  The
similarities outweigh the differences, and we think that we can bring
their white-suited mystics up to speed in JCL and C++ within a few
months."

 The Presiding Bishop and Ms. Chinnis issued a joint statement saying:
"We welcome this merger as a meshing of two great but sometimes
old-fashioned institutions. The merger will allow us to cut our
technical staff by half again, and concentrate our resources on
becoming the largest and most successful Protestant Church in the
United States. Our first IBM mainframe is already being installed in
the basement of 815 Second Avenue, the Episcopal Church Center in New
York."

 They continued: "So that we can assure ourselves that the Apostolic
Succession will be continued, the Bishops of the Episcopal Church will
lay hands on the Board of IBM in a ceremony at the Cathedral of St.
John the Divine in New York City.  Then, the entire House of Bishops
will travel up to Armonk, where they will be instructed in the use of
the personal computer."  The business writers of most US newspapers
will join the religion correspondents in recording this momentous
occasion.  Both the business and the religious communities are
awaiting the new developments that this historic merger will make
possible.

His Eminence Bill Gates, had no comment.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #4
****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04467;
          4 Jan 95 18:11 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08053; Wed, 4 Jan 95 08:33:20 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08043; Wed, 4 Jan 95 08:33:17 CST
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 08:33:17 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #5

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 4 Jan 95 08:33:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 5

Inside This Issue:                        Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (Jack Hamilton)
    Re: What is a T1 Line? (Joseph H Allen)
    Re: Britain-Japan Fiber Cable (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: Finland Data Transmission (Wally Ritchie)
    NANP 800 Numbers From the UK (Clive D.W. Feather)
    Cellular Billing Services (Raymond S. VanderBok)
    Cell One NY/NJ Eliminates Daily Roam Charges (Stan Schwartz)
    Summary: Telecom Texts (David P. Wiltzius)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Jack Hamilton)
Subject: Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax
Date: 3 Jan 1995 23:28:03 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [Login: guest]


There have been many articles on this topic posted in the comp.infosystems.
www.* groups,

You should read all these articles yourself, but a reasonable summary, I
think, is this:

- Compuserve was charged by Unisys with a patent violation for the LZW
  compression algorithm used in GIFs.  Compuserve had used the algorithm
  believing it was in the public domain, but in fact Unisys had applied
  for a patent.

- Compuserve decided to license the technology rather than fight the patent.

- Compuserve doesn't seem much happier about this than anyone else (except
  the people at Unisys, I guess).

- Unisys clearly seems to be the villain here.

- Compuserve has to pay royalties to Unisys.

- The patent doesn't apply to GIF files themselves.

Here's part of a message from Tim Oren, who claims to be a vice-President
of Compuserve.

  CompuServe has not and is not asserting a proprietary interest in the GIF
  spec.  Even if we wanted to, there are enough sharp attorneys here who could
  remind us that it has long been publicly disclosed with no patent filing
  or attempt to assert other rights.  However, in developng GIF, we did
  use the LZW compression scheme.  Unknown to us at the time, Unisys had
  filed for a patent on that algorithm, even though we found it in a public
  source.  We were approached regarding the matter long after GIF had been
  widely released on CompuServe and to the market at large.  Regardless of
  what you may think about software patents in general, or the tactic of
  waiting until substantial infringment has occured, we were in an infringing
  position and had no option to seek a license.  Since we have a substantial
  base of developers who were not only creating clients to Compuserve,
  but had used GIF in good faith in their own products, we also needed to
  in some way protect their interests by developng a pass through license.

  The text of that license, or portions of it, are what's circulating
  around the nets.  Because it has been taken out of context, many are taking
  it as an assertion, by CompuServe, of an intent to prosecute proprietary
  rights in GIF against all users, including developers of Web clients
  and other software.  This is not the case.  CompuServe has no intent
  of pursuing rights in GIF in such a fashion, and I am writing this with
  the knowledge and consent of our CEO.  Unisys, of course, may follow
  whatever they see as their best interests in the matter.  For better or
  worse, as a patent attorney can tell you, selective enforcement is allowed
  by the letter of the law.

  Tim Oren
  Vice President
  CompuServe

and more from Mr Oren:

  Re GIF, I can talk about it, and if the impression being left is that
  we are trying to make big bucks, I definitely need to talk about it,
  because we've left the wrong impression.  Here's the story, which you
  CAN repeat, WITH my name attached:

  GIF was originally developed at CompuServe by Steve Wilhite, who
  currently works for me.  As part of it, he used with the LZW
  compression scheme, which had been openly published by Unisys engineer
  in a journal.  A number of other developers picked up and used LZW as
  well.  None of us knew that Unisys had filed for, and eventually
  received, a patent on the LZW scheme.  I believe this is called a
  'submarine' patent - it can surface and get you later.  We were got.

  Unisys proposed an infringement suit, and we had no recourse but to
  settle.  We are paying licensing fees in a manner which IS a
  nondisclosure item.  One of the things we needed to be able to do is to
  'pass through' a license embodying both LZW & GIF to those developers
  who create their own client programs to CompuServe, such as TAPCIS and
  Mac Nav, since they 'practice' LZW as well.  The reason that GIF is
  included as a conditional in such licenses is that we can't pass
  through an unrestricted LZW license, and the reason there is money
  involved is that we in turn have to pay Unisys.

  If anyone is taking the impression that we are asserting proprietary
  rights in GIF additional to the LZW patent, that is wrong.  Neither are
  we attempting to assist Unisys in enforcing their patent with respect
  to non-CompuServe environments, such as the Internet, though 'buying
  into' our license would be one way of Internet based vendors in
  avoiding possible action from Unisys.

  This is far more headache than it is worth, believe me, and we are
  actively engaged in looking at migration strategies that will get us
  and our customers off the hook.  Our reputation has been damaged by
  being an unwitting partner to Unisys during those 7 years of
  encouraging proliferation, and we are not happy about it.  (I'm sure
  Stallman - rms - could find a moral in here somewhere... )

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

Jack Hamilton  [e-mail]  KD6TTL  '92 K75RTA  co-moderator, sci.med.aids

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph H Allen)
Subject: Re: What is a T1 Line?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 08:01:22 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, James Carlson <carlson@xylogics.
com> wrote:

> I'm afraid you'll have to re-read what I wrote.  There is no such
> thing as "cross-talk" at the *digital* level.  One DS0 channel cannot
> affect another within a T1 line; there just is no path for this to
> happen.  Any signal at all can be carried on a DS0, and the others
> will be blissfully unaware that it exists.  They are separated in
> time.

For a DS0 as defined as a TDM channel on a T1, this is true (excluding
inter-symbol interference on a bad line).  The original poster was
concerned about a filter on a 56K copper pair, which prevented it from
being used at any higher rate.  In this case there is filter to
prevent cross-talk between 56K copper pairs.  An entire T1 can also go
on a copper pair, but not with that filter.  The fact that the line is
a DS0 which eventually gets multiplexed onto a T1 also limits his
bandwidth. If this is not the filter which the poster was referring
to, then pardon me.

>>> In fact Pulse Code Modulation (digital) without any error detection
>>> has almost the same interference properties as FM radio.  If two FM
>>> stations are close, there will be noise.  If they are really close,
>>> you'll hear both stations at once and lots of noise.

> The two are very different.  PCM is a digital signal; if you can
> recover it from the noise on the line, you'll get a "perfect" copy of
> the data.  Line hits will produce a decidedly non-analog type of
> noise, with random data points being generated.  To produce
> traditional "cross-talk" effects, you'd have to do an arithmetic
> average on the values of the data points between two lines.  This is
> highly unlikely to occur.

> If you had two AMI lines next to each other, you'd need to have the
> extraneous cross-talk signal exceed the pulse detection threshold of
> the receivers in order to be able to detect *anything* at all.
> Anything below this value would simply be invisible at the digital
> level.

If there are two PCM signals going at the same rate with no error
detection, no sequence randomization, and out-of-band syncronization,
and there is enough interference to mess with the detection threshold,
you will here actual cross-talk.  It will be very bad, and the
original signal will also be almost completely munged.  Yes, this is
different from linear additive cross-talk, but it's still cross-talk.

> FM, due to the nature of analog demodulation techniques, exhibits a
> capture effect.  If two signals are broadcast on the same frequency,
> the "louder" signal will be heard to the exclusion of the "quieter"
> signal.  You won't hear both stations at once.  If the received
> amplitude of the two signals are varying with respect to each other,
> then all sorts of interesting effects (depending on the type of
> demodulation used) occur, but hearing both at once isn't one of the
> options.

This "capture" effect has nearly the same effect as two PCM signals on
top of each other.  The stronger one will get through if the weeker
one doesn't mess with it too much.  If they have the same signal
levels, you'll have real cross-talk plus lots of noise (to the point
where they are both nearly indistinguishable, same as PCM).  This
really happens, try it.

>>> There's also a ~100KHz low-pass filter between the A/D converter and
>>> the line to limit the edge rate of the digital pulses.  Cross-talk is
>>> more severe at higher frequencies, so limiting the unnecessary high-
>>> frequencies caused by fast edges helps reduce cross-talk.

> Any filter placed in the DS0 data path after quantization and before
> multiplexing has no effect on the bandwidth of the signal that the
> user of that DS0 sees.  This has nothing to do with the poster's
> original statements.

It does, because the original poster was concerned about that
bandwidth of the actual copper pair that came to his house.  It's my
understanding that an ISDN DS0 is 56K digital line on a copper pair
between your house and the local office, not a shared T1 (although a
multiplexer at the local office my put it on a T1).


[e-mail] (192.74.137.5)  Joseph H. Allen

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Britain-Japan Fiber Cable
Date: 4 Jan 1995 06:31:23 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (John Nagle) writes:

> [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) writes:

>> AT&T will build a cable from Britain to Japan for $1.2G.  It'll be
>> 17,000 miles long, 5Gbps, and carry 320,000 "voice and other messages".
>> That looks like only 16Kbps per circuit (which looks low).  The
>> current longest cable is a 9,000 mile one from France to Singapore,
>> completed a year ago.

>> Fun math: That works out to a capital cost per circuit of only $3750.
>> Assume that a phone call from Britain to Japan costs $2/minute.  If
>> all 320,000 channels were in continuous use, then the cable would be
>> paid for in the first 31 hours.

>> Alternatively, if we assumed that the cable is good for ten years,
>> or 100,000 hours, then amortizing the capital cost would be three
>> cents per hour, or $5e-4/minute.  This is a factor of 4,000 less
>> than the price of the call.

>      The numbers for the newer transantlatic cables look like that,
> too. You really should be able to buy a full-time transatlantic
> circuit for about $100/month, and at the rate cable is being laid, you
> probably soon will.

>      Not having to acquire property rights is a big win. Fortunately,
> the UN didn't think of this for the Law of the Sea conference.

There is no question that the "cost" to the carriers of the
international circuits is declining toward zero. That cost, however,
has very little to do with what you pay for an int't private-line or
switched service. An international circuit is two "half circuits" with
the price at each end completely controlled by the carriers at each
end, one or both of which is normally a monopoly PTT. Only US/Canada
and US/UK circuits are priced at anything even reasonably related to
cost. Until PTT's discover what price elasticity means, or they are
forced by large private bypass users, tariffed rates are unlikely to
reflect the low costs actually involved.

The U.S. Model is informative. For interstate long distance the
"costs" are $0.03 originating access (paid to LEC), $0.03 terminating
access (paid to LEC), and $0.01 or less TOTAL operational cost for the
IXC.  Because the IXC has to pay the LEC's the $0.06, it has about
$0.07 total cost resulting in a retail pricing on the order of $0.11 -
$0.16. The IXC of course has to absorb credit risk on all of the true
cost (including the LEC which gets its money in any case. The IXC also
has marketing and other costs. Nevertheless the true cost of long
distance is on the order of a penny a minute and that includes the
switches. If access costs were reduced to the same magnitude as the
long distance, the total retail price would be on the order of a
nickel a minute. Intrastate is even worse. I actually pay less to call
Ft. Lauderdale to London than I pay to call from Ft. Lauderdale to
Miami.

The fact is that most PTT's subsidize their large and politically
powerful employee bases by maintaining the highest possible overall
charges for international calling both in collection rates (charged to
those in their country) and in accounting rates (charges to U.S. or
other foreign carriers). The same true for private lines. In fact the
"price" guideline for a private line is oftern based on 9000 minutes
of switched usage, no relataion to cost.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Finland Data Transmission
Date: 4 Jan 1995 06:50:24 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> We have been communicating to a site in Finland with autoranging 14.4k
> modems.  On a good day we can run at 9600, but typically at 2400.  We
> have tried AT&T, MCI, and IDB (all are direct digital connections
> through our PBX), but all seem to be extremely variable.  We use
> NetBlazer modems, same model, on each end.

> This is really expensive, and we want to move to a more reliable
> service, as we expect to have longer hold times of three to five hours
> a day.  I checked on a 56k DDS, but cost was about $9K per month.

> Are there any satellite solutions, or packet solutions that anybody
> knows of?  BTW, we also tried x.25 from Sprint, but service went down
> often, and Sprint just has the WORST customer service for problem
> solving.

You might want to try different modems including some newer V.34's You
might also investigate the nature of the analog loops at both your end
and the Finland end. V32bis and V34 depend on effective cancellation
of echo. Not all modem models are equally effective with circuits that
have long delays. The types of echo cancellers and echo suppressors
used on individual connections can also be a significant factor. Since
you will be spending several $K per month, it should be worthwhile to
investigate different modems and possibly some conditioning of the
analog loops in Finland. How is your voice quality? Are you getting
satellite circuits all the time?. What happens US/UK with the same
modems? What happens Finland/UK.

With the money your spending, the capital costs of the best modems
money can buy are insignificant.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

Subject: NANP 800 numbers from the UK
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 12:57:52 GMT
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>


All of a sudden, I can now dial 1-800 numbers from the UK. There is a
few seconds of silence, and then an American female voice tells me
that this call will *not* be free, but charged at standard direct-dial
rates.  If I don't want to pay, I should hang up now.

Just for fun, I tried 1-800-MY-ANI-IS. It told me: "702 000 5555" !


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] (Raymond S. VanderBok)
Subject: Cellular Billing Services
Date: 4 Jan 95 13:02:09 GMT
Organization: Industrial Technology Institute


Are there service companies that provide custom billing for cellular
service?  I would like to be charged for service in a way different
from what my cellular provider offers.


Ray VanderBok
Metalforming Manager
NIST / Midwest Manufacturing Technology Center
[phone]    internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 22:35:58 EST
From: Stan Schwartz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cell One NY/NJ Eliminates Daily Roam Charges


It was buried in small print in the copy of their ad in Monday's {New
York Newsday}, so I called customer service and verified it.  As of
1/2/95, Cell One NY/NJ (00025) has FINALLY followed NYNEX Mobile's
lead and eliminated the $3.00 daily "nag" roamer charge everywhere in
North America.  This applies to both NACN and Non-NACN cities (it was
unclear in some cases whether some NACN cities charged the fee).  At
any rate, the only charges for roaming outside the NACN are 99 cents
per minute airtime (still higher than NYNEX, for the most part).
CellOne's customer service rep explained that some areas are 83 cents
per minute instead of the 99, but they are few and far between - one
should assume that it will be 99 and be pleasantly surprised if the
bill is 16 cents less (per minute).

A small celebration is in order!


Stan

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

From: [e-mail] (David P Wiltzius)
Subject: Summary: Telecom Texts
Date: 4 Jan 1995 00:00:06 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab.


I had several requests to post a summary so here goes.

I haven't found a good textbook in telecom, but I think Newton's
Telecom Dictionary is a very useful substitute.  Because it is
structured as a dictionary, one must piece together information from
various entries, but I did pretty well on your test sentence. All the
technical terms in your sentence were in Newton and they clearly
pointed me toward the SONET entry, which is almost two pages long, and
did a decent job of explaining your sentence, I think.

I teach a course on information and communication technology (for
industrial engineers); I use a collection of up-to-date articles on
uses of telecom (Network World is one great source) and have the
students use Newton to help them read these articles.

I saw a book in Barnes and Noble called "Digital Telephony", Second
Edition, by John Bellamy.  Publisher is John Wiley, (c) 1991.

IBSN  0-471-62056-4

After perusing the book, I came to the conclusion that it contains
much of the information I am looking for (the same sort of thing you
are looking for).

The first chapter covers analog systems.  The rest is digital.  There
is a chapter on SONET.

I am still debating whether or not to get it (it was $75).  I am
interested but I could also spend $1000 on software engineering books
(my occupation).

Consider it requested.  BTW, I bought some of the Telephony BASIC
series.  Haven't had a chance to look at them yet but they are THIN.
I suspect they are VERY basic and not a good bargain.  Happy Holidays,
(Ed: I bought two of them (SONET and Wireless) months ago and I think
they are worth their modest price.  They are basic, as advertised.)

McGraw-Hill, Delran, NJ 08075, publishes a series of reference books
called Datapro. The series covers everything from how modems work, T-1
history, to vendor and product analysis.  William Stallings has
written several books on communications media and equipment.  Titles
slip my mind but I'm sure you should be able to find something by
author search.

-------------------Start off with "Digital Telephony" 2nd Ed. by John
Bellamy ISBN 0-471-62056-4.  He has a chapter on SONET that will give
you a taste.  Since the field is still emerging, many issues with
SONET and SDH are still evolving.

------------------- RADIO SHACK CARRIES A BOOK CALLED "UNDERSTANDING
TELEPHONE ELECTRONICS" WHICH EXPLAINS SUBJECTS FROM THE SIMPLE POTS
TELEPHONE TO CENTRAL OFFICE EQUIPMENT.  TELLABS, INC. PUTS OUT A TEXT
BOOK COMPLETE WITH TESTS AT THE END OF EACH CHAPTER.  HOPE THIS HELPS.
IF YOU HEAR ABOUT OTHERS PLEASE LET ME KNOW.

------------------- You're welcome! I recently purchased an excellent
telecom book from Artech House Inc.: "Service Management in Computing
and Telecommunications." Artech specializes in telecom material. Their
number is: 617-769-9750, call for a catalog. I've found them pleasant
to do business with, but their prices, as with Computer Literacy, are
full list (read: high).

Speaking of price, if you're in the San Jose area, there is a large
store near the corner of Hilsdale and Camden, across Hillsdale from
Target, that buys close-out books from publishers. They sell most for
under $5.00, and many for $3.00! Many books are college texts, and on
some very good subjects. I was there this afternoon and picked up the
"Artifial Inteligence Handbook ($3.00), Spencer Johnson's "Yes or No"
($3.00), "Voodoo Dos" ($8.00), Jimmy Carter's "An Outdoor Journal"
($3.00), Stanley Davis' "Managing Corporate Culture" ($2.00), and the
"Pocket Guide to Phrasal Verbs" ($2.00). These are all hardbound
editions. I didn't see any telecom material, but I have in the past.
the place is huge, and I didn't look at everything. It's definately
worth a visit if you're in the neighborhood, and you have the time.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #5
****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa06229;
          4 Jan 95 20:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23108; Wed, 4 Jan 95 15:23:13 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23100; Wed, 4 Jan 95 15:23:09 CST
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 15:23:09 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #6

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 4 Jan 95 15:23:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 6

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Settles CALL-INFO Dispute With MCI (AT&T News via A. Alan Toscano)
    Motorola Flip Technical Manual (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Irish/USA Phone Ring Signals vs UK (Conor O'Neill)
    Telecom FAQ - Time to Update It (Dave Leibold)
    Is There a Telecom Group in Chicago? ([e-mail])
    Seeking White Pages on CD or Disk (Scott Warbritton)
    EARN Gopher Server ([e-mail])
    Computer Caller-ID (Thomas Fitzurka)
    AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers (Alan Toscano)
    Are You Working in Televirtuality/Networked Virtual Worlds? (Robt Jacobson)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Andy Spitzer)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 14:01:51 -0600
From: A Alan Toscano <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T and MCI Settle 800-CALL-INFO Directory Assistance Dispute


Michael Lordi
908-221-6382

Gary Morgenstern
908-221-6153


AT&T AND MCI SETTLE 800 CALL INFO DIRECTORY ASSISTANCE DISPUTE

     BASKING RIDGE, N.J. -- AT&T today announced that it has reached
an agreement to settle its complaint against MCI Telecommunications
Corporation involving MCI's 1-800-CALL-INFO directory assistance
service.

     Under the settlement, MCI will make changes in the service that
will protect the public's interests and trust in the toll-free status
of 800 services.

     The agreement requires MCI to cease its practice of automatically
charging for calls to its 800 number for directory information based
on the electronic identification of the callers' numbers.

     Contingent on that change, and upon the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) approval of the settlement, AT&T will drop its
complaint that MCI's practice violated the 1992 Federal Telephone and
Dispute Resolution Act.  The law restricts telephone companies and
information providers from charging customers for calling 800 numbers.

     Callers to MCI's service will now be required to use credit
cards, calling cards or establish alternative billing arrangements
with MCI in advance of their calls.  MCI has agreed to make these
modifications by Jan. 7.

     "This means that callers will no longer have to fear dialing 800
numbers and automatically being charged.  And businesses don't need to
concern themselves with policing these calls from their premises,"
said Kenneth Sichau, AT&T's marketing vice president.  "It's great
news for the entire industry!

     "This is precisely the outcome we had requested when we filed our
complaint in October.  We will continue our efforts at the FCC to
preserve and strengthen rules that protect consumers from abusive or
unfair practices involving toll-free 800 service."

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Motorola Flip Technical Manual
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 17:35:39 GMT


Is there a good source for the Micro T-A-C technical manual (or
information contained therein)?  My dealer said they paid several
hundred dollars for one.


Shawn Gordhamer   [e-mail]

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

From: Conor O'Neill <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 16:19:08 +0000
Subject: Irish/USA Phone Ring Signals vs UK
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Hi,

I recently purchased a British Telecom Answering machine for use in
Ireland. In my innocence I assumed the Irish and UK phone systems
would be almost identical. They are not. From what I can gather, the
Irish system almost identical to the USA when tones are concerned.  I
purchased an adapter in Ireland which uses a capacitor to modify the
ring signal so that the BT machine recognises the tones. However it
does not recognise the hang-up tone and so is a bit useless at the
moment. Anyone out there know how to modify American tones to suit BT
equipment? I'm pretty sure about the Irish and American signals
being similar as several people I know have bought phone equipment in
the USA which worked perfectly here.  Any help would be appreciated.


Conor O'Neill

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 00:38:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Telecom FAQ - Time to Update It


The TELECOM Digest FAQ is long overdue for an overhaul. Anyone with
updates for the FAQ should send them this way. Hopefully before the
winter is out, another FAQ edition will replace the current one.

Send updates to [e-mail] (or to any of my usual e-homes)

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

From: [e-mail] (LogicaRsch)
Subject: Is There a Telecom Group in Chicago?
Date: 4 Jan 1995 15:20:39 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (LogicaRsch)


I do market research specializing in telecommunications. I'm looking
for a telecom organization that I can join that has a Chicago chapter.
Specifically, I'm looking for a group that has meetings, seminars and
get-togethers, a little newsletter, etc. etc. for a hundred or two
hundred bucks a year. Can someone clue me in? Thanks!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, to show you what a hermit I
have become the past few years, my answer to your question would have
to be 'I do not know'. Seriously, I don't.  Maybe we should start
one, or some sort of telecom discussion group, social, etc.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Buzz)
Subject: Seeking White Pages on CD or Disk
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 95 13:55:56 EST
Organization: infinet.com


I'm not sure if such an animal exists, but I'm looking for white pages
for the entire country on either CD or Disk. All reply's on where to
obtain this information, either by email or posts will be deeply
appreciated.


Scott Warbritton   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They're out there. Some are of dubious
value in terms of accuracy.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 12:17:09 +0100
From: GopherMail Server <[e-mail]>
Subject: EARN Gopher Server


Mail this file back to gopher with an X before the menu items that you want.
If you don't mark any items, gopher will send all of them.


  1.  About the EARN Information Service.
  2.  About EARN/
  3.  About TERENA/
  4.  User Services Documentation/
  5.  EARNEST, the EARN Newsletter/
  6.  CNRE - Computer Networks for Research in Europe/
  7.  Network Services Conferences (NSC)/
  8.  LISTSERV (public archives, list of lists)/
  9.  Networking Information (Internet Documents, RIPE, InterNIC, ISOC, ITU)/
  10. EARN/Bitnet (List of nodes, node changes, management databases, etc.)/
  11. Other Gopher and Information Servers/
  12. Subject Tree/
  13. Library Catalogs and Electronic Journals/
  14. Network Resource Tools (archie, Netfind, Whois, veronica, Usenet, etc.)/
  15. Need help? Try NETHELP, the online help desk (or read the FAQs)/

You may edit the following two numbers to set the maximum sizes after which
GopherMail should send output as multiple email messages:

Split=64K bytes/message <- For text, bin, HQX messages (0 = No split)
Menu=100 items/message <- For menus and query responses (0 = No split)

#
Name=About the EARN Information Service
Numb=1
Type=0
Port=70
Path=0/README
Host=gopher.earn.net
#
Name=About EARN
Numb=2
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/general.information
Host=ftp.earn.net
#
Name=About TERENA
Numb=3
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/terena
Host=gopher.earn.net
#
Name=User Services Documentation
Numb=4
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/doc
Host=ftp.earn.net
#
Name=EARNEST, the EARN Newsletter
Numb=5
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/earnest
Host=ftp.earn.net
#
Name=CNRE - Computer Networks for Research in Europe
Numb=6
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/cnre
Host=ftp.earn.net
#
Name=Network Services Conferences (NSC)
Numb=7
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/nsc
Host=ftp.earn.net
#
Name=LISTSERV (public archives, list of lists)
Numb=8
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/listserv.archives
Host=ftp.earn.net
#
Name=Networking Information (Internet Documents, RIPE, InterNIC, ISOC, ITU)
Numb=9
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/networking.servers
Host=gopher.earn.net
#
Name=EARN/Bitnet (List of nodes, node changes, management databases, etc.)
Numb=10
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/network.information
Host=ftp.earn.net
#
Name=Other Gopher and Information Servers
Numb=11
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/Other Gopher and Information Servers
Host=gopher.sunet.se
#
Name=Subject Tree
Numb=12
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/Subject Tree
Host=gopher.sunet.se
#
Name=Library Catalogs and Electronic Journals
Numb=13
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/epub
Host=gopher.earn.net
#
Name=Network Resource Tools (archie, Netfind, Whois, veronica, Usenet, etc.)
Numb=14
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/tools
Host=gopher.earn.net
#
Name=Need help? Try NETHELP, the online help desk (or read the FAQs)
Numb=15
Type=1
Port=70
Path=1/nethelp
Host=gopher.earn.net

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Fitzurka)
Subject: Computer Caller-ID
Date: 04 Jan 1995 11:21:56 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY


Does anyone know of a software program that enables you to have your
computer identify caller's phone numbers? I saw a movie called
Brainscan that had a computer, using caller id, identify the caller
and tell the person in an "igor" voice, which I perticularly liked,
that "Bobby is calling master". The idea was really interesting to me
and I would like to get something like it.


Thanks.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know the specific name of a
software program doing this, but there is lots of software for what
you propose. I think someone said Procomm had that ability.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 14:00:53 -0600
From: A Alan Toscano <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers


Jon Mellor    908-221-5017
Carol Henry   908-221-8089
Doug Idleman  908-221-3950

AT&T FIRST TO DELIVER LONG-AWAITED "FOLLOW-ME" 500 NUMBERS

     BASKING RIDGE, N.J. -- Mobile consumers and corporate road
warriors eager for the new "follow-me-everywhere" 500 numbers are
getting them from AT&T, the first company to offer a service.

     The company said it already has arrangements to provide 500
numbers to as many as 37,000 members of the National Football League
Players, the American Institute for Foreign Study, and Cross Country
Healthcare.  AT&T also is selling the service to tens of thousands of
individuals who reserved numbers last summer, when the company
announced how people could use the new numbers.

     Customers can begin using the new personal number service, called
AT&T True Connections, in the next several weeks as local dialing
availability becomes universal.

     Anyone who needs to stay connected to business associates,
friends or relatives while moving from place to place can benefit from
having an AT&T 500 number.  People can tailor the service to their
needs for anytime-anywhere communications, and can keep their 500
numbers for life.

     The people signing up for AT&T's service include real- estate
agents, who move around a lot during the day; business owners and
executives who spend time in different offices during the week;
college students, who move between campuses and their homes; and
retirees, who travel throughout the year as both tourists and
grandparents.

     "AT&T 500-number service can save these people -- and the
important people in their lives -- time and money," said Joseph P.
Nacchio, president-AT&T Consumer Communications Services.  "They'll
spend less time exchanging numbers and tracking each other down when
they want to talk.  And they may even spend less money making fewer
calls."

     Customers can choose from several 500-number offers with a
variety of features available only from AT&T.  Each customer will have
a 500-prefix number that can be programmed to ring any telephone,
cellular phone, pager, fax machine or personal computer that can be
dialed directly in the United States and more than 200 other
countries.

     By dialing their own 500 numbers, customers can program several
phones to ring in sequence, retrieve voice-mail and fax messages and,
soon, make outgoing calls without calling cards or coins.

     Each of the AT&T 500-number packages will be available for an
introductory price of $1 a month, with no enrollment fee, through
April 30, 1995.  Voice-mail service will cost an additional $5.95 a
month.

     AT&T's 500-number service for businesses will include all
available features, and will cost $7 a month for each number after the
introductory offer has ended.  The company expects to add more
business-related features in the new year.

     A variety of packages for consumers allows each person to pick a
level of service that meets individual needs.  Beginning May 1,
subscriptions will range from $1 to $7 a month.

     Enrollment for business customers and consumers beginning May 1
will cost $10 for each randomly selected 500 number or $25 for each
specifically requested 500 number.

     In addition to monthly fees, a per-minute charge will apply to
calls made with 500 numbers.

     Calls within the United States, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin
Islands during off-peak hours (from 5 p.m. to 8 a.m. weekdays, and all
weekend) will cost 15 cents a minute, whether the caller or receiver
pays.  Calls during peak hours (from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays) will
cost 25 cents a minute.  Rates for some in-state calls may vary.
Calls made to or from other countries will be charged the regular AT&T
rates for those countries.

     Business customers can realize savings opportunities by applying
500-number charges to such volume-discount plans as Customnet and
Small Business Advantage Plus.

     Charges for consumers' AT&T True Connections calls can be
discounted through AT&T True USAsm Savings, and they also can earn
points in AT&T True Rewardssm and AT&T Global Rewardssm, the company's
customer-rewards programs.

     With voice-mail service, subscribers can receive messages and
gain more control over their communications.  For instance, it gives
them the ability to screen calls, and pager owners can receive
notification on their pagers when messages have been left in their
voice mailboxes.

     "We're offering a personal number service that gives customers
tremendous flexibility," Nacchio said.  "It's rich in features and
will help them better manage their communications."

     The pro football players, nurses and students getting 500 numbers
have distinct needs that AT&T meets.

   o The football players and others covered by the NFLPA
     agreement can program their 500 numbers to follow them to
     hotels around the country.

   o The foreign-exchange students' parents can call their
     kids' 500 numbers to reach them around the world.  The
     students also can automatically reverse charges on calls
     back to the United States from locations with touch-tone
     service.

   o The nurses and other medical specialists who take short-
     term jobs through Cross Country Healthcare, a national
     placement firm, can have their 500 numbers follow them to
     the apartments they rent.

     Both business customers and consumers can learn more about AT&T
True Connections by calling 1-800-TRUE-500, extension 439.  For
consumers to subscribe, they must have or obtain AT&T long-distance
service in their homes, but they are not required to enroll in any
specific program.

                          #   #   #

AT&T 500 PERSONAL NUMBER SERVICES

PACKAGES AND PRICES JANUARY 1995

     A single feature-rich package for business customers will be
available for the introductory price of $1 a month through April 1995.
These customers will receive all the features available to consumers,
plus business-related enhancements in coming months.

     Four packages for consumers offer a wide range of choices in
features, functions and prices.  All will cost $1 a month for an
introductory period through April 1995.

     The basic package, called "Private Line," offers a 500 number
that the subscriber can keep for life, no matter how many times he or
she moves within the United States.  AT&T currently can assign
subscribers 500 numbers that begin with 20 different exchanges, such
as 346, 367 and 677.  For example, a person's number could be
500-346-XXXX.  With this package, the calls to the 500 number go only
to the subscriber's home telephone.  It also allows subscribers to
make calls to their own homes when they're traveling.  Beginning in
February, they'll be able to charge calls to other places on their
AT&T True Connections accounts without coins or credit-cards.  This
package will continue to cost $1 a month after the introductory
period.

     The "Stay Close" package adds call-placing and the subscriber's
choice of call forwarding or reverse-billing to the basic package.
Call-forwarding lets the subscriber have 500-number calls forwarded to
virtually any other U.S. telephone number and to more than 200
countries and areas on demand.  Reverse-billing lets the subscriber
pay for calls from other people, when those people have a code number
given by the subscriber.  This package will cost $3 a month after the
introductory period.

     The "Traveler" package adds call-placing, call-forwarding and
reverse-billing to the basic package, and will cost $5 a month after
the introductory period.

     The premium package, "Navigator," offers all the above features
and adds call-sequencing, which lets a subscriber's 500-number calls
ring at several locations in sequence.  For instance, a call could be
forwarded first to an office phone, then a cellular phone, and then
home or even a hotel.  The subscriber could change the sequence as
often as desired.  This package will cost $7 a month after the
introductory period.

     For $5.95 a month, AT&T True Connections subscribers can add
voice-mail and receive an unlimited number of messages.  With
call-screening, they can choose to receive all calls, urgent calls,
calls from certain people, or send all calls to their voice mailboxes.
And pager owners can receive notification on their pagers when
messages have been left for them.

     Both business customers and consumers can learn more about AT&T
True Connections by calling 1-800-982-8480, extension 439.  For
consumers to subscribe, they must have or obtain AT&T long-distance
service in their homes, but they are not required to enroll in any
specific program.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Jacobson)
Subject: Are You Working in Televirtuality/Networked Virtual Worlds?
Date: 4 Jan 1995 19:56:39 GMT
Organization: WORLDESIGN, Seattle


I would be interested in anyone working in these areas for possible
inclusion on a panel at a leading international conference on virtual
worlds.  Thanks.  Please use email.


Bob Jacobson

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 4 Jan 1995 05:51:23 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> What kind of noise/distortion does American-style bit-robbing cause to
> voice band signals transmitted through PCM channels?

> (The reason I ask is that I wonder how much bit-robbing affects V.34
> modems.)

The effect of a robbed bit is to introduce, 50% of the time, an
additional quantitization error that results in an overall reduction
of about 2db in the S/N ratio. This is not likely to be the limiting
factor in V.34 performance except possibly in situations where many D4
type links are involved in tandem. In the U.S., most intermachine
trunks are common channel direct connections so only the robbed bit at
each end of the IC/EC connection introduces the robbed bit (as well as
any non CCS systems in the EC). I believe that other types of noise
(other than quantization noise) will have a much greater effect on
V.34 peformance particular any type of impulse noise or cross-talk in
the analog portions of the local loop.


Wally Ritchie     Ft. Lauderdale, Florida.

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 12:29:30 EST
From: [e-mail] (Andy Spitzer)
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?


[e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber) writes:

> What kind of noise/distortion does American-style bit-robbing cause to
> voice band signals transmitted through PCM channels?

While I can't answer your question in scientific terms (aka %THD
measurements, S/N ratios, etc.) I can answer it subjectively.

In Robbed Bit signalling, the "Robbed" bit occurs every sixth frame
(or sample if we are concentrating on an individual channel), thus in
every sixth sample the LSB is overridden with the value of the A bit,
then 6 samples later with the value of the B bit.

On a "quiet" idle channel (AB bits both 0), using u-Law PCM, the pattern sent
over the channel would be: (in hex, LSB last)
   FF FF FF FF FF FE  FF FF FF FF FF FE ...

The difference in voltage of a standard CODEC (A/D converter for PCM)
from FF to FF is about 2 mV (on a scale from -8031 to +8031 mV).  So,
converted to an analog signal, the above waveform is a series of 2 mV
impulses occuring every 8000/6 = 1333.3 Hz.  This waveform is rich in
harmonics, so it "sounds" like a very high pitched, (although rather
quiet) whine, similar to the "ringing in your ears" sound.

Once the line is taken offhook (aka AB bits both become 1), then the
pattern becomes:
   FF FF FF FF FF FF  FF FF FF FF FF FF ...

which is dead quiet.  (And since LSB=1, and AB=1 there is no distortion!)

Thus the noise associated with robbed bit signalling can be viewed as
superimposing the intended signal with the above impluse train.
Perhaps armed with this information, someone else can calculate the
noise/distortion measurments you are seeking.

Hope this helps!


Andy Spitzer
[e-mail]           The Telephone Connection           301-417-0700

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #6
****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07234;
          4 Jan 95 22:45 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27091; Wed, 4 Jan 95 16:22:11 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27078; Wed, 4 Jan 95 16:22:06 CST
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 16:22:06 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #7

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 4 Jan 95 16:22:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 7

Inside This Issue:                        Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Canadian Yellow Pages Companies Face Anti-Monopoly Challenge (Nigel Allen)
    Cross Keys (Richard D.G. Cox)
    Re: Cell One NY/NJ Eliminates Daily Roam Charges (Alan M. Gallatin)
    Re: Cell One NY/NJ Eliminates Daily Roam Charges (Jeffrey Rhodes)
    Re: Flat Rate Cellular Phone Service (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK (James Sterbenz)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Jeffrey Rhodes)
    Re: Watching The Area Codes Split (Revised List) (Steve Grandi)
    Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T (Donald J. Zanolla)
    Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: Where Does ISDN Fit In? ([e-mail])
    Looking For Mail Order Cellular Accessories (G. Robert Arrabito)
    Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1? ([e-mail])
    Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1? (Jeff Box)
    Re: What is a T1 Line? (Matthew P. Downs)
    Re: What is a T1 Line (William Wood)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 15:34:15 -0500
Subject: Canadian Yellow Pages Companies Face Anti-Monopoly Challenge
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Internex Online


Here is a press release from the Director of Investigation and
Research of the Bureau of Competition Policy, an independent official
of the government of Canada. (I don't work for the government; I'm
just forwarding the press release. Other government press releases are
available through ftp, gopher and mosaic at debra.dgbt.doc.ca in
/dbd/ftp/pub/isc/Industry.Canada.News.Releases.)

 File name:Dec-22-94.nb3
 File location: debra.dgbt.doc.ca
 /dbd/ftp/pub/isc/Industry.Canada.News.Releases
 Date archived: Wed Jan  4 10:13:39 EST 1995
 Archive name: Industry Canada, Canadian Federal Government
 Archived by: [e-mail]

Originator: <see document body>

Bureau of Competition Policy

          DIRECTOR BRINGS APPLICATION BEFORE COMPETITION
             TRIBUNAL REGARDING YELLOW PAGES PUBLISHERS

     OTTAWA, December 22, 1994 -- George N. Addy, Director of
Investigation and Research of the Bureau of Competition Policy, filed
an application today before the Competition Tribunal alleging that two
subsidiaries of Bell Canada Enterprises, Tele-Direct (Publications)
Inc., and Tele-Direct (Services) Inc., are engaged in conduct contrary
to the Competition Act.

     The provisions of the Act that are at issue in this case deal
with abuse of dominance, tied selling and refusal to deal.

     The Director is asking the Competition Tribunal to prohibit the
two companies from tying the sale of advertising services to the sale
of advertising space in the Yellow Pages and from engaging in other
anti-competitive acts toward other participants in the market. He is
also requesting the Tribunal to order the two companies to provide
subscriber listing information to competing publishers.

     "In my view, the anti-competitive acts alleged in this
application have deprived a large segment of the Canadian business
community of the benefits of competition in this important advertising
medium," Mr. Addy stated. "The order requested would open the market
to independent publishers, advertising agencies and consultants and
result in more competitive product and service offerings for consumers
of these products," Mr. Addy continued.

     The Director's application alleges that Tele-Direct
(Publications) Inc., and Tele-Direct (Services) Inc., each with market
shares in excess of 90 percent, control the publication of telephone
directories in their territories, which includes the provision of
advertising space in such directories and related advertising
services. The application alleges that the two companies have tied the
sale of advertising services to advertising space in the Yellow Pages.
This conduct has prevented advertising agencies from competing for the
advertising services business of advertisers in a substantial part of
the market. The respondents have refused to supply publishers of
competing directories with current telephone subscriber listing
information which is obtained on an exclusive basis from the telephone
companies. As well, the respondents have engaged in additional
anti-competitive acts which have had an exclusionary effect on
advertising agencies, advertising consultants and competing telephone
directory publishers.

     Tele-Direct (Publications) is the exclusive publisher of
telephone directories for its affiliate Bell Canada which at present
is the sole provider of local telephone services throughout most of
Ontario and Quebec. Tele-Direct (Services) is the exclusive publisher
of telephone directories for certain municipal, provincial and
territorial telephone companies in Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick,
Newfoundland and Labrador, Yukon and the Northwest Territories.

     The application is on public record before the Competition
Tribunal. Under the Tribunal rules, the respondents have 30 days to
file a response to the Director's application.

For more information, please contact:

Robert Lancop
[phone]    Release 7188


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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 13:56:35 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Cross Keys


[e-mail] (Ethan Henry) gave you some addresses for
Newbridge Networks, and added:>> There's also an address in the UK.

There is indeed.

It is at: Coldra Woods, Chepstow Road, NEWPORT, Gwent, NP6 1JB  UK
Telephone: [phone] (from outside the UK [phone])
Telex: 497557 (From outside the UK, [phone])

I was particularly interested in his comment that he worked, not for
Newbridge, but "across the street, at Crosskeys Systems Corporation".

What, you may ask, is the connection between Newbridge and Crosskeys?
Well, in the valley in South Wales where I grew up, Newbridge and
Cross Keys are both names of (nearby) villages.  Whether there will
ever be telecom companies named after the two villages between them
(Cwmcarn and Abercarn) is another matter.  Perhaps there already are
(Cwmcarn is the location of what was Post Office Telephones' refurbishment
factory, now bought and operated by Northern Telecom in the UK !) Both
Newbridge and Cross Keys are less than ten miles from the Newbridge HQ
at Coldra.

Cross Keys was also one of the first places in the valley to have a
crossbar switch replace the "original" Strowger UAX13 - these little
switches were intended to serve up to 200 lines but were often made to
stretch to serve anything up to 700 lines, until they were replaced.


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, P O Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan  CF64 3YG
Voice: 0956 700111;     Fax: [phone];     VoiceMail: 0941 151515
E-mail address: [e-mail]; PGP2.6.2 public key on request

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan M. Gallatin)
Subject: Re: Cell One NY/NJ Eliminates Daily Roam Charges
Date: 4 Jan 1995 13:20:45 -0500
Organization: Pinetree CyberServices


In a previous article, Stan Schwartz <[e-mail]> wrote:

> At any rate, the only charges for roaming outside the NACN are 99 cents
> per minute airtime (still higher than NYNEX, for the most part).

This is actually untrue.  NYNEX roaming costs $.99/minute outside of
the Boston to Washington corridor.  Inside that corridor the rates are
$.59 for New England (and I think that's limited to NYNEX markets
only) and $.79 for BAMS markets south of New Jersey.  Cellular One's
rates outside that corridor vary, up to $.99/minute, but occasionally
less.  Within, the rates from Boston to Washington are the same as
home rates.  On all rate plans (even the overpriced "access plan") the
$.79 NYNEX charges is more than any CellOne home minute could possibly
be.  Also, the $.59/minute NYNEX charges north of NYC is more than all
CellOne home rates except for Access and Plan30 peak minutes.  (Then
again, anyone who has Access clearly doesn't care about minute rates
for roaming, and the Plan30 peak minute is $.65, just a bit more than
NYNEX's New England Roaming rate).

Long story short: By eliminating the $3 fee, Cellular One is matching
or beating ALL NYNEX roaming rates, save peak hours while roaming in
New England for Plan30 customers.


Alan M. Gallatin  <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Rhodes)
Subject: Re: Cell One NY/NJ Eliminates Daily Roam Charges
Date: 4 Jan 1995 20:31:08 GMT
Organization: McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail], Stan Schwartz <[e-mail]> writes:

> It was buried in small print in the copy of their ad in Monday's {New
> York Newsday}, so I called customer service and verified it.  As of
> 1/2/95, Cell One NY/NJ (00025) has FINALLY followed NYNEX Mobile's
> lead and eliminated the $3.00 daily "nag" roamer charge everywhere in
> North America.  This applies to both NACN and Non-NACN cities (it was
> unclear in some cases whether some NACN cities charged the fee).  At
> any rate, the only charges for roaming outside the NACN are 99 cents
> per minute airtime (still higher than NYNEX, for the most part).
> CellOne's customer service rep explained that some areas are 83 cents
> per minute instead of the 99, but they are few and far between - one
> should assume that it will be 99 and be pleasantly surprised if the
> bill is 16 cents less (per minute).

> A small celebration is in order!

In some Cellular One markets, the 99 cent per minute roamer air time
includes all necessary long distance charges (10 to 20 cents per
minute) for automatic call delivery via the NACN. This is because
McCaw buys bulk long distance from AT&T and can absorb the ACD long
distance charges, perhaps justifying a higher per minute roamer air
time charge.

Unfortunately, this practise will have to change when markets are
converted to Equal Access to support the McCaw-AT&T merger. McCaw is
not permitted to be a long distance reseller, so Cellular One
subscribers must pick an Equal Access long distance carrier. ACD long
distance charges will be set by the PICked Equal Access carrier.

As usual, opinions are my own and are subject to vary with actual
facts.


Jeffrey Rhodes at [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Flat Rate Cellular Phone Service
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 17:59:31 GMT


Jhupf <[e-mail]> writes:

> On Thu, 29 Dec 1994, Lawrence The Dreamer Chen wrote:

>> I don't know how wide spread the service is, but up here (Canada) they
>> have packages where you get unlimited weekend calling, and for $10 a
>> month more you get unlimited evening calling (7pm-7am).

> Cellular One of Triangle here in the Triangle in North Carolina offers
> full local access on weekends for $10 a month.  We were considering
> going for it until we realized we had an accmulation of more than 575
> minutes of local calling credit we haven't been able to use during the
> past 14 months.

Are you saying that Cellular One lets you carry unused minutes from
your allowance over to future months? GTE Mobilnet here in the San
Francisco Bay Area has a "use 'em or lose 'em" policy.


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] (James Sterbenz)
Subject: Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK
Date: 4 Jan 1995 18:14:47 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA


In article <[e-mail]>, Clive D.W. Feather <clive@sco.
COM> wrote:

> All of a sudden, I can now dial 1-800 numbers from the UK...

So will 500 numbers work out of the US as well?


James P.G. Sterbenz   Sr. MTS, Broadband Intelligent Networks
jpgs@{acm|ieee}.org   GTE Telecommunications Research Laboratory
[phone]       40 Sylvan Road MS-61, Waltham, MA 02254 USA
http://info.gte.com/jpgs/jpgs.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I don't think anyone knows yet,
since they are not yet working in the USA, or maybe just barely in
a few areas. Wait a month or so until they are turned on and working
correctly around the USA, then let's see what happens from abroad.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Rhodes)
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 4 Jan 1995 18:01:48 GMT
Organization: McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> What kind of noise/distortion does American-style bit-robbing cause to
> voice band signals transmitted through PCM channels?

> (The reason I ask is that I wonder how much bit-robbing affects V.34
> modems.)

I'm not a modem expert but I would answer "none". If a call connection
is made on a bit robbing DS0 within a DS1, then the modems will settle
for some transparent speed (9600bps) during the initial negotiation. I
don't think the V.34 modems will connect at 28k8 when bit robbing is
present.

There really aren't many circuits like these, especially for long
distance calls. Most bit-robbing occurs on intra-LATA (I think) by
LECs that haven't updated circuits that are being depreciated over a
40 year period.

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 12:28:16 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Steve Grandi)
Subject: Watching The Area Codes Split (Revised List)


Thanks to a number of folks, I have corrected some errors in my list
and added some new information.  There will be at least 15 new area
codes in 1995!

(Last Revised: 04 January 1995)

    Date       Event

1)  1/7/95     AC 630 overlaid on ACs 312 and 708 (Chicago metro area)
2)  1/15/95    AC 334 splits from AC 205 (Alabama)
3)  1/15/95    AC 360 splits from AC 206 (Washington)
4)  3/1/95     AC 281 overlaid on AC 713 (Houston metro area)
5)  3/1/95     AC 954 overlaid on AC 305 (Miami metro area)
6)  3/19/95    AC 520 splits from AC 602 (Arizona)
7)  4/2/95     AC 970 splits from AC 303 (Colorado)
8)  5/28/95    AC 941 splits from AC 813 (Florida)
9)  7/15/95    AC 540 splits from AC 703 (Virginia)
10) 9/1/95     AC 423 splits from AC 615 (Tennessee)
11) 9/2/95     AC 562 overlaid on ACs 213, 310 and 818 (Los Angeles metro area)
12) 10/??/95   AC 770 splits from or overlaid on AC 404 (Atlanta metro area)
13) 10/??/95   AC 860 splits from AC 203 (Connecticut)
14) 10/1/95    AC 441 splits from AC 809 (Bermuda & Bahamas)
15) ??/??/95   AC 864 splits from AC 803 (South Carolina)
16) ??/??/??   AC 340 splits from AC 809 (Puerto Rico)


Notes:

1) Wireless services (cellular phones and pagers). All wireless services in
   708 will be forced to move to 630.  All new wireless services in areas
   served by 312 and 708 will be in 630.  Wireless companies are appealing
   to the Illinois Commerce Commission and to the FCC.

2) 334 will contain Auburn, Dothan, Mobile, Montgomery and Selma.
   205 will retain Anniston, Birmingham, Decatur, Huntsville and Tuscaloosa.
   Permissive period ends 5/13/95.

3) 360 will contain Bellingham, Bremerton, Olympia, Vancouver.
   206 will retain Auburn, Bellevue, Everett, Redmond, Seattle, Tacoma.
   Permissive period ends 5/21/95.

4) First numbers assigned in AC 281 will be wireless services.  Landline
   services will be assigned in AC 281 later.

5) Wireless services.  All wireless services in 305 will move to 954.
   Awaiting approval of Florida Public Service Commission.

6) 520 will contain Flagstaff, Prescott, Sierra Vista, Tucson, Yuma.
   602 will retain Buckeye, Chandler, Glendale, Mesa, Phoenix, Scottsdale,
   Tempe.
   Permissive period ends 7/23/95.

7) 970 will contain Aspen, Durango, Fort Collins, Grand Junction, Greely,
   Loveland, Steamboat Springs, Vail.
   303 will retain Arvada, Aurora, Boulder, Denver, Englewood, Littleton,
   Longmont.
   Permissive period ends 10/1/95.

8) 941 will contain Bradenton, Fort Meyers, Lakeland, Sarasota, Winter Haven.
   813 will retain Clearwater, St. Petersburg, Tampa.
   Permissive period ends 3/3/96.

9) 540 will contain Blacksburg, Roanoke, Salem, Winchester.
   703 will retain Alexandria, Arlington, Fairfax, Falls Church, Mclean.
   Permissive period ends ??/??/??

10) 423 will contain Chattanooga, Clarksville, Johnson City, Kingsport,
    Knoxville.
    615 will retain Murfreesboro, Nashville.
    Permissive period ends 2/1/96.

11) First numbers assigned in AC 562 will be wireless services in the area
    served by AC 310.  Landline services in AC 310 and wireless and
    possibly landline services in AC 213 and 818 will follow. Wireless
    companies are appealing to the FCC.

12) AC 770 will either be an overlay on AC 404 or a geographical split.

13) No further details.

14) No further details.

15) 864 will contain Anderson, Greenville, Rock Hill, Spartanburg.
    803 will retain Charleston, Columbia, Florence, Myrtle Beach.
    Permissive period ends ??/??/??

16) No details.


Steve Grandi, National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, Arizona USA
Internet: [e-mail]  [phone] (after 1 Apr 95: [phone])

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

From: [e-mail] (Donald J. Zanolla)
Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T
Date: 4 Jan 95 20:02:15 GMT
Organization: Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group


[e-mail] (Steve Cogorno) writes:

> It may be a matter between the LEC and the customer, but as soon as
> AT&T finds out that the Easy Access carrier has been changed, they
> will issue an order to change it right back.

> I would call the LEC (in my case Pacific Bell) and tell them AT&T is
> "slamming" your line.  When they hear "slam" they take your complaint
> very seriously.  Tell them you want a password on your account, and
> not to authorize any changes made without that password.

> You might want to call AT&T up and tell them you don't appreciate them
> slamming your line.  (Their ears perk up nicely when they hear "slam"
> too).

Please define SLAM in this context.


Thanks,

Donald Zanolla   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Slamming" has always been defined in this
context as the unauthorized switching of long distance carriers on a phone
line. If for example you are a customer of AT&T and one day you discover
that your default (one plus or zero plus) carrier has been changed to
Sprint -- just an example -- without your permission or knowledge, then
we say that (in this example) Sprint 'slammed' your line.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code
Date: 4 Jan 95 10:03:17 -0500
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Prime
perf) writes:

> Does anyone know the procedure for obtaining a 10XXX code? Where does
> one begin? What FCC forms and regulations are involved? Having
> obtained a 10XXX code, how does one get it incorporated into the PSTN?

You are a tad late. All the 10xxx codes are long *gone*. You will have
to wait for the four digit ones to be in universal use.

Or buy some ma/pa in-state outfit hogging an xxx one and then you own it.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve)
Subject: Re: Where Does ISDN Fit In?
Date: 4 Jan 1995 12:05:55 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


ISDN is a digital scheme composed of two 64kb/s channels for
voice/data/whatever and one 16 Kb/s channel that serves signalling
purposes.  As far as uses go, any of the following have been done:

1) remote lan connections;
2) compressed video teleconferencing;
3) internet access;
4) any dial-up data situation.

These are just a few off the top of my head.


Take it easy,

Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (G.Robert Arrabito)
Subject: Looking For Mail Order Cellular Accessories
Date: 4 Jan 95 03:54:48 GMT
Organization: Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine


I'm looking for a mail order outlet in either Canada or the U.S. which
carries NMH batteries for my Motorola cellular phone. Can anyone suggest
good, reliable companies?


Rob Arrabito     e-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve)
Subject: Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1?
Date: 4 Jan 1995 12:00:27 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


There is a company in California called Cylink.  They make several
different kinds of crypto gear for communications.  I'm unable to come
up with a telephone number for them at the moment.


Take it easy,

Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (JeffB65582)
Subject: Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1?
Date: 4 Jan 1995 10:20:38 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JeffB65582)


Many years ago I recall that the Collins Radio Division of Rockwell
International manufactured a device known as a "T1 bulk encryption
unit".  It would take the entire 1.544 stream and encrypt it while
still meeting the one's density requirements, etc.  I don't know if
they're still made, but that's where I'd start looking.


Jeff Box

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
Subject: Re: What is a T1 Line?
Date: 4 Jan 1995 17:21:03 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


[e-mail] (Joseph H Allen) writes:


> It does, because the original poster was concerned about that
> bandwidth of the actual copper pair that came to his house.  It's my
> understanding that an ISDN DS0 is 56K digital line on a copper pair
> between your house and the local office, not a shared T1 (although a
> multiplexer at the local office my put it on a T1).

The DS0 for ISDN is a 64 kbps clear channel. A 56 kbps is effective
through put because the other 8 kbps is used for signalling overhead.
In ISDN, you don't have this overhead, it's carried on the D channel.
All DS0's that go to a line termination are 64 kbps.  It's more of
what is the effective bandwidth.  Unless your circuit is provisoned to
be a clear channel, it will have this 8K of overhead associated with
it.


Matt

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 11:23:59 -0800
From: [e-mail] (William Wood)
Subject: Re: What is a T1 Line?


It's been interesting to watch the thread of "What is a T1 Line" thru
various net respondents, to say the least. I don't know what they are
teaching in college or tech schools these days, but from some of the
comments from people on the net, it has little relevance to the real
world. I'm not an engineer but have some years experience as a
technician and manager in the telephone industry and offer my
observations as an assistance to those who wish to listen.

First, what is the "T" in T1? It's the next letter in the alphabet
after "S," and that's all the "T" means. Over the years I've heard
people insist it stands for "terrestrial" or even "twisted pair"
because the original system only worked on wire. Nice try but no
cigar. All of the interoffice carrier systems prior to 1962 were
analog and had single or double letter designations. I came into the
game too late to work on the really early ones but I did maintain J,
K, L, N1, N2, N3, O, ON, BN, and R type carrier systems. All are
(were) analog and worked on twisted pair, coax or radio transmission
facilities. The carrier system developed by Bell Labs and manufactured
by Western Electric Company which was introduced to the Bell System in
1962 was digital and had the letter designation of "T" because it was
the next letter to be used. (I don't know what happened to the "S,"
maybe it died in the labs?)

The original hardware consisted of a "bank" of plug-in cards. There
were three banks in a standard 19" "bay" (i.e. "rack"). Each bank was
made up of a row of cards for transmit, a row of cards for receive and
two rows of cards for channel units. The channel units were divided
into two groups of 12 (a "digroup"). A 12 channel group was common in
the analog systems and that concept was carried over to this system.
Each of the channel units converted a standard range VF (voice
frequency 300 to 3500 Hz) analog signal into a 64 Kbps DS0 (digital
signal level zero). The bank produced a channelized digital time
division multiplexed stream known as DS1 (digital signal level one).
The bank hardware was collectively known as a "D1 Bank." The original
"T1" carrier used a "D1" bank to produced a "DS1" digital stream. The
stream was (is) 24 each 64 Kb channels (1.536 Mbps) plus 8 Kbps of
framing for a total of 1.544 Mbps. Channel level signaling (off hook,
dial pulses, etc.) was done by "bit robbing" (a type of channel
associated signaling) within each channel stream. With all these
individual cards, the system was difficult to maintain, but when it
worked right it was light years ahead in channel noise compared to any
of the existing analog systems.

Over the years WECO brought out updates of digital banks and that is
why there are D2, D3, D4 and D5 type banks in addition to all the
"non-Bell" manufacturers hardware. Interesting to note that "D4"
framing (as compared to Extended Superframe Format) is referring to
the bit stream form standardized by a specific type of WECO bank. It's
no wonder that many people now also confuse these bank hardware
designations with the higher rate digital multiplexed streams. There
is no direct relationship between D1, D2, D3, D4 banks and DS1, DS2,
DS3, DS4 bit rates. This also adds mystery to what is meant by "T1,
T2, T3, and T4," is it bank hardware or bit stream?

The D1 banks transmit an Alternate Mark Inversion (AMI) signal over a
4 wire twisted pair (transmit on one pair, receive on the other) to a
distance of around 6 thousand feet before regeneration. The 6 Kft was
a standard spacing for "H" type load coils used in long analog voice
grade pairs to improve speech quality. To bring up a cable for T
carrier required a regen installed in the same pole mount or cable
vault as the load pots, so the physical locations were easy to get to.
Six thousand feet at 1.544 Mb was a major feat in 1962. The AMI cut
the baud (symbol) rate considerably but it was still a very high
equivalent frequency for the time. There are currently on the market a
number of 'repeaterless' T type systems which can extend the
cable distance up to 12 thousand feet with no regen. Short haul N type
analog carrier systems typically had 10 to 15 MILE spacing between
repeaters, so a digital T regenerator every mile seemed a bit
complicated at the time.

As to the ISDN Primary Rate, it is not a T1, if T1 is understood as a
DS1 with 24 individual and unrelated DSO's. The physical access may be
on two pairs (four wire) and the bit rate is 1.544 Mb, but the channel
stack is different. One of the DSO 64 Kb time slots (channels) is
dedicated (aka, common channel signaling) to control signaling,
supervision and other data functions for the other 23 DSO (possibly
voice) channels. This control channel is the "D" and the others are
the "B" channels. Depending on the manufacturer, the system level
hardware may be software configurable to look like a standard T1-DS1
or a ISDN PRI. Or it may take a different card altogether. With the
exception of some Special Services applications, ISDN PRI does not run
between telephone exchanges. Standardized trunking arrangements
(frequently using a Common Channel Signaling system such as SS7) are
used to carry traffic between exchanges.

The issue of a low pass filter on 'ordinary telephone lines' is directly
related to what that line is connected to. If we start with an example
of POTS (plain old telephone service) phone connected to a mechanical
switch such as a step by step (Stroger) switch - there are no filters.
It's a purely physical wire connection from phone, to line, to switch,
to line, to phone connection. Whatever frequency is applied to the line
at one end will come out at the other, impaired only by the physics of
the wire facility. This is still true today in the case of 'Metallic' or
'Wire Only' (no active devices) circuits. In data applications sometimes
these are called Local Area Data Channels because they have to be 'local,'
meaning they don't go thru switches or carrier systems.  Whatever goes
in, comes out, minus the line losses.

If the line is connected to a analog or digital carrier system or to a
digital switch, it will be subjected to limitation by a filter for the
purposes of creating a standard 3 Khz voice channel bandwidth. This
has been the standard since the earliest carrier systems and remains
the standard today. This limitation is not a secret plot to limit
modem bit rates. Nor is it a device to improve speech quality
(although a companding process is normally used to improve the voice
quality of the narrow VF channel). It was, and is, an engineering
necessity for multiplexing multiple voice channels onto a limited
transmission facility (either a bus in a switch or a copper, fiber or
radio trunk facility for a carrier system). One net respondent
suggested that you could ask as a 'courtesy' for the telephone
company to remove the filter. They cannot remove this function without
impacting other circuits in the shared switch or carrier system. They
can however, move your wires to a different type of hardware which has
wider analog or digital capacity. Then you no longer have POTS
service, you would now have some type of Special Service circuit and
would have to pay extra for it.

Finally, there is a subtle difference between 'cross talk' and 'cross
modulation.' Nit picking perhaps but cross talk takes place at the VF
level and is commonly associated with a physical cable problem. If the
pairs in a cable get wet (particularly pulp [paper] insulated pairs) the
signal energy of one POTS call can bleed into another pair. Each person
can hear others talking on their call. This problem is typical of the
local loop side of a telephone exchange. Cross modulation takes place
after the analog or digital modulation step is taken in a digital switch
or an analog or digital carrier system. In digital (T) carrier systems
cross mod usually results in white noise or frying in a conversation.
Its unusual to hear distinct conversations crossing into your call. In
analog systems cross mod allows distinct conversations to enter your
call. Cross mod takes place on the interoffice or trunk side of an
exchange. Not always easy to distinguish the two but helpful getting the
problem fixed if you can do it. This is because often the repair folks
who fix the local loop side are not the same folks who fix the trunk
side. Trouble gets fixed faster if you give it to the right people
first.

I offer this as a help to my friends and wish to offend no one so please
keep any flames to pilot light size. I don't know anyone in this industry
who knows it all so we need to support each other as much as possible.


WE Wood   Technotranslater
Techtrans Animatics Group

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #7
****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08047;
          5 Jan 95 1:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11233; Wed, 4 Jan 95 20:16:14 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA11226; Wed, 4 Jan 95 20:16:12 CST
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 20:16:12 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #8

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 4 Jan 95 20:16:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 8

Inside This Issue:                        Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    More Administrivia, Errors, etc (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    OZLIP Reminder (Mehmet Orgun)
    GSM Book [Moulet &...] (Rupert Baines)
    US Contact: American Management System, Systemetic Inc. (Mr. Wah Chan)
    Wanted to Buy: Tekalek 221-C  E-1 Test Set ([e-mail])
    Re: Standard 19 Inches Network Relay Rack (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers (S. Donelan)
    Re: Looking For Mail Order Cellular Accessories (Michael Schuster)
    Re: Watching the Area Codes Split (David Leibold)
    Re: Watching the Area Codes Split (Mark Brader)
    Re: Roll Over/Hunt Group (Tim Gorman)
    Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code (Wayne Huffman)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 19:15:54 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: More Administrivia, Errors, etc


<Face red mode> ... *if* you chose to pick up a copy of the 1992-1994
volume of the Accelerated Index from the archives .. well, there was a
slight error in the way some items were keyed ... I found out when
someone using the SEARCH command of the Email Information Service
contacted me to say they were getting quite screwey answers in
response to some searches he was making ...

It was only announced yesterday, so most of you probably have not yet
picked up a copy, and in all probability most of you will not want
to bother keeping this humongous, 26,000 (yes twenty six thousand)
line file at your site. But if you did take a copy prior to Wednesday
at about 6:30 PM CST, do me a favor ... ditch it and go get another
copy, one that has been corrected.

What this is -- when it works correctly, as it is now -- is a complete
index of the titles of articles which have been in the Digest for the
past six years and the author names. You can either use SEARCH, which
is a command in the email server, or you can simply go and pull the
two files back to your site.  There are two editions. One covers the
years 1989-1991 and the other covers 1992-1994. Together, they constitute
about 48,000 entries, the number of messages seen here over the past
six years. They are sorted in strict alphabetical order by subject with
any instances of 'Re:' where it appears ignored for the purpose of the
sort. Where more than one article appears with the identical subject
title, the sort continues further by author *first* name. When using
grep or SEARCH (which is just a version of grep I put in the email
server) you can search by subject name or author name. It is highly
recommended that you use the most liberal grep possible, that is,
with '-i' as the argument, so that case will be ignored. Also, if you
choose to search by author, search the *last name only* since sometimes
the first name appears as just an initial, i.e. P.Townson.

If you are really interested, use the INFO command in the email server
to get two other files you'll need to interpret the rest of the data
shown in the accelerated index:

                   INFO back-issues
                   INFO search-hints

Anyway, that's enough on the topic. I botched it, and I've repaired
it, I think. I'm sure someone will tell me if that's not correct.

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

In other administrivia news:

I've received a suggestion from a reader about having a 'human resources'
section in the archives. This would be a place where anyone who wished
to do so could put a paragraph or two about themselves for the benefit
of other readers. It would be voluntary and would have no connection
at all to the mailing list, which is never shared or revealed.

Suggestions for things to include would be in addition to your name,
address, phone number and company/school/institutional affiliation,
perhaps a .signature file, a paragraph about your current project(s),
prior accomplishments, etc. It would be removed/destroyed from the
archives whenever you said to do so, or modified as required.

*DO NOT SEND ENTRIES NOW*

Just let me know what you think of the idea, and if you would want to
have data about yourself there in the Telecom Archives.

Should it be open and available to all to read? I can fix it so that
it is blocked or denied to FTP/Gopher users while available on a
passworded basis to email service users. If it is open to all to read
you can be sure of receiving lots of junk mail ... :)  If on a
passworded basis, then only those who contribute entries of their
own would get the password to read the biographies of the others ...
in other words, give a biography of yourself, and read the others.

Let me have your thoughts. *DO NOT SEND ENTRIES NOW*.


PAT

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 12:02:36 +1100
From: [e-mail] (Mehmet Orgun)
Subject: OZLIP Reminder


Dear All,

Please contribute to the success of ISLIP'95 by submitting a paper,
posting/distributing the call for papers etc. I have posted it to a
number of newsgroups already.

I have also prepared a WWW home page for ISLIP'95. Check out the URL:
http://krakatoa.mpce.mq.edu.au/~mehmet/islip95.html

A PostScript version of the call for papers can be obtained from
the above page as well as a LaTeX version.


Cheers,

Mehmet

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

                          Call for Papers
                              ISLIP'95
The Eigth International Symposium on Languages for Intensional Programming
       May 3-5, 1995, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Objectives

There is a growing interest in computational models and/or programming
languages and systems based on intensional logics such as temporal
logic, interval logic, modal and intuitionistic logics. In fact, a
whole new programming model called intensional programming has been
created with applications in a wide range of areas including parallel
programming, dataflow computation, temporal reasoning, scientific
computation, real-time programming, temporal databases, spreadsheets,
attribute grammars, and hardware synthesis.

This symposium aims at bringing together researchers working in all
aspects of this area, and to promote intensive discussions and foster
collaboration among researchers.  We encourage papers dealing with the
theoretical foundations, design, implementation and prototype
development issues, comparative studies, and applications, as well as
those describing new challenges arising out of applications.

The symposium will include, but will not be limited to, the following
topics of interest (as they relate to intensional programming):

   Programming paradigms             Semantics

   * dataflow computation            * non-determinism
   * connectionist models            * extended Kahn principle
   * logic programming               * intensional concepts
   * real-time programming               * termination issues
   * languages such as Lucid and GLU

   Software Engineering                Applications

   * version control                 * signal processing
   * visual user interfaces          * image processing
   * parallel programming            * hardware synthesis
   * fault-tolerant systems          * graphics
   * program verification            * data models


Submissions

You are invited to submit either a full paper or an extended abstract
of approximately 5000 words (10-15 double spaced pages).  The cover
page should include the name, phone/fax numbers and e-mail addres of
the contact author(s), a short abstract, topic(s) and a list of
keywords.  Papers will be reviewed by the program committee for their
originality, correctness, significance, and relevance to the
symposium.

We prefer PostScript or self-contained LaTeX submissions via
electronic mail to either one of the e-mail addresses below.  You can
also send 3 hardcopies of your submission to one of the following
addresses (chosen with respect to geographical proximity). Submissions
should arrive no later than February 15, 1995.

  Edward A. Ashcroft / ISLIP'95         E-mail: [e-mail]
  Department of Computer Science & Eng  Phone : [phone]
  Arizona State University            Fax   : [phone]
  Tempe, Arizona 85283, U.S.A.

  Mehmet A. Orgun / ISLIP'95         E-mail: [e-mail]
  Department of Computing              Phone : +61 2 850 - 9570
  Macquarie University            Fax   : +61 2 850 - 9551
  Sydney, NSW 2109, Australia

Authors will receive notification of acceptance by March 20, 1995.
Revised versions of the papers to appear in the pre-proceedings to be
distributed at the Symposium are due on April 12, 1995 (preferred in
PostScript or LaTeX form, sent by email).  The symposium will be held
on May 3-5, 1995 at Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

At the Symposium, the research will be presented and also evaluated,
and it is planned that final polished papers will appear in the
proceedings in book form.

The details about registration and accommodation will be provided later.


Symposium Chair

  Edward A. Ashcroft       Arizona State University

Program Committee

  Seiki Akama          Teikyo University of Technology
  Edward A. Ashcroft     Arizona State University
  Weichang Du       University of New Brunswick
  Tony A. Faustini        Arizona State University
  Jan Hext            Macquarie University
  Tom Hintz          University of Technology,Sydney
  R. Jagannathan        SRI International
  Michael Johnson       Macquarie University
  Steve Matthews       University of Warwick
  Mehmet A. Orgun     Macquarie University
  John Potter        Microsoft Institute
  John Plaice          University of Laval
  William W. Wadge        University of Victoria
  Andrew L. Wendelborn  University of Adelaide
  Kang Zhang        Macquarie University


Local Arrangements

  Mehmet A. Orgun        Macquarie University
  Kang Zhang        Macquarie University


Important Dates

 Submission Deadline:   February 15, 1995
 Notification:      March 20, 1995
 Revised Versions due:  April 12, 1995
 Symposium:           May 3-5, 1994


Further Information

Contact:
     [e-mail]
     [e-mail]

Latest information about the Symposium will be made available
via the WWW page: http://krakatoa.mpce.mq.edu.au/~mehmet/islip95.html

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

Mehmet A Orgun, Department of Computing, Macquarie University
        Sydney,  NSW 2109,  Australia
        Tel: [phone],  Fax: [phone]
        E-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rupes)
Subject: GSM Book [Moulet &...]
Date: 4 Jan 1995 19:04:12 -0500
Organization: Concentric Research Corporation


A couple of people have emailed me asking for this information, so I
thought I should re-post it.

The GSM book that seems to be most popular is:

The GSM System for Mobile Communications
Mouly & Pautet
ISBN 2-9507190-0-7
tel [phone]
fax [phone]

It is a private printing - you have to contact the authors on number
above.

I have nothing to do with the authors and do not get commision. Which
is a shame, as I've recommended it quite a bit <G>

Does anyone know of a US distributor ?  (I suppose there may be copies
on sale at CTIA or Wireless ?)


Rupert Baines

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

From: [e-mail] (Mr Wah Chan)
Subject: US Contact: American Management System, Systemetic Inc.
Date: 4 Jan 1995 22:45:20 GMT
Organization: Hong Kong Supernet


Anyone know about the following companies:

    American Management System
    Systemetic Inc.

Both companies specialize on Telephone Billing Systems.  We need to
know their US contact and also their Rep Office in HK or SE Asia.

Suggestions on how to find such information are also welcomed.  (e.g.,
sites where I can find out the address and telephone number of any US
companies, etc.)


Johnny Chan     Internet Address: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Pat)
Subject: Wanted to Buy: Tekalek 221-C  E-1 Test Set
Date: 4 Jan 1995 22:55:24 GMT
Organization: Netcom


I'm told that the Tekalek (SP?) 221-C E-1 test set is no longer
manufactured. So, I'm looking for someone that wants to sell a used
one.

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 13:18:12 -0500
Subject: Re: Standard 19 Inches Network Relay Rack
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


In TELECOM Digest Volume 14 Issue 481, Jocelyn Poulin <[e-mail]>
asked for suppliers of seismic-certified relay racks.

Try the following:

AMCO Engineering, Schiller Park, IL                  708 671-6670
B-Line Telecom, Reno, NV                             702 677-0855
     (formerly Saunders Telecom)
Chatsworth Products, Chatsworth, CA                  818 882-8595
     (formerly Dracon division of Harris)
Equipto, Aurora, IL                                  708 859-1000
Hammond Manufacturing Co., Buffalo, NY               716 894-5710
Hendry Telephone Products, Goleta, CA                805 968-5511
Newton Instrument, Butner, NC                        919 575-6426
Rittal Corp., Springfield, OH                        513 399-0500
Zero/Stantron, Pacoima, CA                           818 890-3445


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] (Sean Donelan)
Subject: Re: AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers
Date: 4 Jan 95 18:14:32 CDT
Organization: Data Research Associates, St. Louis MO


In article <[e-mail]>, A Alan Toscano <atoscano@Starbase.
NeoSoft.COM> writes:

> she moves within the United States.  AT&T currently can assign
> subscribers 500 numbers that begin with 20 different exchanges, such
                                          ^^
> as 346, 367 and 677.  For example, a person's number could be

According to the AT&T 1-800 line they only have four exchanges
available.  Does anyone know when (and what) other exchanges will be
available?


Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Schuster)
Subject: Re: Looking For Mail Order Cellular Accessories
Date: 4 Jan 1995 19:24:08 -0500
Organization: Public Access Internet & UNIX


In article <[e-mail]>, G.Robert Arrabito <robbie@hermes.
dciem.dnd.ca> wrote:

> I'm looking for a mail order outlet in either Canada or the U.S. which
> carries NMH batteries for my Motorola cellular phone. Can anyone suggest
> good, reliable companies?

Motorola  1-800-331-6456


Mike Schuster     [e-mail] | [e-mail]
[e-mail] | GEnie: MSCHUSTER

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

From: [e-mail] (David Leibold)
Subject: Re: Watching the Area Codes Split
Organization: Toronto FreeNet
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 01:14:15 GMT


Mike Morris ([e-mail]) wrote:

> The perfect location for area code 666 is Washington DC.  Give the
> entire code to the federal government.  Keep all the non-goverment
> stuff in the old area code.

Canadian federal government offices in Vancouver BC have been on the
666 NXX for years. This included (at last report) the regional office
of the CRTC which regulates telecom and broadcasting in Canada.


David Leibold     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Watching the Area Codes Split
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 23:10:10 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We went through this once before, a couple
> years ago, and someone posted a list of all the places where the 666
> exchange appeared around the USA, in which area codes, etc, and if there
> were any special users such as centrex accounts, etc on them. It seems
> to me somewhere some government offices were on 666 in that area code;
> maybe it was the IRS, I'm not sure. ...]

Wrong country.  From the Telecom Archives:

> Date: Sat, 11 Aug 90 19:59:12 PDT
> From: Jonathan Story <[e-mail]>
> Subject: Re: 666 and Ignorant People

>     In Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (area code 604) the 666
> exchange is used by ... the Canadian Government.

> [e-mail]

And our IRS analog, Revenue Canada, would certainly have an office in
Vancouver.


Mark Brader                  "'Taxpayer' includes any person
[e-mail]                    whether or not liable to pay tax."
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto        -- Income Tax Act of Canada, s.248(1)

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 20:40:40 -0500
From: Tim Gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Roll Over/Hunt Group


[e-mail] (Hendrik Rood) writes in TELECOM Digest V14 #481:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jon
> Zeeff) says:

>> Ameritech tells me that they cannot roll over a trunk hunt where
>> instead of starting with line one and picking the first free one, it
>> always takes the next one after the last used one (ie, a circular
>> hunt).  Maybe I didn't use the right terminology.  Does anyone know
>> why they couldn't do this?

> Even when this is possible it is very stupid to do circular hunting with
> a standard trunk and a rollover trunk. What happens is simple described:

> Suppose: Main trunk eight circuits
>          Rollover trunk four circuits.

> Circular hunting results after at most eight incoming calls in usage
> of the rollover trunk. Even when circuits on the main trunk are
> released again.

> This means that with circular hunting your rollover does not act as a
> rollover anymore but simply as a trunk.  I can understand software
> writers of exchange manufacturers that block such a setup in their
> code :-).

This isn't quite true. With all circular hunt trunk groups I know of,
the decision of whether or not to route advance to the next group is
done each time a call origination is received. So if a trunk in the
primary group is free at the time, it will get the next call.

Circular hunt on primary high-alternate use combination does provide
signficant benefits, especially if per trunk signaling is used.
Circular hunt, if designed to always start hunting at the trunk
following the one just picked, significantly decreases the impact of
killer trunks on traffic capacity of the trunk group.


Tim Gorman  [e-mail]
Southwestern Bell Tel. Co

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

From: [e-mail] (Wayne Huffman)
Subject: Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code
Date: 5 Jan 1995 01:59:07 GMT
Organization: Netcom


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Prime
> perf) writes:

>> Does anyone know the procedure for obtaining a 10XXX code? Where does
>> one begin? What FCC forms and regulations are involved? Having
>> obtained a 10XXX code, how does one get it incorporated into the PSTN?

> You are a tad late. All the 10xxx codes are long *gone*. You will have
> to wait for the four digit ones to be in universal use.

> Or buy some ma/pa in-state outfit hogging an xxx one and then you own it.

FYI The local cableco here in Fairfax County, VA (Media General Cable)
has a 10XXXX code (106-500), used for ordering Pay-Per-View movies.  I
can't seem to get an answer from Bell Atlantic on how this was
arranged. Is this a common practice, I wonder.


Wayne H.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #8
****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14469;
          5 Jan 95 14:52 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28762; Thu, 5 Jan 95 08:02:22 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA28755; Thu, 5 Jan 95 08:02:19 CST
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 08:02:19 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #9

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 5 Jan 95 08:02:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 9

Inside This Issue:                        Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: What is a T1 Line? (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: What is a T1 Line? (Ed Goldgehn)
    Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (Monty Solomon)
    Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (Pat Clawson)
    Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code (Rahul Dhesi)
    Re: Watching the Area Codes Split (Tim Gorman)
    Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK (Jan Joris Vereijken)
    Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T (Wolf Paul)
    Re: Erlang Capacity (Tim Gorman)
    Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Paul Gloger)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: What is a T1 Line?
Date: 5 Jan 1995 04:04:45 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs) writes:

> [e-mail] (Joseph H Allen) writes:

>> It does, because the original poster was concerned about that
>> bandwidth of the actual copper pair that came to his house.  It's my
>> understanding that an ISDN DS0 is 56K digital line on a copper pair
>> between your house and the local office, not a shared T1 (although a
>> multiplexer at the local office my put it on a T1).

> The DS0 for ISDN is a 64 kbps clear channel. A 56 kbps is effective
> through put because the other 8 kbps is used for signalling overhead.

Not exactly.

> In ISDN, you don't have this overhead, it's carried on the D channel.

Signalling is on the D channel but other overhead may also be involved.
(see below) ...

> All DS0's that go to a line termination are 64 kbps.  It's more of
> what is the effective bandwidth.  Unless your circuit is provisoned to
> be a clear channel, it will have this 8K of overhead associated with
> it.

ALL ISDN WITHOUT EXCEPTION is clear channel in the B channels. There
is no ISDN transport mechanism that will ever modify the 8th bit.

What the original poster was probably referring to as a "56K digital line"
was most likely  a DDS circuit.

DDS is a four-wire (i.e. two pair) circuit with a bit rate of 64Kbps
of which 56Kbps is available for data. DDS uses an AMI coding so that
most of the spectral energy peaks around 32KHZ much like a T1 with
1.544mbps has its spectral peak around 772KHZ.

ISDN BRI "Lines" in the US are normally single pairs that use a 2B1Q
modulation scheme with 160kbps transmitted at 80K "quads" per second.
The same pair is used for BOTH directions of transmission with
adaptive echo cancellation used at both ends to cancel that ends
transmit signal at it receiver so it "hears" only the other end.
80kqps 2B1Q has most of its spectral energy around 40KHZ which is not
much higher than DDS.

Of the 160kbps, 2 B channels of 64Kbps each and 1 D channel of 16Kbps
are provided both of which are free of any coding restrictions as far
as the "line" is concerned. The remaining 24kbps is used for overhead
and maintenance functions. ALL forms of ISDN transport clear 64kbps
bearer channels without coding restrictions. The 56K bps restrictions
come up only when inter-working with non-ISDN segments that have
coding restrictions which means most of the US intra-LATA networks.

ISDN PRI in the US can be transported over T1 lines that employ B8ZS
encoding instead of AMI. B8ZS has essentially the same spectrum as AMI
but provides for transmission of any bit stream in the individual time
slots.  With PRI the D channel is 64KBPS leaving 23 B channels of
64KBPS (without coding restrictions) on the T1 with D channel and 24 B
channels on any additional associated T1's.

Channel Banks that support B8ZS T1 lines can also be used to transport
the bit streams for BRI lines. In this case 1 or 2 timeslots are
assigned as the B channel(s) and 1 timeslot (typically) is assigned as
the D channel. In fact this may become the most common way ISDN is
delivered to residential areas.

ISDN BRI lines in US and the rest of the world are typically broken up
for CPE interface to a four-wire S/T interface. In the US the
conversion from the line to S/T interface is accomplished by an NT-1
which is CPE in the same sense that a DSU is CPE. Other CPE can,
however, incorporate this functionality itself.

The S/T lines are twisted pairs with separate transmit and receive
pairs.  The line code is inverted AMI baseband with a bit rate of
192kbps and spectral peak around 96khz. 144kbps is used for the
payload B channels (64kbs each) and D channel (16kbs). The B channels
AGAIN are clear channel.  The remaining 48kbps is used for overhead
functions including a protocol that allow any one of multiple devices
to acquire the D channel.

WORTH REPEATING! ISDN always provides a clear 64kbps B channel free of
any coding restrictions whatsoever. If it don't it ain't ISDN. When
the B channel inter-works with a non-ISDN network or service, however,
coding restrictions may apply to the transport. ISDN segments will
never modify the data stream.  Non-ISDN segments can modify the stream
in many ways including trashing the the 8th bit with signalling data,
converting between A-Law and u-Law PCM, "TRUE VOICING" or other
marketing gimmicks, echo control, signal level conversions, or even
deliberate modifications to prevent users from sending data over
connections setup as voice in order to avoid usage charges on data.

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (William Wood)
writes:

<good accurate stuff deleted>

> The bank hardware was collectively known as a "D1 Bank." The original
> "T1" carrier used a "D1" bank to produced a "DS1" digital stream. The
> stream was (is) 24 each 64 Kb channels (1.536 Mbps) plus 8 Kbps of
> framing for a total of 1.544 Mbps. Channel level signaling (off hook,
> dial pulses, etc.) was done by "bit robbing" (a type of channel
> associated signaling) within each channel stream. With all these

I believe that the D1 system used the full 8th bit for signalling and
a 7 bit PCM. This was something less than satisfactory so the robbed
bit approach and an 8 bit PCM code was introduced in succeeding
systems.

Just for the record.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Re: What is a T1 Line?
Date: 5 Jan 1995 02:44:54 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


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

[one of the best explanations I've ever seen snipped]

The only flames you should get are lighters in the air in lieu of applause.


Ed Goldgehn                           E-Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr. Vice President                    Voice:   [phone]
Open Communication Networks, Inc.     Fax:     [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 23:51:29 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax
Reply-To: [e-mail]


> The announcement by CompuServe and Unisys that users of the GIF image
> format must register by January 10 and pay a royalty or face lawsuits
> for their past usage, is the online communications community's
> equivalent of the sneak attack at Pearl Harbor.

Begin forwarded message:

  Date: Wed, 4 Jan 95 01:27:59 EST
  Sender: [e-mail]
  From: [e-mail] (John Ross)
  Subject: Future of .gif

It's not quite as bad as first reported. This was posted on The WELL tonight:

[TD Editor's Note: Text printed here yesterday. See previous issues.
VP of Compuserve in essence says 'not our fault' and hoping things can be
worked out.  PAT]

>  Tim Oren
>  Vice President
>  CompuServe

My analysis of this is that it's premature to panic. Depending on what
UnySys does, there may be no problem. But it's probably time to find a
replacement for .gif as the Web standard anyway.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And maybe a replacement for .git *has*
been found -- already!  See the next message in this series for one
solution put together on the run by a few people.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jan 1995 03:08:34 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax


An Open Letter to the Senior Management of CompuServe and the Online
Communications Community:

HOW TO SAVE GIF -- NOW !!

Following last weekend's surprise announcement of the CompuServe-Unisys GIF
Tax, we agree with many in the online communications community that a
group is needed to create a new imaging format.  New compression methods
allow us to design a format that's smaller, more flexible, and ready
to go the distance for our future needs.  But let's take a hard look
at the current crisis at hand.

There are thousands of software products in the market featuring GIF
support, from shareware to professional commercial packages. There are
thousands of BBS systems and Web sites transmitting GIF images to
online customers all over the world.  What happens to these products
and their developers when January 10th hits?  Does the online community
stop viewing GIFs online?  Will Web Sites have holes in the HTML pages
where the GIFs should have been?  Will sysops be told to remove GIFs
and GIF-related software from all non-CompuServe related systems?  How
many millions of dollars will be lost by software developers and sysops?

Like all of us, we're waiting for a possible announcement from CompuServe
and Unisys that may solve our problems.  That same announcement may
also seal GIF's demise. We need a backup plan if things don't go well.

Some say GIF is dead.  We think it's just broken.

SO WE FIXED IT.

We replaced the broken part - LZW compression.

So now, we propose a remedy that may cure our problem in a timely manner.

If CompuServe really wants to continue to provide the GIF format under
the conditions of their original royalty-free license, but can't
because of the patented Unisys LZW compression algorithm, the most
painless cure is to substitute another compression scheme.  Here's our
fix. See what you think:

* We just completed a two-day, no-sleep marathon to yank the LZW routines
out of our GIF89a code and replace it with an open form of LZHUF.

* In our testing, the LZHUF compression produced GIF files that were
virtually identical in size to the LZW version.  Some LZHUF images
were slightly larger.

* We have followed the GIF89a format specification to the letter,
except for the part that defines the type of compression method used
on the image data (LZHUF vs LZW).

* We replaced all LZW functions in our GIF library with LZHUF
functions. This two hour change to our software produced a completely
functional GIF library (Interlaced, Comment Blocks, Masking Bits,
Etc.).  EVERYTHING WAS INTACT AND WORKING FINE WITHOUT ANY NEED FOR
LZW.

* We also wrote a program to convert the original GIF87a and GIF89a
images to the LZHUF version of our proposed GIF format.

There has been talk in this forum of a GEF (Graphics Exchange Format)
or a GIF95a format, and even the replacement of the LZW part of GIF.
We took the initiative and created GEF.

We think GEF is a quick and viable solution to our problem. TeleGrafix
Communications offers it to the online community FREE OF CHARGE as a
public service.

We are willing to upload our proposed GEF update with ALL SOURCE CODE
intact so everyone can convert their current GIF files from the closed
LZW form to the open LZHUF form.

All we ask is that CompuServe give us its approval.

Developers need make only minimal changes to their original GIF source
code.  It took us only two hours.  Most GIF-based products that your
customers own can be upgraded WITH JUST A PATCH FILE.

GIFs and LZW would become unrelated immediately and we could get back
the open, royalty-free format we have come to depend on.  If CompuServe
will not allow the compression method to be changed, then GIF is truly
a dead format.

We appreciate any comments on our proposal, especially from GIF's
creators at CompuServe.  If it is not supported by CompuServe or the
online community, then it will be deleted along with all of our other
GIF-related files.  We will stay with JPEG, and search for an entirely
new image format standard.


Sincerely,

Pat Clawson
President & Chief Executive Officer
TeleGrafix Communications

Mark Hayton
Vice President & Chief Technology Officer
TeleGrafix Communications Inc.

Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
BBS: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good luck with this! Let's hope the change
in format can be accomplished with a minimum of effort on the part of all
concerned. If your's will do the job, perhaps CIS should look at it and
see if they can be accomodating.   PAT]

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

From: Rahul Dhesi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code
Date: 5 Jan 1995 10:55:45 GMT
Organization: a2i network


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Wayne Huffman)
writes:

> FYI The local cableco here in Fairfax County, VA (Media General Cable)
> has a 10XXXX code (106-500), used for ordering Pay-Per-View movies.  I
> can't seem to get an answer from Bell Atlantic on how this was
> arranged.

I assume they talked with some IXC called 'EDS', which owns 10650.
The next digit you dial is another zero, which leads to an operator.


Rahul Dhesi <[e-mail]>

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 21:50:27 -0500
From: Tim Gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Watching the Area Codes Split


Sean E. Williams <[e-mail]> writes in TELECOM Digest V15 #3:

>John Lundgren wrote:

>> Someday there might just be a database that has your name, and the
>> number associated with it, and all people will have to do is punch up
>> your name, and not have to worry about a number.  And it will be current.

> Just like the internet Domain Name System.  It could have been implemented
> years ago, and then we wouldn't be having all the problems associated
> with the NANP -- your neighbor could be in a different area code, and
> you wouldn't even have to know or care, so long as you could remember
> his name!

> How about a system which provides a menu of available options?  Start
> out by entering a person's name.

> Okay, so there are thousands of "Jim Smiths" in the US.  At first, you
> are presented with the one who lives closest to you (the city / street
> would be displayed) or you could specify a specific location at the
> start if you are calling a "Jim Smith" who lives several states away.

> When you finally select the appropriate "Jim Smith", a menu appears
> listing the following options: home, cellular, pager, fax, data, etc.
> Select the option you wish, and you are connected to that service.

> I don't know much about ISDN, but it's probably capable of doing this
> right now if the appropriate software were to be written.

I couldn't let this one go by. Is there anyone else out there who
would expect the internet DNS to puke up if it had to handle a system
the size of teh nationwide phone system? Especially with the daily
change activity that has to be processed?

Just keeping the 800 database current is a major undertaking. I cannot
even imagine keeping a database of over two (actually closer to four isn't
it?)  billion potential nodes current, especially if it included mobile
terminals which change second by second rather than daily, weekly or
longer.


Tim Gorman   Southwestern Bell Tel Co  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Joris Vereijken)
Subject: Re: NANP 800 numbers from the UK
Date: 5 Jan 1995 11:30:01 +0100
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jan Joris Vereijken)


Clive D.W. Feather  <[e-mail]> wrote:

> All of a sudden, I can now dial 1-800 numbers from the UK. There is a
> few seconds of silence, and then an American female voice tells me
> that this call will *not* be free, but charged at standard direct-dial
> rates.  If I don't want to pay, I should hang up now.

I tried this in the Netherlands (from the 040-84 exchange located in
Nuenen, near Eindhoven), and it didn't work. After I had dialed
00-1-800-xxx I got the "illegal number" tones.

Previously, in the Netherlands, you could dial all digits of 1-800,
but got a (Dutch) recording "this number cannot be reached".

In 1993 this recording disappeared, and you couldn't dial further than
00-1-800-xxx.

Just for the heck of it I tried it a dozen times, with differnt values
of xxx. Alas, to no avail.

What's happening? Is the Dutch PTT blocking calls that could be
perfectly well completed? Or do the Britsh have a special agreement
with the Americans that not valid in the Netherlands?

Who knows more?


ByeBye,

Jan Joris


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It would not surprise me if a special
deal was in place between the UK and the telcos here.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T
Date: 5 Jan 1995 09:01:11 GMT
Organization: Alcatel Austria AG
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (David Cornutt)
writes:

>> I got one of those things.  Unfortunately for AT&T, the phone number
>> that they had on the check was not an actual line, but an old remote-
>> call-forwarded number that I was retaining for personal reasons.

>> As such, it was, of course, utterly impossible to make outgoing calls
>> from that number.  So the check went in the trash.  I imagine that
>> cashing it under those circumstances probably would have constituted
>> fraud.

That would be a very interesting question:

Would it really constitute fraud if I cashed a check which someone has
sent me without solicitation from me? After all, I agree to their
switching this number, so I am fulfilling the condition they placed on
me for cashing the check.

It is **THEIR** problem that they did not do their homework properly.

Now, if they advertised such a check for anyone requesting a switch,
and I call them and have them send me a check in return for switching
that number, knowing full well that it isn't a real line, then I could
see calling this fraud. But not if the initiative was theirs.

Well, we'll find out how this works over here in a couple of years.
Austria just joined the EU, and the EU has decreed the end of telecom
monopolies by the end of 1996 (or is it 1998)? We will all be faced
with the same problems and privileges then.


Wolf N. Paul, UNIX Support/KSR          [e-mail]
Alcatel Austria AG                   [phone] (w)
Scheydgasse 41/E26                  [phone] (fax)
A-1210 Vienna, Austria (Europe)         [phone] (h)

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

Date: Wed, 4 Jan 1995 21:30:57 -0500
From: Tim Gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Erlang Capacity


[e-mail] writes in TELECOM Digest V15 #2:

> I am looking for information about Erlang Capacity Calculations for
> land line based telecom networks. My main question is this:

> In cellular, typical system design is according to Erlang B or Erlang
> C traffic tables, and designed for 2% blocking (.02 G.O.S., Grade Of
> Service).

> Is this the same for land line?, local PSTN? long distance trunks?
> international trunks? etc. Any information or source of information
> for this would be useful.

Grade of Service for all PSTN providers that I know of is 1% blocking.
To provide this on tandem connections to interLATA carriers we utilize
0.5% blocking on our end office-access tandem links. I'm not sure what
you are describing with the term "land line" since a land line has
100% grade of service to the CO by definition (this may not be true in
some concentrated subscriber loop carrier systems but it should be
pretty close).

InterLATA toll and international toll grades of service are not in my
area of expertise anymore but I'll be they are close to 1% blocking as
well in most areas.

We use Neil-Wilkerson tables for coming up with the number of trunks
required. It's been a long time since I studied this but I think a
simple explanation would be that these tables are Poisson tables with
peakedness factors for non-smooth offered load. The Poisson tables
would be equivalent to your Erlang B tables, I suspect.

Again, it has been a while but I thought Erlang C was not used for
figuring blockage to offered load on a trunk group but instead for
figuring holding time in queue while waiting for answer. Are you sure
you use Erlang C in trunk blocking or do I have my tables mixed up :-) ?


Tim Gorman  Southwestern Bell Tel. Co   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 04:49:47 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges


 From the Associated Press, as reported in the {Los Angeles Times},
Sunday, January 1, 1995:

Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges

Memphis, Tenn. - A woman listening to a police scanner she had gotten
for Christmas picked up a conversation over cordless telephones and
heard what turned out to be a murder plot unfolding, investigators
say.

Donna McGee tipped sheriff's deputies to what she had heard, and on
Thursday a woman and her boyfriend were arrested and accused of conspiring
to kill the woman's husband and make it look like a burglary gone awry.

"It appears their motive was to collect the insurance money and get
out of debt, and for them to continue their lives together," said
Sheriff's Capt. Joe Ball.

Jacqueline Lee Greene, 32, and Christopher Scott Davis, 21, were charged
with conspiracy to murder her husband, James Kenneth Greene.  Davis
was also charged with criminal attempt to commit murder.

McGee said the scanner chatter she heard Wednesday caught her attention fast.

"I heard this man say: 'Are you sure you want to go through with
this?'  She said she was sure, and asked him if he was sure," McGee
said Friday.  "She asked him: 'Do you really love me enough to kill
for me?'  He said: 'Yes, I do.  Do you have any doubts?'"

The man and woman talked about having Davis enter the Greene house
through a window, McGee said.

"She said if he came through the unlocked patio door, there wouldn't
be any sign of forced entry," McGee said.  "She said: 'If you come
through the window, Kenny will hear you and he'll come and that's when
you shoot him.'"

By this time some of McGee's family was listening.  When the woman on
the scanner called her daughter, McGee's daughter recognized a playmate's
name.  Eventually, the McGees said, they realized the identity of the
intended victim.

Greene "was just absolutely amazed, scared, shocked" when sheriff's
deputies informed him of the plot against him, Ball said.

Cordless telephones use radio waves to communicate between the handset
and the base.  Those radio waves can easily be intercepted by a police
scanner.

Ball said there was nothing illegal in McGee's listening to the cordless
phone conversations because it was a random scanning.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's the first time I have ever heard
of cordless phone monitoring being dismissed as 'nothing illegal' because
it was 'random scanning'. You'd think they would rely on previous court
decisions stating that cordless phones do not have the same protection
as cellular phones ... or something ... but isn't all scanner listening
essentially 'random'?   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #9
****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24012;
          5 Jan 95 21:58 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16473; Thu, 5 Jan 95 17:08:34 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16463; Thu, 5 Jan 95 17:08:31 CST
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 17:08:31 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #10

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 5 Jan 95 17:08:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 10

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Internet '95 Conference (Leona Nichols)
    800 Numbers, How Important? (Paul Harts)
    Re: Telecom Group in Chicago (Maurice Givens)
    New Telecom Resource on the Internet ([e-mail])
    Switch Features Information Wanted (Glenn Shirley)
    Videoconferencing Seminar in Rochester, NY (David C. Weber)
    Call Waiting and Caller-ID (Keith Knipschild)
    Cellphone ANI Now Being Given? (Keith Knipschild)
    Cellular Phone Pricing Question (John McGing)
    British Telecom Cuts Rates to Canada and U.S. (Dave Leibold)
    M2 Presswire Note (News Digest Reader Account)
    Need Profile of Teleport Communications Group (Linli Zhao)
    CAI Preferences by Service Providers (Alex Cena)
    Telecomix (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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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,  5 Jan 95 10:15:26 PST
From: Leona Nichols <[e-mail]>
Subject: Internet '95 Conference


TeleStrategies' Internet '95 Conference/Expo

CONFERENCE TRACK
Publishing, Marketing and Advertising on the Internet
March 21-22, 1995


Tuesday, March 21, 1995

9:00-10:30  Session C-1
THE FUTURE OF INTERNET PUBLISHING
Brewster Kahle, CEO, WAIS, Inc.
John Curran, Product Manager, BBN Technology Services
Stanley R. Greenfield, President, Dial-A-Book, Inc. and former
  Senior Vice President and consultant for Ziff-Davis Publishing
  Company

10:45-12:15  Session C-2
HOW TO MARKET AND ADVERTISE EFFECTIVELY
Jeffrey Dearth, CEO, Electronic Newsstand, Inc.
Andrew Frank, Director, Software Development
  Ogilvy & Mather Direct
Duffy Mazan, Partner, Electric Press, Inc.

1:30-3:00  Session C-3
PUBLISHING ON THE INTERNET
Laura Fillmore, President, Online Bookstore
John Pierce, Electronic Publishing Specialist
  Online Computer Library Center, Inc.
Brad Templeton, President, ClariNet Communications

3:30-4:00 Session C-4
ONLINE CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS
Lee H. Stein, Chairman and CEO, First Virtual Holdings Incorporated

4:00-5:30  Session C-5
ROUND TABLE DISCUSSION OF INTERNET SECURITY
Steven Lipner, Vice President, Trusted Information Systems, Inc.
Kurt Stammberger, Technology Marketing Manager
  RSA Data Security, Inc.
Raymond DeRoo, System Administrator, E-Znet Inc.

Wednesday, March 22, 1995

8:30-10:00  Session C-6
COPYRIGHT AND LICENSING ISSUES
Kathlene Karg, Assistant Director, Copyright and New Technology
  Association of American Publishers, Inc.
Steve Metalitz, Partner, Smith & Metalitz
Rebecca Lenzini, President, CARL Corporation

10:30-12:00  Session C-7
DOING BUSINESS ON THE INTERNET
Phillip J. Selleh, Solutions Consultant
  Worldwide Alliance Team, AT&T Global Information Solutions
Fernand A. Lavallee, Senior Associate
  Venable Baetjer Howard & Civiletti
Nat Ballou, Technology Consultant, Software Products Division
  AT&T Global Information Solutions
Arthur S. Rosenfield, President, Business Development Group, Inc.

1:30-3:30  Session C-8
COMMERCENET: A MODEL FOR BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS ELECTRONIC COMMERCE
Randall Whiting, Chair, CommerceNet Sponsors Steering Committee
  SESSION CHAIR
Stacy Bressler, Worldwide Business Development Manager - Interactive
  Electronic Sales, Hewlett-Packard Company
Robert Frank, Project Leader - Chief Scientist - Electronic
  Commerce/EDI, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Gail Grant, Vice President - New Business Development, Open Market, Inc.
Mark Resch, Xerox Corporation
Anita Schiller, Director of Electronic Marketing, Silicon Graphics, Inc.
William Wong, CommerceNet Project Leader, Enterprise
  Integration Technologies


WORKSHOP TRACK
HOW TO DO BUSINESS ON THE INTERNET
MARCH 21-22, 1995

TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 1995

9:00-10:00  Session W-1
BUSINESS USES OF THE INTERNET
Howard McQueen, President, McQueen Associates

10:15-11:00  Session W-2
NETIQUETTE: HOW TO DO BUSINESS ON THE INTERNET WITHOUT GETTING FLAMED
Paul Kainen, President, Kainen Technology Services

11:00-12:00  Session W-3
SECURITY 101
Alan Taffel, Vice President - Marketing, UUNET Technologies, Inc.

2:00-2:30  Session W-4
WRITING FOR THE INTERNET
Ed Hott, Vice President - Sales, Interse Corporation

2:30-3:45  Session W-5
CREATING A BUSINESS PRESENCE ON THE INTERNET
Duffy Mazan, President, Electric Press, Inc.

4:00-5:00  Session W-6
MARKETING AND MANAGING YOUR SERVER
Scott Finer, President, HSF Consulting

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 22, 1995

9:00-9:45  Session W-7
HANDLING ONLINE CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS
Representative, First Virtual Holdings Inc.

9:45-10:30  Session W-8
ONLINE PUBLISHING
Laura Fillmore, President, Online Bookstore

11:00-12:00 Session W-9
CREATING A PROFITABLE ONLINE CATALOG
Gregory Giagnocavo, Internet Consultant, Wentworth Worldwide Media

2:00-3:15  Session W-10
BUSINESS-TO-BUSINESS MARKETING ON THE INTERNET
Robert Tobias, Senior Consultant, Regis McKenna Inc.


PRE-CONFERENCE TUTUORIALS
MARCH 20, 1995

Pre-Conference Tutorial -- Basic Level -- Session T-1
The Basics of Using the Internet for Business
Monday, March 20, 1995   o   9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
By John Buckley, Director of Training, Gestalt Systems, Inc.


Pre-Conference Tutorial -- Advanced -- Session T-2
Understanding and Using Internet Resources and Improving Access
Monday, March 20, 1995   o   9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
By Howard McQueen, President, McQueen Associates


Pre-Conference Tutorial -- Advanced -- Session T-3
COMMERCIAL WEB DEVELOPMENT
Monday, March 20, 1995   o   9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
By Duffy Mazan, President, Electric Press, Inc.


EXHIBIT TRACK

Exhibitors at past TeleStrategies Internet programs include:
America Online        Ameritech Library Services        Gestalt Systems
McQueen Associates        PSI                    Inforonics
Hybrid Networks, Inc.    Spry, Inc.                UUNET
Legi-Slate            Wentworth Worldwide Media        WAIS, Inc.
Internet Access Group


EXHIBIT HOURS
Monday, March 20         5:00-6:30 p.m.
Tuesday, March 21        12:00-6:30 p.m.
Wednesday, March 22        10:00-2:00 p.m.

In addition to the exhibits, on March 21-22, seven exhibitors will do
in-depth online demonstrations of their services.

FOR INFORMATION ABOUT EXHIBITING AT TELESTRATEGIES INTERNET 95,
CALL JACKIE MCGUIGAN AT 703-734-7050.


FOR MORE INFORMATION, REGISTRATION OR A COMPLETE CONFERENCE BROCHURE:

    CALL    [phone]
    FAX        [phone]
    E-MAIL    [e-mail] (Please include ground
            address or fax number to receive the full
            conference brochure, which is not available
            on-line)


PRE-CONFERENCE TUTORIALS -- March 20, 1995 (choose one)

The Basics of Using the Internet for Business ...................$495
Understanding and Using Internet Resources and Improving Access..$495
Commercial Web Development.......................................$495

INTERNET CONFERENCE TRACK
Plus workshops, exhibits and online demonstrations
March 21-22, 1995................................................$985

ALL FOUR INTERNET 95 EVENTS
A tutorial (please specify), conference, workshop, online
demonstrations and exhibits
   March 20-22, 1995..............................................$1,395

   INTERNET WORKSHOPS, DEMONSTRATIONS AND EXHIBITS
   March 21-22, 1995................................................$495

   EXHIBITS ONLY
   March 20-22, 1995.................................................$10

HOTEL INFORMATION

Sheraton Crystal City Hotel
1800 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
703-486-1111

CONFERENCE HOURS

Registration begins at 8:00 a.m. on Monday and
Tuesday. Session hours are 9:00-5:00 on Monday, March 20, 9:00-5:30 on
Tuesday, March 21 and 8:30-3:30 on Wednesday, March 22.

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jan 1995 15:10:58 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Paul Harts)
Subject: 800 Numbers, How Important?
Organization: PTT Research, The Netherlands


Hi,

Recent research indicated that more than 25% of all 'long Distance
Calls' in the United States is to an 800 number. Can any of you
substantiate this percentage? And do you know if is it measured in
frequency of use or in minutes?


Thanks in advance,

Paul

email: [e-mail]
mail : Winschoterdiep OZ 46    P.O. 15000
       9700 CD  Groningen      Netherlands

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

From: [e-mail] (Maurice Givens)
Subject: Re: Telecom Group in Chicago
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 14:32:20 GMT


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

> I do market research specializing in telecommunications. I'm looking
> for a telecom organization that I can join that has a Chicago chapter.
> Specifically, I'm looking for a group that has meetings, seminars and
> get-togethers, a little newsletter, etc. etc. for a hundred or two
> hundred bucks a year. Can someone clue me in? Thanks!

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You know, to show you what a hermit I
> have become the past few years, my answer to your question would have
> to be 'I do not know'. Seriously, I don't.  Maybe we should start
> one, or some sort of telecom discussion group, social, etc.   PAT]

As former chairman of the Chicago Chapter of the IEEE Comunications
Society, I would like to invite you to our Chapter meetings.  These
meetings are frequented by local telecom engineers and researchers.
Additionally, our meetings address timely issues concerning the
telecom industry.

For more information on metings of the Communications Society, or to
get in contact with the current chairman, you may call the Chicago
IEEE office at 1 800 898 IEEE (1 800 898 4333).

All interested parties are invited to our meetings.


Maurice "Maury" Givens   PP ASEL IA   AGI IGI
[e-mail]        Ham Radio: N9DC

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: New Telecom Resource on the Internet
Date: 5 Jan 1995 18:44:53 GMT
Organization: TZ-Link, a public-access online community in Nyack, NY.


Our company, Telematrix Communications, has recently opened a new site
on the World Wide Web called "telematrix.com." So far as we know, it's
the only site devoted entirely to telecommunications information and
we aim to become the main listening post and forum for people interested
in this field. Our target audience includes both professionals and
users of all sorts.

We are contacting you because we seek your input.  We would like to
know what telecommunications information or resources you want or need
that are not already readily available on the Internet. In addition,
we solicit your reaction to our site and suggestions for any
improvements.

At present, we have a free calendar of telecom events, new product
announcements, softwasre, practical "tips" on telecom cost savings,
newsletters, magazines and educational/training resources, plus much
more.

Telematrix.com can also be accessed by gopher, ftp and telnet.

Thank you for your interest.

http://www.telematrix.com/

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

From: [e-mail] (UL ENG)
Subject: Switch Features Information Wanted
Date: 6 Jan 1995 04:26:19 +1100
Organization: Stanilite Electronics Pty. Ltd. Sydney, Australia


Does anyone know of a standard or recommendations for features in B
number analysis type tables ie. someone dials 414-xxxx and the switch
knows to throw away the 414 and replace it with say 555 or strips it
entirely or dials 414-yyyy where yyyy is a certain offset from xxxx. I
need to know what minimum features should be available in a switch's
number translation type functionality.

Standards can be CCITT(ITU), EIA or whatever.

Alternatively decent books that deal with the subject.

Hope the above made sense.


Glenn

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

From: David C. Weber <[e-mail]>
Subject: Videoconferencing seminar in Rochester, NY
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 95 16:20:18 EDT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link


There will be a free Personal Videoconferencing seminar in Rochester,
NY on Thursday January 19, 1995. The Seminar is sponsored by:
PicturePhone Direct, Intel, and Frontier Communications.  The seminar
will include hands on demonstrations and presentations with Intel's
ProShare Videoconferencing system, Frontier Communications ISDN
services, and System integration by PicturePhone Direct. There will be
two individual sessions:Session 1 from 10:30am-12:30pm, and Session 2
from 1:30pm-3:30pm. The Seminar will be held at 180 South Clinton Ave.
Rochester, NY. For reservations or information please call 1-800-810-9966
or email to [e-mail].

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: America's Suggestion Box - BBS [phone]
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 95 00:44:32
Subject: Call Waiting and Caller-ID


I got the lastest edition of the HELLO DIRECT Catalog (Spring 95)
today, and I noticed on page 24, they are selling a Northern Telecom
PowerTouch 225 w/Caller ID. This phone has capabilites for different
modules.  The ad states:

   " Caller ID, Call Waiting Module - coming in mid-95 You'll
     see who's on a call waiting call, without interupting the
     call you're already on."

Is this possible yet? Anywhere?

   " Also in LATE-95 a new module called "ADSI" is comming. It
     will help doing banking, paybills, and such -- by phone."

What is ADSI?


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: America's Suggestion Box - BBS [phone]
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 95 00:44:31
Subject: Cellphone Now Giving ANI?


I guess NYNEX Mobile has made some progress, Today I dialed 1-800-MY-ANI-IS
 from my Cellular phone ... and guess what ... it came back with my
cellular phone number. In the past it would come back with a WEIRD
number.

Is NYNEX Mobile the first company to pass along the ANI from cellular
phones?


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John McGing)
Subject: Cellular Phone Pricing Question
Date: 4 Jan 1995 21:51:09 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I have a car phone on Cell One here in the Baltimore area.  The plan
is $24.95 a month plus $.39 or $.37 per minute prime and $.19 or $.17
per minute off-prime (I don't have my bill handy.)

Anyway, where I work we have a big employee assocuation that recently
announced they had some special pricing plans from both Bell Atlantic
Mobile and Cell 1.  I'm not sure but think each was offering the same
pricing scheme which was (per BAM): Pay the employee association
$25.00.  BAM monthly charge becomes $8.95.  Per minute charges were
the same as under the existing plan (above). This requires a three year
contract.

Cell One showed up, and sold about 200 accounts then told the employee
association that they had run out of slots and packed up and left.  BAM
is coming back two more times next week.

(They actually walk out to the parking lot and reprogram your phone as
part of the sale.  I found that interesting.)

Anyway, I have a couple of questions: Even including the $25.00 year
to the employee association, the monthly base cost is $11.03 month vs
$24.95.  Over three years that's $167.00 x3 or over $500.00 in
savings.  Is this deal too good to be true?  The three year thing
doesn't worry me (we're NOT moving <g> and the car phone we have is a
real top drawer Motorola we can switch to a new car.).  Should it?

And why would Cell One only have 200 "slots"?  BAM was doing a land
office business.  I called Cell One to see if they could match the BAM
pricing, the sales rep said no and said he understood why I would want
to switch and said to call them when I wanted the service terminated! <g>.

Appreciate any insight on whether this is a switch that makes sense to
do.


John
[e-mail]   [e-mail]
J.MCGING on GEnie  70142,1357 on Compuserve

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 00:20 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: British Telecom Cuts Rates to Canada and U.S.


British Telecom calls from the UK to Canada and the U.S. will cost
about 20% less effective February 1995, according to a BT announcement
reported by the Associated Press. The cuts were reportedly authorized
by the UK regulator last year as part of a price reductions scheme.

The sample rate given was for a three minute call at the lowest rate
period: the former rate was equivalent to CAD$3.14; the new rate will
be CAD$2.49.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you think this price reduction is
somehow tied in with the recent ability to dial 1-800 numbers in the
USA from the UK as Clive pointed out a couple days ago?    PAT[

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jan 1995 13:15:28 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: M2 Presswire Note


Dear Colleague,

Please give me a moment of your time ... I want to offer you the
chance of reading AND placing full-text press releases on a range of
topics including IT/communications and the media from all around the
world. I also want to introduce you to the range of newsletters that
M2 Communications Limited offers.

They may be of use to you or a colleague, and discounts of up to
50% are being offered until the end of January.

YOU ARE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO EVER SPEND A CENT, PENNY, RUPEE
ETC ...

While every effort has been taken to cleanse our database, if you have
received a duplicate of this PLEASE send a copy of it with an appended
note to [e-mail].  Similarly, if we have
offended you and you do not want to hear from us ever again PLEASE
send a copy of this mail with an appended note to [e-mail];
and we will place you on our kill-file so that we do not trouble you
again. Please accept our apologies if this is the case.

FEEL FREE TO PASS THIS NOTE AROUND internally and to colleagues.

M2 PRESSWIRE is a new service that allows the FREE SUBSCRIPTION to a
daily digest of Internet-delivered full-text press releases in English
from around the world. We also offer companies the chance to have
releases sent free-of-charge.  For details send e-mail to listserv@
m2comms.demon.co.uk with the body text: get m2pressw.faq.  To get a
full index type 'index' without the quotes.

We also want to introduce you to a range of business newsletters
and give you samples.  Send e-mail to [e-mail]
with the body text: get nlindex.txt.

If you need help please holler. We've deliberately not appended
the material in order not to trouble you further.

Thank you for your time. We hope to see you as a regular user of
M2 Communications' resources in the future.


Sincerely,

M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD
Darren P. Ingram ([e-mail]) -- Please note new e-mail address
M2 Communications Ltd. Reptile Hse, 20 Heathfield Rd, Coventry CV5 8BT, UK
Tel: [phone]/Fax: [phone]/Tlx: 94026650 DBRIG
Publishers of Telecomworldwire, Service Communications, Internet Business News
M, Data Broadcasting News and now M2 PRESSWIRE ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Linli Zhao #8277)
Subject: Need Profile of Teleport Communications Group
Date: 5 Jan 1995 16:18:16 GMT
Organization: Wellfleet Communications, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I need any information known about Teleport Communications Group (TCG).

Thanks in advance.


Best Regards,

Linli Zhao   Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jan 95 11:56:18 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: CAI Preferences by Service Providers


I am trying to build a list of air interface preferences by US cellular
and PCSservice providers.  Any comments, corrections, additions, etc.
would be highly appreciated.

Service Provider    Air Interface   Comments

CELLULAR
AirTouch            CDMA            Full Svc in San Fernando Jun 95
Ameritech           CDMA            Construction starts 3Q95
Bell Atlantic       TDMA            Likely to switch to CDMA
Bell South          TDMA            Under Construction
GTE                 CDMA            Under Construction in Austin, TX
McCaw               TDMA            Commercial
NYNEX               CDMA            Trials
Southwestern Bell   TDMA            Commercial
Sprint              CDMA            Under Construction
US West             CDMA            Svc in Seattle Mid '95

PERSONAL COMMUNICATION SERVICES
McCaw/AT&T          ?
Wireless Co         ?
Pacific Bell        DCS1900
Bell South          DCS1900
SouthwesternBell    DCS1900
APC                 DCS1900
Go Communications   DCS1900
GTE                 CDMA
AT&T/Cable&Wireless CDMA
PCS Primeco         CDMA
Ameritech           CDMA
OmniPoint           DS1900


Thanks in advance,

Alex M. Cena, [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 00:22 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Telecomix


Highlights of some of the newspaper phunnies with phone topics in
recent months:

Charlie 13 Dec 94:

[at a police station] "If he wants to use his one phone call under the
Miranda rule to call a TV shopping club, that's his right, John."

Mixed Media 10 Oct 94:

Introduced the concept of "MCI Friends and Royal Family ... for those
making 300 calls to the same number."

The Better Half 28 Aug 94:

Stan invites Harriet to call his "Hubby Hotline" for $3.99/minute.

Animal Crackers 14 Nov 94:

[Lyle the ever-jilted lion phoning his ever-unrequited love:]
"Lana's installed call forgetting"

On The Fastrack 10 Oct 94:

The newly-wed Bud & Chelonia are seen having their first fight -
namely an net flame war.

Finally ...

{Mad Magazine} #332 had an article full of cell phone comics.
I won't spoil those ones, though ...


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am curious: Who is running {Mad
Magazine} now that Bill Gaines has passed away?  It was his thing
for all the years it operated until his death.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #10
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29154;
          5 Jan 95 23:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18279; Thu, 5 Jan 95 18:24:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18272; Thu, 5 Jan 95 18:24:05 CST
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 18:24:05 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #11

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 5 Jan 95 18:24:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 11

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Joel B. Levin)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Christopher Zguris)
    Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code (Sander J. Rabinowitz)
    Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code (James J. Sowa)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (William H. Sohl)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Matthew P. Downs)
    Re: Seeking White Pages on CD or Disk (Andrew C. Green)
    Re: AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers (J Costello)
    Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (Marc Collins-Rector)
    Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (Brad Hicks)
    Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (Tony Waddell)
    Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (Wolf)
    Re: Where Does ISDN Fit In? (John Dearing)
    Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK (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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Joel B Levin)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 05 Jan 1995 15:03:13 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc.


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

> Ball said there was nothing illegal in McGee's listening to the cordless
> phone conversations because it was a random scanning.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's the first time I have ever heard
> of cordless phone monitoring being dismissed as 'nothing illegal' because
> it was 'random scanning'. You'd think they would rely on previous court
> decisions stating that cordless phones do not have the same protection
> as cellular phones ... or something ... but isn't all scanner listening
> essentially 'random'?   PAT]

You're kidding, right?  This is policeman ("Sheriff Capt.") talking,
not a lawyer or judge.  Count on the court decisions coming up when
the defense starts arguing in court.


Regards,

JBL

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 17:12 EST
From: Christopher Zguris <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's the first time I have ever heard
> of cordless phone monitoring being dismissed as 'nothing illegal' because
> it was 'random scanning'. You'd think they would rely on previous court
> decisions stating that cordless phones do not have the same protection
> as cellular phones ... or something ... but isn't all scanner listening
                                          ===============================
> essentially 'random'?   PAT]
  ====================

Once you have a scanner programmed to scan 46-49 MHz and find a
neighbor(s) cordless phone, you're going to keep the scanner
programmed for that range.  The only thing in the cordless-phone
frequency range are cordless phones, no police, no EMS, no fire
department, no Secret Service, no FBI, no broadcasts from Air Force
One (Okay, cordless baby monitors, wireless headphones, and wireless
intercoms and other stuff like that also broadcast in that range).  If
someone has their scanner set in _that_ range they're probably looking
for cordless phones, no? Of course, wireless headphones _also_ use
that range, maybe _that's_ what is being "randomly" scanned for :-) ?

Cell phones are another matter, a listener with a scanner modified to
get that range will hear little "snippets" of conversations before the
phone changes frequencies or cells, that's definately "random". But as
for cordless phones, most/all will stay on the same frequency for the
entire call, much to the delight of the avid snooper with nothing
better to do.


Christopher Zguris   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The most bizarre instance of this I have
yet to encounter or hear about was reported to me the other day. It seems
some old biddy with nothing better to do was listening in on her neighbor
using her cordless phone via her scanner. She overheard what she believed
was this woman discussing a plan to murder someone and she reported it to
the police. The cops had a big raid of the house, lots of hoopla, the
whole routine. It turns out the neighbor and the person she was talking
with were *rehearsing lines for a school play they were both in*. They
were reading their scripts over the phone and learning their lines. The
cops let it slip out who it was that called them; now Biddy has something
else to do with her time and money. She had to hire an attorney to
defend herself in a suit against her for bearing false witness against
her neighbor.

Cordless phone monitoring is merely the 1990's version of what nosy people
used to do many years ago, long before cordless phones were invented and
when four and eight party telephone lines were common. In those days -- I
am talking 1930-50 now -- when several people shared the same telephone
pair in a 'party line' arrangement, the ringing voltage for the bell was
sent at different frequencies (or electrical cycles) so that one bell on
the party line would ring but the rest would not. The trouble is, all the
other bell clappers would give a slight 'tick' when the ringing voltage
came down the line. Unless you were standing right next to the phone
listening closely, you'd never hear the 'tick' from your bell clapper
when someone else's phone was actually ringing.  The way the snoops
overcame that 'problem' was to set their phone instrument inside a
galvanized wash-tub. That would amplify the 'click' by several magnitudes
so that wherever they were in their house, on their front porch or
whatever, they would hear it. Someone down the street gets a phone
call; everyone else on the block would hear that 'click click' from
their own phone. Remember, these were the very old-fashioned, all
steel, very heavy desk phones of the 1940's. When they heard that
clicking from the bell clapper, in their house they would go, if they
were not there already, and soon the legitimate called party would
have two or three eavesdroppers on the instruments at their homes
listening to the conversation, typically with a rag over the mouthpiece
to cover up background noise at their end.

When I was twelve years old, I had a freind who was the same age. We
had a private line but his parents had a four-party line. We would
call each other from time to time and have the sort of conversations
on the phone that twelve year old boys have with each other. One day
the call got sort of raunchy from his end, and right in the middle
of it came that unmistakeable click of a reciever somewhere going
off hook. Most party line subscribers were courteous; they would say
'excuse me' and replace their recievers, or maybe just hang up without
speaking, but at least you heard that *second* click to assure yourself
they were gone from the line. This time the off hook click was heard
and I started to shush my friend. "Better shut up! Someone's listening."
"Oh," he said gleefully, "that's just Mrs. Winchell. That old witch
has been our party line neighbor for years! Why, if she doesn't know
everything we do and talk about over here by now, she never will find
out!" ... pause, shocked silence on my end ... then that awaited second
click as Mrs. Winchell replaced her receiver.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sander J. Rabinowitz)
Subject: Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 17:10:00 -0500


On 5 Jan 1995, Wayne Huffman writes:

> FYI The local cableco here in Fairfax County, VA (Media General
> Cable) has a 10XXXX code (106-500), used for ordering Pay-Per-
> View movies.  I can't seem to get an answer from Bell Atlantic
> on how this was arranged.

Actually, what you've got there is really 10650+0.  The carrier access
code, plus zero, gives you the operator for that carrier.  For example,
10288+0 gets you AT&T's operator.  I don't think anyone has a six-digit
carrier access code yet, although I do find it curious that a cable
system (presumably not as yet a telephone company) has the use of its
own carrier access code.


/Sandy/
EDS/Saturn, 100 Saturn Parkway #F10, Spring Hill, TN 37174.
Internet: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is this any stranger than a newspaper
having a three digit number of its own, ie 311, like that newspaper
in, where is it, Georgia?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (James J. Sowa)
Subject: Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code
Organization: AT&T Network Wireless Systems Busines s Unit
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 13:51:47 GMT


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

> Does anyone know the procedure for obtaining a 10XXX code? Where does
> one begin? What FCC forms and regulations are involved? Having
> obtained a 10XXX code, how does one get it incorporated into the PSTN?

But welcome to 1995!!

I haven't seen the discussion on 101XXXX codes yet.  Carrier codes are
growing into that fourth digit now.  From the information I have seen
the carrier code 5000 will be the test number.

These new four digit carriers are supposed to be assigned as soon as
the available three digit codes run out.  I wonder who the lucky
carrier will be with the first four digit code assigned to them?


Jim Sowa

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

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 5 Jan 1995 11:35:17 -0500
Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore)


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

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

>> What kind of noise/distortion does American-style bit-robbing cause to
>> voice band signals transmitted through PCM channels?

> In the U.S., most intermachine trunks are common channel direct
> connections so only the robbed bit at each end of the IC/EC connection
> introduces the robbed bit (as well as ny non CCS systems in the EC).

Today, most end-to-end voice connections do not include any trunking
which uses robbed bit signalling.  The great majority of local
trunking, especially in metro areas, has all been converted to CCS.

One way to determine the probability of what type of local trunking is
in your area is if caller ID is available.  If you can have caller ID,
then the local trunking is using CCS and thus no robbed bit signaling
is involved at that end of any connection.


Bellcore NISDN Hotline Technical Consultant (1-800-992-ISDN)
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 5 Jan 1995 13:23:28 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


[e-mail] (Jeffrey Rhodes) writes:

> I'm not a modem expert but I would answer "none". If a call connection
> is made on a bit robbing DS0 within a DS1, then the modems will settle
> for some transparent speed (9600bps) during the initial negotiation. I
> don't think the V.34 modems will connect at 28k8 when bit robbing is
> present.

> There really aren't many circuits like these, especially for long
> distance calls. Most bit-robbing occurs on intra-LATA (I think) by
> LECs that haven't updated circuits that are being depreciated over a
> 40 year period.

Unless you use ISDN, you are using robbed-bit signalling between your
premise and the Cetral Office. Unless like a previous poster had
stated, the robbed bits only become inportant during call set-up and
tear-down.  Ie. going on-hook and off-hook.  Otherwise the robbed bits
will be 1's.


Matt

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 10:28:47 CST
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Seeking White Pages on CD or Disk


[e-mail] (Scott Warbritton) writes:

> I'm not sure if such an animal exists, but I'm looking for white pages
> for the entire country on either CD or Disk.

[...]

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They're out there. Some are of dubious
> value in terms of accuracy.   PAT]

You could start with your local library. By coincidence, just last
night I was playing with White Page listings for the entire United
States on CD-ROM at the public PCs in the Arlington Heights (IL)
public library.

Several PCs, complete with Canon Bubblejet printers, are available for
free public use of a selection of database services, including White
Pages and business listings via CD-ROM, current as of August, 1994.
The setup obtained by the library is dubbed "InfoNet" and comprises a
variety of name brand software which announces itself at the start of
the session, so if you like the particular database you're using, you
can presumably seek it out for private purchase.


Andrew C. Green           [phone]
Datalogics, Inc.          Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron
Chicago, IL  60610-3498   FAX: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Costello)
Subject: Re: AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers
Date: 5 Jan 1995 17:36:02 GMT
Organization: RESTRAC, INC.


Here is the current list of exchanges which AT&T can use for their
500 numbers.  This is current as of 1/5/95.

288   346  367  677  437  442
443   445  446  447  448  449
488   673  674  675  679


John

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax
Date: 5 Jan 1995 17:00:32 GMT
Organization: Concentric Research Corporation
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> An Open Letter to the Senior Management of CompuServe and the Online
> Communications Community:

We applaud Pat Clawson and Telegraphic's attempt to build a consensus
within the industry on how to deal with the LZW issue.

> If CompuServe really wants to continue to provide the GIF format under
> the conditions of their original royalty-free license, but can't
> because of the patented Unisys LZW compression algorithm, the most
> painless cure is to substitute another compression scheme.  Here's our
> fix. See what you think:

We urge Compuserve and our fellow Telecommunication Industry peers to
adopt this or a similar proposal in order to quickly deal with this
issue.


Marc Collins-Rector  C.E.O.
Concentric Research Corporation -- 400 41st Street, Bay City, Michigan 48708
Voice:517-895-0500 or 800-745-2747 Data:517-895-0510 or 800-991-2747
Fax:[phone]    Email: [e-mail]

The Concentric Network -- Home of BBS Direct, CRIS and Concentric Internet
Services.

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

From: /G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU1=[e-mail]
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 1995 12:22:20 -0600
Subject: Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax


In TELECOM Digest 15.9, [e-mail] suggests we replace the GIF
"standard," and [e-mail], a VP at TeleGrafix
Communications Inc., offers us Yet Another Graphics standard.

Will I be lynched if I point out that there is a competing standard to
GIF, one that big chunks of The Network are using already?  It's called
JPEG, or ".jpg".

The last time I glanced at any of the alt.binaries.pictures hierarchies,
there were more jpg files than GIFs.  JPEG may be slightly lossy, but
it offers sixteen thousand times the color resolution in files typically
a third the size of a GIF.  That's ONE THIRD or less of the size ...
just think how much happier =that= would make people running Web browsers
over 14.4 kb/sec links.  OK, so it's an old argument.  But with the
GIF "standard" now dependent on a UNISYS patent, it looks to me like
it's time to re-examine the arguments.

PATCLAWSON points out that it would be easy to write a converter from
GIF to GEF.  There are =already= scads of converters from GIF to JPEG,
running on just about every platform.  Any more, most graphics packages
that can read GIF can also read JPEG.  So why reinvent the wheel?

So OK, you're determined not to use a lossy algorithm.  Fine, there's
also =another= bitmapped graphics standard.  TIFF.  So I repeat, what
do we need Yet Another bitmapped graphics standard for?


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

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

From: Tony Waddell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax
Date: 5 Jan 1995 15:37:57 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good luck with this! Let's hope the change
> in format can be accomplished with a minimum of effort on the part of all
> concerned. If your's will do the job, perhaps CIS should look at it and
> see if they can be accomodating.   PAT]

This reminds me of the time when SEA sued Phil Katz over using the ARC
extension. I know its not quite the same thing, but similar results could
happen. When was the last time you saw an arc file? And is SEA even still
in business?

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

From: [e-mail] (Wolf)
Subject: Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 15:47:22 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Pat,

Someone ([e-mail]) here at the school contacted Tim Oren of
CompuServe Incorporated and received the following reply:

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

From:  Tim Oren,  CompuServe Incorporated

In 1987, CompuServe designed the Graphics Interchange Format (GIF)
specification for graphics files.  The GIF specification incorporated
the Lempel Zev Welch (LZW) compression technology.  In early 1993,
Unisys notified CompuServe of patent rights granted to LZW.  At that
time, CompuServe began negotiating with Unisys to secure a licensing
agreement.  This agreement was reached in mid-1994, and CompuServe
then initiated a process to secure a similar license that would
benefit its GIF developer community.

Following the agreement reached between CompuServe and Unisys,
CompuServe announced the Graphics Interchange Format (GIF) Developer
Agreement, shortly after its completion, on December 29, 1994.  This
agreement is aimed at GIF developers who are developing programs and
shareware primarily for use in conjunction with CompuServe.  The
service offers a license to these developers to use LZW technology in
programs written to the GIF specification.

CompuServe remains committed to keeping open the GIF 89a specification
both within CompuServe and in areas outside CompuServe.  CompuServe
continues to strongly support the use of the GIF specification in the
entire online community including the Internet and World Wide Web.
This agreement will be transparent to end-users and will not result in
any charges for people using viewers or transmitting GIF images.

The agreement offers software and shareware developers who use the LZW
technology in their GIF programs protection under a software license
that CompuServe is authorized to grant under the agreement with
Unisys.  Developers who choose to take advantage of this service would
acquire the rights to use the LZW technology in certain software and
shareware developed primarily for use in conjunction with CompuServe.
Developers who choose to participate in this agreement within the
implementation period will also benefit in that Unisys has agreed not
to pursue royalty claims for past use of the LZW technology in GIF.
The implementation period has been extended to January 31, 1995.

CompuServe has presented this new agreement as a service to its GIF
developer community.  Cost to developers will be a $1.00 one-time
licensing fee and a royalty payment of 1.5 percent or $0.15, whichever
is greater, per registered copy of a program containing the LZW
technology.  CompuServe will not profit from this service.

CompuServe encourages developers to work with Unisys directly if the
GIF Developer Agreement does not meet their needs.  Unisys is
continuing to make the LZW technology available to any interested
parties under reasonable and non-discriminatory terms.  Developers are
not required to register with CompuServe.  Registering with CompuServe
is simply one option for addressing the Unisys LZW patent issue.
Developers may want to consider consulting with legal counsel.

CompuServe is committed to keeping the GIF 89A specification as an
open, fully-supported, non-proprietary specification for the entire
online community including the World Wide Web.  Whether they choose to
register with CompuServe or not, developers are encouraged to continue
use the GIF specification within their products.

A copy of the GIF Developer Agreement is available in the Library
section of the CompuServe Graphics Support Forum (GO GRAPHSUP) and
will shortly be posted to CompuServes World Wide Web page
(HTTP:\\WWW.COMPUSERVE.COM).  Developers who are not developing
software primarily for use in conjunction with CompuServe should
contact Unisys directly at: Welch Patent Desk, Unisys Corp., P.O. Box
500, Bluebell, PA 19424 Mailcode C SW 19.

Sincerly,

Tim Oren,
CompuServe Vice President,  Future Technology

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

From: [e-mail] (John Dearing)
Subject: Re: Where Does ISDN Fit In?
Date: 5 Jan 1995 17:22:12 GMT
Organization: Netaxs Internet BBS and Shell Accounts


Daniel Ritsma ([e-mail]) wrote:

> When talking about telecommunications in computer-networking, people
> often talk about t-1,2,3 or other type of line that specifically
> define the bandwith of the connection.

These terms apply to dedicated leased line circuits. They can be
either point-to-point or can provide you a circuit into a larger
network (like a frame relay network). And you're right, a T-1 is
classically defined as a 1.544MB/S digital circuit.

> What about ISDN, how do you fit that in these terms?  What is the
> standard bandwith of ISDN, and how is it when you only use it for
> computer-data transfer when we speak about t-1s.  Is it like an 15kHz
> analoge line, that is used for Radio Signal transfer.

ISDN is a different animal. ISDN is switched. There is a telephone
number associated with an ISDN line. Garden variety ISDN provides you
with 2 64K Bearer channels and a 16K Data channel. This is what is
commonly referred to as 2B+D. By using a technique called "bonding"
your terminal equipment and take the 2 "B" channels and "bond" them
together, giving you 128K of bandwidth. Actually, the bandwidth is a
little less than that because of the overhead associated with the
bonding process. But it's still a lot more bandwidth than an analog
modem!

Since ISDN is a switched offering, there are charges in addition to
the regular monthly bill for the line. You pay for each call made
(usually at business rates, unless your state has a residential ISDN
offering).

> In short when do I use ISDN, over other alternatives?

A quick answer is when you need more bandwidth than an analog modem
can provide. Another time is when you have data to transfer but only
for short periods of time. ISDN is a good, medium speed,
bandwidth-on-demand solution.

An example is the remote office that needs a connection to the
corporate LAN but doesn't need to keep the connection "nailed up" all
day long.  They can use ISDN to place a connection to the corp LAN on
an as needed basis, dropping the connection when there is no coprorate
bound traffic.


Just my $.02,

John Dearing   [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 16:10:50 GMT
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>


> All of a sudden, I can now dial 1-800 numbers from the UK. There is a
> few seconds of silence, and then an American female voice tells me
> that this call will *not* be free, but charged at standard direct-dial
> rates.  If I don't want to pay, I should hang up now.

Is anyone reading this in a position, if I called them, to find out
whether they paid for the call as well?


Clive D.W. Feather     | Santa Cruz Operation
[e-mail]          | Croxley Centre
Phone: [phone] | Hatters Lane, Watford
Fax:   [phone] | WD1 8YN, United Kingdom


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would suspect there will be two charges.
You will be charged to wherever the gateway is in the USA for the carrier
in particular, and the end user will pay his usual 15-25 cents per minute
for the remainder of the call. Isn't that how it always worked when you
reached an 800 number from the UK in the past using USA Direct and similar
services?    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #11
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04798;
          5 Jan 95 23:56 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19603; Thu, 5 Jan 95 19:35:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19595; Thu, 5 Jan 95 19:35:02 CST
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 19:35:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #12

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 5 Jan 95 19:35:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 12

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Annoucement of Citizen Service Forum (Pete Goss)
    GLU System Now Available (R. Jagannathan)
    Help Wanted; PBX Admin, Texas  (Thomas Hughes)
    Cellular NAM and ESN (Greg Segallis)
    Need ANSI X3.28 Code - x328.rq (Tom R. Valdez)
    Need an EBCDIC Spec - ebcdic.rq (Tom R. Valdez)
    More CO Codes For Each NPA - Any Telcos to Take Advantage? (Dave Leibold)
    Information Wanted on Northern Telecom Phone (Keith Knipschild)
    SNA Over Token Ring (Timothy S. Chaffee)
    AP Reporter in Berlin Needs Help With Report (Frank Bajak)
    Interim Results of FCC Auctions (Brian Miner)
    101xxxx: Not Yet (Paul Robinson)
    Info Wanted: Competitors For Intra-state Leased Lines? (Lance Ware)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Pete Goss)
Subject: Annoucement of Citizen Service Forum
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 10:28:27 GMT
Organization: Project Colorado


Project Colorado, "Demonstrating One-Stop Service to the Citzen"
Service to the Citizen  '95

A forum on implementing Service to the Citizen through information
technology.

Where: Convention Center, Denver, CO
When: February 22-23, 1995

Background:

The National Performance Review had several recommendations aimed at
developing a government that works better and costs less. This forum
is designed to reenergize the nation to accomplish some of those
recommendations.

Project Colorado is a collaborative effort of government, industry and
academic communities with a mission of developing and demonstrating
the effectiveness of one-stop delivery mechanisms from which the
citizen can obtain government information and services across all
Local, State, Tribal and Federal agencies. The single interface
envisioned is in strong contrast to an arcade of kiosks that would be
the result of each agency developing its own delivery system.

Target Audience:

The forum is designed for leaders at all levels of government who want
to facilitate the development of governments that more effectively
serve the citizen-customer. It is oriented toward:

o    those with a lead role in developing new ways to deliver
government information and services;

o    those concerned with improving the effectiveness of their
department or agency;

o    those who can impact policy and the way government business is
conducted; or

o    those who are responsible for getting things done.

Specifically, the people who should attend include:

o    heads of departments or agencies at the Local, State, Tribal,
or Federal level;

o    directors of principal operating components of the above;
heads of regional divisions;

o    heads of planning organizations, systems organization, or
information resource groups; or

o    those who report to or aspire to one of the above positions.


Participants will:

o    build an understanding of why it is essential to replace
conventional methods of service delivery;

o    discover available methods of service delivery appropriate to
their citizen-customers, including service centers, desktop computers,
intelligent telephony and satellite;

o    build an understanding of issues surrounding electronic
delivery of information and service, including privacy, security,
funds transfer, and personal identification;

o    see and hear how others are using information technology in
their agencies;

o    identify solutions for problems that they have encountered
while implementing electronic service;

o    interface with those who are making things happen; and

o    meet sources with experience and expertise who can help them
implement electronic service delivery.

Program:

The forum will include two plenary sessions, two luncheon speeches,
and 40-44 working group sessions on topics including applications,
technology, economic benefits, telemedicine, privacy and security
issues, system architecture, funding & implementation, reinventing
government and the role of the US Postal Service.

Plenary #1

Introductions: Representative Patricia Schroeder, D-CO (invited)
Welcoming Address: Governor Roy Romer, Colorado (invited) Providing
More Service at Less Cost through One-Stop Service Delivery Speaker:
Greg Woods, National Performance Review

Plenary #2

Motivating the Restructuring Effort: Operating in a Reduced Funding
Environment Speaker: Honorable Kim Devooght (invited) Assistant Deputy
Minister, Safety and Regulation, Ministry of Transportation, Ontario

Luncheon #1

Changing Our Way of Providing Government Services Is Essential to the
Continuing Viability of Our Government Speaker: Vice President Gore
(invited) and Shirley Chater, Commissioner, Social Security Administration

Luncheon #2

New Technologies Bring a New Era to State Governance
Speaker: Governor Leavitt, State of Utah


Applications: Topic Coordinator: Bob Woods, Associate Administrator for FTS
2000, General Services Administration

Community-focused Integration of Services - Project Colorado: Rick
Schremp, Social Security Administration

Restructuring Delivery of Human Services: Carolyn Marzke, National
Center for Service Integration Improving Access to Government

Information: Frank Lalley, Veterans Affairs

Tailoring Applications to Meet Customer Needs: Session Leader TBD

Looking Forward - A Plan for the Future: Bob Woods

    ---------

Technology.  Topic Coordinator: Jack Warner, AT&T

Citizen/Network Interface - The Multimedia Kiosk: Mike Rich, AT&T Global
Information Solutions

Citizen Personal Portable Record Keeping Devices - The Role of
"SmartCards": Jack Radzikowski, Federal Electronic Benefit Transfer Task
Force (invited)

Citizen Information Networking Technology - The Access, Switching, Server
and Wide Area Networking Technology: Ed Fontenot, US West Technologies

Citizen Information Network Trial Status: Johnny Brown, Interactive
Communications TeleVideo

Citizen Information Network - Looking Forward:  Jack Warner

   -----

Economic Benefits.  Topic Coordinator: Jerry Mechling, Ph.D., Harvard
University

What and Where are the Real Savings?: Session Leader TBD

Mechanisms to Measure Economic Benefits: Session Leader TBD

Evaluating the Return on the Public Investment - Electronic vs. Alternative
Means: Session Leader TBD

Dollars and Sense in Public Access - A National Network Approach: Michael
North, North Communications

Looking Forward - A Plan for the Future: Jerry Mechling

 -----

Telemedicine.  Topic Coordinator: Margaret Cary, MD, MBA, MPH, Regional
Director, Region VIII, Health and Human Services

Empowering the Rural Citizen - Defining the Need: Mary Gardner Jones,
Alliance for Public Technology

Technology - Creating the Connection: Peggy Poggio, Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory

TeleHealth Opportunities - The Perspective of the Service Provider: Jane
Preston, MD, American Telemedicine Association

Lessons Learned: Ben Sherman, Western American Indian Chamber

Looking Forward - A Plan for the Future: Dr. Cary

 -----

Privacy/Security.  Topic Coordinator: Steven Lasky, Security
Technology & Design

Advantages and Potential Pitfalls of Electronic Benefit Transfer Using
SmartCard Technology: Session Leader TBD

International Implications of Privacy Regulations: Session Leader TBD

Perceptions Regarding Quality of Service and Exercise of Control: Session
Leader TBD

Ensuring Adequate Safeguards of Personal Data: Session Leader TBD

Looking Forward - A Plan for the Future: Steve Lasky

  -----

System Architecture.  Topic Coordinator: Timothy Thomas, Ph.D., Los Alamos
National Laboratories

Architecting the NII to Facilitate Commerce: Depak Gupta, Nations Bank

The Concept of "Services" in the Architecture of the NII: Charles N.
Brownstein, Corporation for National Research Initiatives

 From the Internet to the NII: Lessons Learned: Doug Tygar, Carnegie-Mellon
University

Interoperability and Distributed Functionality on the NII: Timothy Thomas

Looking Forward - A Plan for the Future:  Tim Thomas

 -----

Funding, Implementation and Evaluation.  Topic Coordinator: Russ Bohart,
California Health and Welfare Agency Data Center

Models Across the Country: Sandi Ludwig, IBM

Cooperative Ventures Between Industry and Government: Larry Silvey, Info-Texas

Enterprising the Citizen Service Center / Potential Revenue Streams:
Russ Bohart

Getting Started -- Basic Considerations: Hal Ferber, California Health &
Welfare Agency Data Center

Looking Forward - A Plan for the Future: Russ Bohart

 -----

Reinventing Government.  Topic Coordinator: Jim Flyzik, Department of Treasury

Improving Service Through Partnering:  Fred McDonald, Government of Canada

Roles and Relationships in the Reengineering Process: Renato DiPentima,
Social Security Administration

Reinventing Government--A State Perspective:  Bradley Dugger, Past
President,  National Association of State Information Resource Executives
(Invited)

The Intergovernmental Enterprise: Bob Greeves, National Academy of Public
Administration

Looking Forward - A Plan for the Future: Jim Flyzik

 -----

Role of the Postal Service in Electronic Government and Electronic
Commerce.  Topic Coordinator: Robert A. F. Reisner, Vice President,
Technology Applications, US Postal Service

Transacting Business Online - Electronic Commerce Services: Dick Rothwell,
US Postal Service

Communicating Electronically - Hybrid Message Products: Wade Henley, US
Postal Service

The Kiosk Network Solution: Susan Smoter, US Postal Service

Privacy Policy for the USPS on the NII: Chuck Chamberlain, US Postal Service

Looking Forward - A Plan for the Future:  Robert A. F. Reisner

   -----

List of Sponsors:

US Postal Service
National Performance Review
Social Security Administration
University of Colorado at Denver
Western Governors Association
State of California - INFO/CALIFORNIA
International City/County Managers Association
United States Department of Agriculture
United States Department of Health & Human Services, Region VIII
National Congress of American Indians
Western American Indian Chamber
Federation of Government Information Processing Councils
Council of Governors Policy Advisors
National Rural Health Association
Western Consortium for Public Health
Consumer Interest Research Group / Alliance for Public Technology
State Technologies
Industry Advisory Council - Denver Chapter
International Teleconferencing Association

Project Colorado Team Members:

Social Security Administration, Denver Region
University of Colorado at Denver College of Engineering
State of Colorado
City of Broomfield, Colorado
Colorado SuperNet
Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories
Los Alamos National Laboratory

Price:

$295 through 2/1/95, $395 thereafter. Attendance limited to 1000 people.

To register, contact Government Technology at [phone].

Hotel accommodations are available at government rates through the
Radisson Hotel, [phone]. Please indicate that you are attending
the Service to the Citizen forum sponsored by Project Colorado to
obtain the rates.

For more information, contact Bob Rantschler, Summit Coordinator,
[phone] or [e-mail] or Pete Goss at [e-mail].

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 12:56:02 PST
From: R. Jagannathan <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: GLU System Now Available


Just to reiterate that the GLU system for parallel programming using
workstation networks can now be obtained from SRI.

Please see http://www.csl.sri.com/glu/html/software using Mosaic for
details.

If you have any questions, please contact me.


Thanks,

Jaggan

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 14:29:05 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Help Wanted; PBX Admin, Texas


HELP WANTED. Position available: Telephone System Administrator-Houston,
Tx.  Manage two PBX's, 145 Key systems.  Northern Telecom SL-1
experiance required.  Reply to Tom Hughes 713-967-8300. Fax [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Segallis)
Subject: Cellular NAM and ESN
Organization: Harris, GCSD
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 18:10:44 GMT


Can two cellular phones be programmed to the same NAM, while their
ESN's are different, so that either phone can be used on one number?
Assume only one phone can be on at a time (e.g.  I have a car phone I
use while on the road and a portable I use when I'm away from my car).
Does the cellular carrier use the NAM to connect calls or the ESN, or
both?  If the ESN must be the same, can I alter the one to match the
other?  This would not be done to steal anyone else's service, just to
allow me the convenience of using both my phones as the situation
requires/allows.  What are the legal issues in doing this?

Email is prefered, as my news server purges more often than I get
to Usenet.)


Thanks,

Greg


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If both phones have the same ESN (because
you altered one to match the other) then yes, what you are asking can be
done, however it is a very big no-no among cellular carriers, to say
nothing of technical difficulties you (or the carrier) may encounter if
both phones happen to be accidentally turned on at the same time. If
the phones each have their own ESN then no it is not possible unless you
can convince the carrier to waive ESN-checking when handling your calls,
and that is not a very good idea either unless you want to risk having
to pay for everyone else who decides to program their phone with your
phone number (that part is easy!).  Please review some articles here
last year on this topic. Long ago, the cell carriers used to give places
like Radio Shack (some carriers still do) 'demo phone lines' for the
purpose of selling phones. Any phone in the store would work, regardless
of ESN when programmed to that phone number; how else could the store
have a dozen different models on display and allow users to 'test drive'
them with actual calls other than having as many phone lines as he did
ESNs, which would be difficult and impractical. The trouble is, phreaks
found out the phone numbers used for demos; that is, the phone numbers
on which the carrier did not bother doing ESN verifications. Pretty soon
everyone was using those numbers for outgoing calls. Ditto with the
administrative phones in the cell carrier's customer service and tech
departments. They were not bothering to ESN-verify those either when
they were used for calls ... now of course they do ... <grin> ... after
Cell One Chicago and a couple others got eaten alive by phreaks.  The
best answer to give you is no, it cannot be done. Forget it.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom R. Valdez)
Subject: Need ANSI X3.28 Code - x328.rq [1/1]
Date: 5 Jan 1995 05:41:26 GMT
Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.


I'm working on a project which requires implementation of the ANSI
X3.28-1976 communications protocol on a PC clone. Does anyone know
where I can find:

  1) a copy of the ANSI X3.28-1976 spec,
  2) source code which implements this protocol and/or
  1) a library which performs this protocol.


Thanks very much!

[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom R. Valdez)
Subject: Need an EBCDIC Spec - ebcdic.rq [1/1]
Date: 5 Jan 1995 05:42:19 GMT
Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.


I'm working on a project which requires conversion of EBCDIC to
ASCII and visa-versa.  Does anyone know where I can find:

  1) a spec for the EBCDIC character set,
  2) source code which performs such translations and/or
  3) a library which performs these translations.


Thanks very much!

[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 95 00:30 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: More CO Codes For Each NPA - Any Telcos Take Advantage?


With the introduction of "interchangeable" area code formats
officially beginning in a few days, the required dialing changes
throughout the North American Numbering Plan mean that all area codes
should be able to assign N(0/1)X format prefixes for their local
numbers.

I saw some recent references to some N(0/1)X format codes in a New
Brunswick (NPA 506) list ... 313 for the Saint John, the provincial
capital. 506 is not a huge population centre, but if 313 is indeed a
forthcoming assignment, it seems telcos will be assigning with the
N(0/1)X format because they now can.

Elsewhere in Canada, 403 (Alberta) and especially 604 (British
Columbia) were nearing capacity under the NNX format. Presumably these
regions will be introducing N(0/1)X CO codes as soon as they can.
Indeed, it's surprising these regions haven't announced an outright
area code split by now.

Are there other area codes where introduction of N(0/1)X format CO
codes/prefixes is planned?

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: America's Suggestion Box - BBS [phone]
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 95 00:44:32
Subject: Information Wanted on Northern Telecom Phone


Does anyone have info on a NORTHERN TELECOM Phone that is advertised
in the HELLO DIRECT Catalog (Spring 95)-(Page 28) ??? This phone is
has a Digital Answering Machine, VOICE Caller ID, Voice Mailboxs,
Message Alert, Personal Greetings based on caller ID info, Person
Directory, FAX / Modem Jack,Headset jack, Message TRANSFER.

All for only $299.00.

I don't know the model number as of yet.  Any information would be a
great help.


Thanks,

[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy S. Chaffee)
Subject: SNA Over Token Ring
Date: 5 Jan 1995 10:10:49 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access [phone]  [Login: guest]


I am looking into moving our print traffic from a SDLC/SNA connection
to run over our Token Ring network. Can this be done? Any pointers in
the right direction would be greatly appreciated!


Thanks in advance,


Tim

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 13:21:54 EST
From: Frank Bajak <[e-mail]>
Subject: AP Reporter in Berlin Needs Help With Report


    Greetings,

    I am working on a story on Deutsche Telekom's bold (ha) leap
into privatization and will attempt to explain how a company considered
Europe's most consumer-unfriendly but at the same time among its most
technically sophisticated is trying to globalize in anticipation of
lost domestic revenues when competition sets in at home.

    I'd be interested in talking to anyone with expertise on the
subject.

    I am also trying to locate John Williamson of {Global Telephony}
magazine, who wrote a piece in the {International Herald Tribune} a few
weeks back I found quite good. You know him?


Thanks,

Frank Bajak        [e-mail]
Correspondent      or [e-mail]
Associated Press   tel: [phone] (ISDN)
10559 Berlin       fax:         [phone]
Germany            office switchboard: 399-925-0

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Miner)
Subject: Interim Results of FCC Auctions
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 15:47:47 GMT
Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc.


Has anyone seen results from the FCC auctions of the PCS licenses on
the net ?

Before today, I assumed the details from the auctions was not made
public.  In today's {Wall Street Journal}, some information from round
21 was presented.


Thanks in advance.

Brian Miner

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jan 1995 03:32:11 EST
Subject: 101xxxx: Not Yet
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>


In attempting to do a carrier check from a 301-587 number in
Montgomery County, Maryland, I got a time out and a recording of
inability to complete the call, when attempting to dial

1010288 1 700 555 1212

The call timed out as if I was trying to call

10102 881 7005

E.g. making a local call using carrier 10102 instead.

So it's not set up yet.

Followup Note:  Dialing

10288 1 360 555 1212

Still times out ^ at this digit 1, meaning they are not yet ready for
the new area codes here yet.  Patrick Towson's comments about dialing
via 1-800-CALL-ATT were correct; AT&T will put a call through with a
calling card, but Bell Atlantic still does not recognize the new area
codes, and probably won't until required to, which, isn't it the 15th
of January?

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

(Note to Pat: the following is probably more appropriate to Chicago than
to Silver Spring, and yes, the computer picked it, I didn't:)

The following Automatic Fortune Cookie was selected only for this message:

Now I lay me down to sleep
I pray the double lock will keep;
May no brick through the window break,
And, no one rob me till I awake.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Poor Chicago. The politicians here are
starting to get frantic now that the Republicans have taken over so
much control. They see the handwriting on the wall; what's left of
the city -- not much -- need not expect any financial help. Which in
a way is okay with me; pouring money into Chicago is like trying to
fill up a Florida sinkhole with buckets of sand: the money just keeps
pouring in and pouring in with months or years later nothing to show
for it.

I guess you saw the latest reports: number of homicides in 1994 was
the third highest in history (exceeded only by 1993 and 1974) with
900 plus murders. All kinds of violent crimes by children against
other children and now Wednesday this latest slap in the face from
the school board:  A nine year old girl is raped *in her classroom
at school with the teacher in the same room*. Teacher is reading a
book he brought to school; the kids are supposed to be studying their
school work. Teacher does not see the attack or hear it. So the girl
gets raped, okay?  Bad enough? Not really. The parents sue the Board
of Education saying the teacher was inattentive and might have prevented
it had he been properly supervising the class. The Board of Education
responds saying (get this now!) *it is the fault of the little girl
that she got raped, since she did not speak out or scream or cry
during the attack. She did not say, "I am being raped, help me". *
Some slimey lawyer for the school board told them to say that. Since
when is a nine year old child responsible for a sexual assualt made
on them under any circumstances?  Well, that's Chicago, as usual. I
am so glad my family and myself managed to find a way out. I really
hope the Republicans cut off *every nickle from every source for
every single program* where Chicago is concerned.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lance Ware)
Subject: Information Wanted: Competitors For Intra-state Leased Lines?
Organization: VOXEL
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 00:33:40 GMT


Can anyone tell me if there is competetion for inter-state (relatively
short haul) leased lines. I am interested in a 56K or 128K circuit
from Laguna Hills, CA to Los Angeles (LAX) area. PacBell's rate is
pretty high.  Who can I call?

Please respnd via email.


Lance Ware   IS Manager & VOXEL Guru   VOXEL

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #12
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa16753;
          6 Jan 95 6:17 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27891; Fri, 6 Jan 95 01:40:12 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27883; Fri, 6 Jan 95 01:40:07 CST
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 01:40:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #13

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 6 Jan 95 01:40:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 13

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellphone Now Giving ANI? (Jeffrey Rhodes)
    Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T (Scott A. Montague)
    Re: More CO Codes For Each NPA - Any Telcos Take Advantage? (Ry Jones)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Benjamin P. Carter)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Scott Darling)
    Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK (Dik Winter)
    ANI on an Airphone and More (Ry Jones)
    Invalid AT&T Prepaid Cards (Jan Mandel)
    New Area Codes and PBX (Jan Mandel)
    Value-Added Services in the States and Elsewhere (Lo Kwan Poon Ken)
    Communications FTP Server in Australia (Iaen Cordell)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Jeffrey Rhodes)
Subject: Re: Cellphone Now Giving ANI?
Date: 6 Jan 1995 00:54:24 GMT
Organization: McCaw Cellular Communications, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] writes:

> I guess NYNEX Mobile has made some progress, Today I dialed 1-800-MY-ANI-IS
> from my Cellular phone ... and guess what ... it came back with my
> cellular phone number. In the past it would come back with a WEIRD
> number.

> Is NYNEX Mobile the first company to pass along the ANI from cellular
> phones?

As I have commented previously, most cellular carriers route 800 calls
to a LEC's End Office on Type 1 facilities such that the cellular ANI
is lost.

It is possible for an Equal Access cellular provider to use Type 2
facilities to a LEC's Access Tandem and deliver the cellular ANI. The
carrier transmitted on Feature Group D signaling is 110. This tells
the Access Tandem to collect the ANI and Digits Dialed (800+), so that
the Access Tandem can dip to a database to find out the carrier
assigned to the 800 number (10 digit 800 portability. The Access
Tandem then routes the call to that carrier passing the real ANI.

Not all LECs permit this. Cellular carriers have little control,
unless of course the LEC and the cellular carrier are the same, eg.
Nynex. When Equal Access is implemented in Cellular One markets to
meet the Consent Decree requirements for the McCaw-AT&T merger, the
McCaw recommendation will be to use the Type 2 facilities for 800
traffic when permitted by the LEC.

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

From: [e-mail] (Montague Scott A)
Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T
Date: 6 Jan 1995 02:54:26 GMT
Organization: Queen's University, Kingston


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Slamming" has always been defined in this
> context as the unauthorized switching of long distance carriers on a phone
> line. If for example you are a customer of AT&T and one day you discover
> that your default (one plus or zero plus) carrier has been changed to
> Sprint -- just an example -- without your permission or knowledge, then
> we say that (in this example) Sprint 'slammed' your line.   PAT]

    Here in Ontario, we use a much softer word (who would have
guessed, eh?).  Now that we have a similar system of Long Distance
Carrier selection, Bell Canada (our original telecommunications
monopoly) is running commercials telling why customers are "switching
back to Bell".  One of the reasons was "I was bounced to another
carrier"... which, I guess, is what we now call it here.

Compare:

1) Unitel 'slammed' me.
2) Unitel 'bounced' me.

Number 2 does sound better to me ... "Slammed" is a little to violent.
Of note: When we adopted LD carrier selection, Bell Canada was
required to tell all people who subscribe to their service that they
can now switch to another LD carrier ... in essence, advertising for
them.  Bell Canada can not charge people for switching their Equal
Access Carrier.  Bell also must do the billing for "Casual Calling",
at no charge to the carrier or customer.  A Bell representive must
also tell a person calling their Business Office that they can pick
any LD Carrier they want.  Bell also had to pay most of the costs
related to making their system accept other carriers.  Sounds like
fair regulations to me ... have Bell shoulder all the costs for my
business to set up.  Thanks Keith Spicer (CRTC Chair); let's see if we
can singlehandedly destroy one of the leaders in R&D in the world in
Communications (let alone Canada).  Watch the R&D budgets go down.
Why would we want a company that subsidizes the local rates with their
LD rates?  Let's drive Bell into Metered Local Calling (NEVER!).
There's no reason why we'd want a LD Carrier that has a better than
99% customer satisfaction rate, year after year.  Thank goodness that
alot of Canadians are sensible, and staying with Bell.


Scott
Personal reply? Send E-Mail to [e-mail] for a PGP public key.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, a lot of what you are complaining
about above are the very topics many of us complained about several years
ago here in the United States ... look how far our complaints got us.
There is both good and bad in the current arrangement here, although many
of us could not see the good parts a decade ago.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ry Jones)
Subject: Re: More CO Codes For Each NPA - Any Telcos Take Advantage?
Date: 6 Jan 1995 03:03:40 GMT
Organization: The SenseMedia Network, http://sensemedia.net/


Dave Leibold ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Are there other area codes where introduction of N(0/1)X format CO
> codes/prefixes is planned?

206-803 is valid. See my previous post on 360-NXX's that contains many
N[01]X exchanges. I think this is very, very widespread.


Please reply to [e-mail] or directly to [e-mail].
Other mutations may bounce, such as [e-mail].

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin P. Carter)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 03:27:40 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> Cordless telephones use radio waves to communicate between the handset
> and the base.  Those radio waves can easily be intercepted by a police
> scanner.

> Ball said there was nothing illegal in McGee's listening to the cordless
> phone conversations because it was a random scanning.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's the first time I have ever heard
> of cordless phone monitoring being dismissed as 'nothing illegal' because
> it was 'random scanning'. You'd think they would rely on previous court
> decisions stating that cordless phones do not have the same protection
> as cellular phones ... or something ... but isn't all scanner listening
> essentially 'random'?   PAT]

It's random within the categories (police, fire, airport, etc.)
corresponding to allocated frequency bands.  At least it's random when
you first turn the scanner on.  After a while, though, you will have
learned which specific frequencies are of interest, and you can set
the scanner to ignore all other frequencies.

I believe it's illegal for a store to sell a scanner capable of
picking up cellular phone conversations.  Cordless phones however can
listen in on each other if they are nearby; and any law to prevent
scanners from picking up those frequencies would not really insure
privacy of cordless phone conversations.


Ben Carter   internet address: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only is it illegal for a store to
sell such units, it is often times against corporate policy to even
discuss the possibility of modification. Take Radio Shack as one
example: it used to be when you bought any kind of radio from them,
whether it was a CB, or a scanner, the clerks took much delight in
handing you a customer-prepared ('a customer brought it in and left
it here', or so they claimed) 'mod sheet' telling how to do the
various mods to their equipment. In the era of CB, the mods would be
to get the radio up to ten meters (what traces to cut on the board
and what chips had to have pins held high; and what cores to adjust
to get the radio to oscillate [or 'key-up'] when you got it that far
off the original center frequency); with the old crystal-controlled
scanners the mods handed out by RS clerks would discuss ways of
swapping out the master crystal with another one to get 'secret
frequencies'; with one of their very early digital scanners there
was a programming error in the ROM which allowed the user to punch
in the decimal point a couple extra times and get the scanner to
receive stuff in the 350-400 megs area -- now commonplace in scanners
but back then 'secret government radio stations' -- oh, the RS clerks
knew them all. Then about ten years ago as 800 meg scanners were
becoming more common, those mysterious mod sheets ("I dunno who left
it here in the store, but we made some copies for customers ..")
discussed how to change RS scanners to pick up cellular phones by
clipping a diode here and there.

But then the feds came to Fort Worth one day with a blunt message
for all concerned: "Can the shit!" said the FCC. You betcha!  Within
a few days a memo was hanging on the back wall in the office of
every Radio Shack store which said there would be no further discussion
of 'mods' with customers under any circumstances. Not only that, if
the customer mentioned making mods, the clerk was to *decline the
sale* rather than possibly be later found to be part of a conspiracy
or a scheme. And they are serious about it. RS corporate policy now
is any clerk who so much as discusses with a customer the possibility
that an item sold by RS might concievably be used in an illegal way
is subject to discharge. No bull or backtalk about freedom of speech
and all that. They are *so* serious about this policy now that about
six months ago, they pulled their two top-of-the-line scanners off
the market for retrofitting when someone found out there was another
programming error in the ROM that customers could 'abuse'. And where
before all their CB radios were using the Motorola 02-A chip for channel
(or frequency) selection (or sometimes a similar chip from Uniden), now
all that stuff is in the ROM, or read-only memory.

The feds got after Motorola on account of that 02-A chip also, and
the FCC made them quit manufacturing it. Easily programmable with a snip
snip here and a drop of solder there, all the guys were using them for
pirate radios. Uniden also got a rap on the knuckles from Uncle when
the company came out with its 'Digi-Scan' unit.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (DSD)
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 5 Jan 1995 21:50:44 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (DSD)


Previously written.....

>> What kind of noise/distortion does American-style bit-robbing
>> cause to voice band signals transmitted through PCM channels?
>> In the U.S., most intermachine trunks are common channel direct
>> connections so only the robbed bit at each end of the IC/EC
>> connection introduces the robbed bit (as well as ny non CCS systems in
>> the EC).

> Today, most end-to-end voice connections do not include any trunking
> which uses robbed bit signalling.  The great majority of local
> trunking, especially in metro areas, has all been converted to CCS.
> One way to determine the probability of what type of local trunking
> is in your area is if caller ID is available.  If you can have caller
> ID, then the local trunking is using CCS and thus no robbed bit signaling
> is involved at that end of any connection.

> Bellcore NISDN Hotline Technical Consultant (1-800-992-ISDN)
> Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
> Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
> 201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

Whoa there big guy!!

First define CCS, I think I know what it is but humor me!

Second, CLASS Features use SS7 which is NOT any part of trunking. And
if you insist they are then why can't an ATT 2B processor do class
features!?

TRUNKING is still running MOSTLY on AMI/D4 56k channels T-1 carrier,
even if it runs under DS3 over fiber. I agree more and more B8ZS ESF
banks are going in.  But, to blantantly say that every or most trunks
are CCS is not something you want to bet money on.

ALSO, in my local WE don't provide Caller-ID on Foreign Exchange
circuits over T-1 carrier because of the 2FXS card incompatibilty with
it.  Be they WECO, Pulsecom, or any other card. WECO 2FS-GT cards eat
the analog packet big time. I haven't tried any other brands of the
same card.


Scott Darling     US WEST Specials

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

Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 03:25:09 +0100
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK


> All of a sudden, I can now dial 1-800 numbers from the UK. There is a
> few seconds of silence, and then an American female voice tells me
> that this call will *not* be free, but charged at standard direct-dial
> rates.  If I don't want to pay, I should hang up now.

I tried from the Netherlands, here I get (for 1-800-MY-ANI-IS) a
recording "het door u gekozen nummer is niet in gebruik" ("the number
you dialed is not in use"); however the message came only after
dialing 1-800-MY-A.


dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj  amsterdam, nederland, [phone]
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn  amsterdam, nederland; e-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ry Jones)
Subject: ANI on an Airphone and More
Date: 6 Jan 1995 04:13:55 GMT
Organization: The SenseMedia Network, http://sensemedia.net/


I called 1-800-My-ANI-Is from an Airtouch cell phone on a Boeing
767-300 over DFW. It returned a 313 number. I then called that number
from the next seat (also an Airtouch GTE phone) and, shocker, nothing.
To arrange for inbound calls (an option on the phone) seems to be more
complex than just getting the ANI for the phone.

I asked a ClairCom ex-employee how they did it, he said it was pretty
involved. Sigh.

Also, USWest is running a promo in 206 / (360 ?) where one phone call
in the same NPA is $1, flat rate. This is only valid from USWest
payphones in 206 when calling another 206 number.


Please reply to [e-mail] or directly to [e-mail].
Other mutations may bounce, such as [e-mail].

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Mandel)
Subject: Invalid AT&T Prepaid Cards
Date: 5 Jan 1995 22:26:55 -0700
Organization: University of Colorado at Denver


On a recent Delta flight to Europe my wife and I got free $5 AT&T USA
Direct cards, a marketing effort to have us start using the service.
But none of the cards worked! AT&T operator said that the numbers on
the cards were invalid. So I used my own AT&T calling card number for
the call.  You get what you pay for.  Not a good advertisement for
AT&T.

To be fair, I used the service from Europe for years and it works well
except that it is sometimes difficult to reach the access number.


Jan Mandel, Center for Computational Math, University of Colorado at Denver
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Mandel)
Subject: New Area Codes and PBX
Date: 5 Jan 1995 22:44:45 -0700
Organization: University of Colorado at Denver


We have recently got a memo that because of new area codes we may not
be able to reach numbers with some new codes from the office, and that
the school phone people will reprogram the PBX quickly to add a new
area code when someone requests it.

This appears to be a rather silly way to cope with the situation. Why
cannot they get new area codes from whoever creates the codes and add
them as they come into being?

Is there one single place somewhere that assigns the area codes?


Jan Mandel, Center for Computational Math, University of Colorado at Denver
[e-mail]

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

Date: 06 Jan 1995 08:36:44 +0800
From: [e-mail] (Lo Kwan Poon Ken)
Subject: Value-Added Services in the States and Elsewhere
Organization: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology


Hi everyone,

I am looking urgently for information on value-added service on
cellular, such as voice-mail and call forwarding, etc.

In particular, I am after information on:

1. How much are the value-added services?
2. What is the percentage of cellular subscribers who subscribe to VAS?

I am interested in figures from all over the world, although I realize
that most data will be of the US.

Please help!

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

From: [e-mail] (Iaen Cordell)
Subject: Communications FTP Server in Australia
Date: 6 Jan 1995 07:13:11 +1100
Organization: DIALix Services, Sydney, Australia.


The following is an index file for the communications futures project
group, this group has an ftp server at ftp.happy.doc.gov.au.  This
group has placed many reports on the future of communications in
Australia.

 This directory includes material produced by the Australian
 Communications Futures Project (CFP).

 The CFP is a research team within the Commonwealth Bureau of
 Transport and Communications Economics.

Stored on this site are full ASCII text versions of recent
CFP papers, as well as binary files of the papers in their
original Microsoft Word for Windows format, and files
in Postscript, Rich Text Format (RTF) and Replica format.

All material (C) Commonwealth of Australia 1994.


File directory: overview of the papers available here

* COMMUNICATIONS FUTURES PROJECT OVERVIEW PAPER

* EMERGING COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES - AN ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK
  (CFP Module 1 Paper 1)

* DELIVERY TECHNOLOGIES IN THE NEW COMMUNICATIONS WORLD
  (CFP Module 5, Paper 2)

* NEW FORMS AND NEW MEDIA: COMMERCIAL AND CULTURAL POLICY
  IMPLICATIONS
  (CFP Paper 3, Mod 2,3 & 14)

* COSTING NEW RESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS
  (CFP Work in Progress Paper 5, addressing CFP modules
   6,7, 8, and 15)


File directory: details of papers, organised by release
sequence:

COMMUNICATIONS FUTURES PROJECT OVERVIEW PAPER

crfpapr2.txt - Ascii text -
crfpapr2.doc - WinWord 2.0c -

Description:

Paper delivered at Communications Research Forum in 1993,
announcing the CFP and describing its workplan.


EMERGING COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES - AN ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK
(CFP Module 1 Paper 1)

mod1pap1.txt - ASCII text - (NO GRAPHICS)
mod1pap1.doc - WinWord v2.0c version
mod1pap1.ps  - Postscript format A big file: 2.3MB
mod1p1ps.zip - Postscript format compressed with PKZIP 2.04g

First work in progress paper of the CFP, designed to provide a
framework for analysing developments in the communications industry
structure and performance (in terms of service provision). The paper
assesses emerging services in terms of the technological combinations
and the distinctive market needs they are expected to meet.


DELIVERY TECHNOLOGIES IN THE NEW COMMUNICATIONS WORLD
(CFP Module 5, Paper 2)

mod5pap2.doc - WinWord 2.0c -
mod5pap2.txt - ASCII text
mod5pap2.ps  - Postscript -
mod5p2ps.zip - ZIPped Postscript file

Description:

Even a casual reader of the communications (and increasingly the
popular) press both in Australia and overseas would quickly become
aware that one of the major themes of discussion relates to the
delivery platform(s) for future communications services.  Among the
more common questions that are raised, often implicitly, are the
following:

* What  sorts  of delivery systems can be used to  provide
  the  range of new communications services that are often
  being mooted, and how do these delivery systems line  up
  against each other?

* How  are  the various technological solutions likely  to
  fare in the market place over the next few years?

* Is  an optic fibre network the inevitable, all-embracing
  solution for satisfying all our communications needs  in
  the  future?   (And,  if so, should  the  Government  be
  actively  supporting this technology  in  preference  to
  other solutions?)

This paper provides some early insights into these and similar
questions, and sets a foundation for future Communications Futures
Project (CFP) work on the current and future development of
communications markets and the policy implications arising from this
development.


NEW FORMS AND NEW MEDIA: COMMERCIAL AND CULTURAL POLICY
IMPLICATIONS
(CFP Paper 3, Mod 2,3 & 14)

culture.doc  - WinWord 2.0c version
cultword.zip - WinWord 2.0c version compressed with PKZIP
culture.txt  - ASCII text version (no graphics)
culture.rtf  - Rich Text Format (RTF)
cult_rtf.zip - Rich Text Format (RTF) compressed with PKZIP
culture.ps   - Postscript version
cult_ps.zip  - Postscript version compressed with PKZIP
culture.exe  - Farallon Replica version with self installing
               Windows Replica viewer
culture.rpl  - Farallon Replica format

Description:

This paper provides a survey of the more foreseeable technological
developments that are likely to affect, to varying degrees, the
various content industries in Australia over the next decade.

While claims of an impending 'multimedia revolution' need to be
treated with caution, the expansion of digital technologies into
content creation appears to be entering a new phase which is changing
product forms.  When combined with computer networks, this is likely
to have a substantial longer term effect on the way the content
industries conduct their business.

The content industries are not only an interesting and important
sector in their own right, but they are also important to some other
more general issues of interest to the CFP's wider work, including the
following:

* Content as factor of production:

Content is likely to be among the most visible and important inputs in
many of the mooted future information and communications services such
as education, video on demand, games, advertising, home shopping.
Hence, the ability of suppliers to provide quality content in volume
at reasonable cost is likely to be among the critical success factors
for the industry as a whole.

* Content and cultural policy:

A second area of wider interest is the important (two-way)
relationship between the content of the electronic media and the
pursuit of cultural policy objectives.

The new technologies are likely to generate new access opportunities
both for existing cultural products and forms, as well as opening up
some quite new forms of expression and creativity.  It is important to
capitalise on these changes, not only economically, but culturally.

* Content and industry policy:

A related reason for the interest in the content industries is the
growing perception that, in the longer term, content will probably be
one of the areas of economic activity most likely to be profoundly
affected by emerging developments in information and communications
technologies.  A focus on content and culture is increasingly being
seen as strategically important for the wider economy.

This paper aims to contribute to the discussion on emerging content
industries by identifying some of the technological and market context
in which they will be developing.

The major content industries are taken to be the creative and many of
the organisational elements (see below) of the print media
(newspapers, magazines, books, pamphlets), the recorded music
industry, the electronic media (the production industry for television
and radio), film, games, software and on-line information services.
Sitting behind all of these particular media is advertising which has
a pervasive influence on products and revenues.


Work in Progress Paper No. 5

COSTING NEW RESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS NETWORKS

costing2.doc - WinWord 2.0 version
costing2.zip - WinWord 2.0 version compressed with PKZIP
costing.txt  - ASCII text version (no graphics)
costing.rtf  - Rich Text Format (RTF)
cost_rtf.zip - Rich Text Format (RTF) compressed with PKZIP
costing.ps   - Postscript version
cost_ps.zip  - Postscript version compressed with PKZIP
costing.exe  - Farallon Replica version with self installing
               Windows Replica viewer
costing.rpl  - Farallon Replica format

This paper reports on one aspect of work being undertaken by the
Communications Futures Project on likely market and network
developments for information services in Australia over the decade
from 1995 to 2005 and beyond.

It presents the results of an examination of the costs of providing
residential information services using a range of delivery platforms.

It was foreshadowed in CFP paper DELIVERY TECHNOLOGIES IN THE NEW
COMMUNICATIONS WORLD that the CFP would undertake further analysis of
the relative costs of providing these services on a range of delivery
platforms.  This paper reports preliminary results of this analysis.
It presents broad estimates of the costs of rolling out various
delivery platforms, although much of the discussion in this paper
focuses on HFC networks.

METHODOLOGY AND SCOPE

The approach taken in this paper involves estimating the costs of the
various components of each of the platforms.  An estimated cost per
household was derived for 1994 for each of the platforms identified in
the earlier work.  That is:

wireless platforms:
*  direct broadcasting to the home by satellite (DBS)
   using digital signals, and
*  microwave multipoint distribution systems (MDS)

cable-based systems:
*  optic fibre systems, particularly hybrid optic
   fibre - coaxial cable (HFC) systems, and
*  the asymmetrical digital subscriber line (ADSL)
   system using existing twisted pair telephone lines.

Estimates were made of the likely movements in component costs over
time and between different geographic areas.  Using a spreadsheet
based model cost estimates were then derived for all households in
different geographic areas and in Australia in total for each year
form 1995 to 2005.  This approach is part of a structured modelling
approach to costs to be revealed more fully in a subsequent paper.


CFP FTP SITE TECHNICAL NOTES:

* Postscript format documents were created by printing the original
Word document to a Postscript printer setup to print to file under
Windows 3.1.

* Where files have been ZIP'ped, MSDOS PKZIP v2.04g has been used to
compress the files.

* Farallon Replica(R) is a cross-platform document viewer similar to
Adobe Acrobat. It allows you to view documents complete with fonts,
graphics etc as they were originally composed, even if you don't have
the fonts or word processor the document was originally created in.

* If you don't already have a copy of a Replica viewer, and if you
have a MS Windows system, downloading and running under Windows the
copy of the respective CFP paper with an .EXE extension will install
Replica on your local PC and then open up the document for viewing
under Windows.


If you have any enquiries about the CFP or the documents available
from this site (for example if you want hard copies, or you are
having difficulty reading them), please contact:

Steven Byrne
Principal Research Officer
Communications Futures Project
Bureau of Transport and Communications Economics
Commonwealth Department of Transport
GPO BOX 501
Canberra  ACT 2601
AUSTRALIA

Internet email: Steven=[e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]


Current at 4 October 1994

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #13
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24618;
          6 Jan 95 22:11 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22640; Fri, 6 Jan 95 16:51:43 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22631; Fri, 6 Jan 95 16:51:39 CST
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 16:51:39 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #14

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 6 Jan 95 16:51:30 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 14

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (Rahul Dhesi)
    Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax (John Murray)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Steve Brack)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (William H. Sohl)
    Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code (Heath Chandler)
    Re: Need an EBCDIC Spec - ebcdic.rq [1/1] (Brent E. Boyko)
    Re: More CO Codes for Each NPA; Any Telcos Take Advantage? (L.Westermeyer)
    Re: Phone Card Reader Wanted (Adam Dingle)
    Re: Seeking White Pages on CD or Disk ([e-mail])
    Re: PCN Auction Info (Steve Samler)
    New Alert - 911 Access (Jim Conran)
    Information Wanted on Novatel 825 (Greg Segallis)
    Need Information on EXCEL (Bill Dankert)
    GSM in Canada? (Dan Matte)
    Request For Information on Local Rates (Erik Naggum)
    International Callback Co-Locating With Telco (Subroto Mukerjea)
    ISDN Over Wireless (Jared Enzler)
    Campus Wiring Innovations ([e-mail])
    MANs in USA (Roman Rumian)
    Re: Memorized Area Codes (Rob Boudrie)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: Rahul Dhesi <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax
Date: 6 Jan 1995 14:22:27 GMT
Organization: a2i network


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

> From:  Tim Oren,  CompuServe Incorporated

[ An explanation from CompuServe ]

The explanation provided sounds much less draconian then the official
GIF Agreement itself.  However, it's worth pointing out that this
explanation is not part of the GIF Agreement, and has no legal value
should somebody (Unisys or CompuServe) ever sue you for violating the
Agreement.  So, your actions should be based ONLY on what the official
Agreement says.  That is all that a court will consider.

> CompuServe remains committed to keeping open the GIF 89a specification ...
> ...continues to strongly support the use of the GIF specification in the
> entire online community including the Internet and World Wide Web ...
> CompuServe will not profit from this service.

These statements may be true.  But they are not part of the Agreement
and not legally binding on you or CompuServe.

It's very dangerous to let a nice friendly explanation make you feel
better about a nasty contract.  The friendly explanation does not make
the contract itself any better!


Rahul Dhesi <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (John Murray)
Subject: Re: Protest of New Compuserve-Unisys GIF Usage Tax
Date: 6 Jan 1995 20:25:02 GMT
Organization: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute


Brad Hicks writes:

> So OK, you're determined not to use a lossy algorithm.

JPEG is not necessarily lossy. The loss is variable from 0% loss to
99% loss, and user-settable (if you're using a JPEG emitter that
allows access to this feature, e.g. saving an image in JPEG fmt using
xv)

> Fine, there's also =another= bitmapped graphics standard.  TIFF.  So
> I repeat, what do we need Yet Another bitmapped graphics standard for?

There are advantages to the GIF format that some people will be
reluctant to lose. Particularly, the fact that GIFs are faster than
JPEGs to decode and smaller for certain kinds (few colors) of images,
and the interlaced data arrangement, which gives you that nice fade-in
(perceptually apparently faster) effect you get when you're using e.g.
Netscape.

The nice thing about the proposed GEF or whatever they're going to
call it is that it retains the advantages of GIF unchanged, while
getting UniSaurus' greedy claws off of it. Go for it, guys.

For in-depth discussion, check out comp.graphics and comp.infosystems.www.
{providers,users}.


John R. Murray

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

Date: Fri, 6 Jan 95 08:46:06 -0500
From: Steve Brack <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges


{} in quoted text are mine.  - SSB

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

> From the Associated Press, as reported in the {Los Angeles Times},
> Sunday, January 1, 1995:

> Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges

> Memphis, Tenn. - A woman listening to a police scanner she had gotten
> for Christmas picked up a conversation over cordless telephones and
> heard what turned out to be a murder plot unfolding, investigators
> say.

> Cordless telephones use radio waves to communicate between the handset
> and the base.  Those radio waves can easily be intercepted by a police
> scanner.

> Ball {a police official} said there was nothing illegal in McGee's listening
> to the cordless phone conversations because it was a random scanning.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's the first time I have ever heard
> of cordless phone monitoring being dismissed as 'nothing illegal' because
> it was 'random scanning'. You'd think they would rely on previous court
> decisions stating that cordless phones do not have the same protection
> as cellular phones ... or something ... but isn't all scanner listening
> essentially 'random'?   PAT]

Courtesy of [e-mail] (Terry Steinford)
Public Law 103-414 signed Oct 25, 1994 (was H.R. 4922)

       SEC. 202. CORDLESS TELEPHONES.
         (a) Definitions. - Section 2510 of title 18, United States
       Code, is amended -
             (1) in paragraph (1), by striking `, but such term does not
           include` and all that follows through `base unit`; and
             (2) in paragraph (12), by striking subparagraph (A) and
           redesignating subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D) as subparagraphs
           (A), (B), and (C), respectively.
         (b) Penalty. - Section 2511 of title 18, United States Code, is
       amended -
             (1) in subsection (4)(b)(i) by inserting `a cordless
           telephone communication that is transmitted between the
           cordless telephone handset and the base unit,` after `cellular
           telephone communication,`; and
             (2) in subsection (4)(b)(ii) by inserting `a cordless
           telephone communication that is transmitted between the
           cordless telephone handset and the base unit,` after `cellular
           telephone communication,`.

With a nip here and a tuck there, apparently the government has made
listening in on cordless phones illegal.


Steve Brack, Consultant  [e-mail]
Toledo, OH  43613-1605   [e-mail]
MY OWN OPINIONS          Tel: [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, this is news to me. I guess we
should all take note that listening to cordless phones is now just
as illegal as listening to cellular. I had not been aware until now
that the law had been changed to include cordless. Anyone else?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (sohl,william h)
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 6 Jan 1995 11:02:04 -0500
Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore)


In article <[e-mail]>, Matthew P. Downs <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> [e-mail] (Jeffrey Rhodes) writes:

>> I'm not a modem expert but I would answer "none". If a call connection
>> is made on a bit robbing DS0 within a DS1, then the modems will settle
>> for some transparent speed (9600bps) during the initial negotiation. I
>> don't think the V.34 modems will connect at 28k8 when bit robbing is
>> present.

>> There really aren't many circuits like these, especially for long
>> distance calls. Most bit-robbing occurs on intra-LATA (I think) by
>> LECs that haven't updated circuits that are being depreciated over a
>> 40 year period.

> Unless you use ISDN, you are using robbed-bit signalling between your
> premise and the Central Office. Unless like a previous poster had
> stated, the robbed bits only become important during call set-up and
> tear-down.  Ie. going on-hook and off-hook.  Otherwise the robbed bits
> will be 1's.

If we are only talking about analog modems then the premise to Central
Office is probably not a DS0 channel, but rather a two wire circuit ...
and if the premise to the central office is an analog two wire circuit,
then there is NO bit-robbing from the premise to the Central Office.

Bit robbing is an inter-office trunk signaling methodology to indicate
the off-hook, on-hook status of each end of the connection.  The off-hook/
on hook signaling from the premises to the central office over a
typical two wire analog phone line is indicated by the completeion of a
circuit path when the premise equipment goes off hook (that is either
a loop start or ground start arrangement).  Note that on a regular two
wire analog phone line (even if there's a modem on it) there is no
on-hook/off-hook indication for the distant station other than the
audible indication that the ringing to the distant end has ceased.  At
the completion of a call, the on-hook indication of a distant station
is not sent all the way back to your premises ... the on-hook is sent as
far as your local central office (again, for a two wire analog line)
which ecognizes the remote disconnect (on-hook) and takes down the
connection.

It is, therefore, quite possible with today's trunking network to have
an end-to-end analog phone call (both ends are two wire, conventional
POTS lines) and the entire interoffice trunking for the call consisting
of 64 clear trunking (i.e. no robbed-bit signaling trunking at all).
As the network continues to evolve, that will be more and more the
likely connection until, at some future time, all robbed-bit trunking
is gone.

Final comment, where you would possibly have ribbed bit signaling from
the premise to the central office is if there is a PBX which is connected
to the central office using a DS-1 trunk/tie line arrangement, but I don't
think that was what the original poster was questioning.


Bellcore NISDN Hotline Technical Consultant (1-800-992-ISDN)
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!cc!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 95 10:45:25 cdt
Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc


> FYI The local cableco here in Fairfax County, VA (Media General Cable)
> has a 10XXXX code (106-500), used for ordering Pay-Per-View movies.  I
> can't seem to get an answer from Bell Atlantic on how this was
> arranged. Is this a common practice, I wonder.

And yet there was a hole in the security in that system. I lived in
Centreville and subscribed to Media General. By dialing 10650 +
AREACODE + Number, I was able to make calls to say ... Waterford and
Catoctin and never received a bill.  I even tried a call to NY same
thing. Give it a try ...


Chandler

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

Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 11:20:43 -0800
From: Brent E. Boyko <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Need an EBCDIC Spec - ebcdic.rq [1/1]
Organization: Loma Linda University


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

> I'm working on a project which requires conversion of EBCDIC to
> ASCII and visa-versa.  Does anyone know where I can find:

>  1) a spec for the EBCDIC character set,
>  2) source code which performs such translations and/or
>  3) a library which performs these translations.

The Unix utility "dd" can be used to convert USASCII to EBCDIC and
vice versa.  For example, the following command would read the ascii
file "text.file" and write it in 80-column EBCDIC format to mag tape
drive 0, using 8000 byte blocks:

    dd if=text.file of=/dev/rmt0 obs=8000 cbs=80 conv=ebcdic

Source code is available as part of the GNU fileutils package. Get the
file fileutils-3.12.tar.gz from the GNU ftp archive at prep.ai.mit.edu,
gatekeeper.dec.com, or ftp.uu.net.

Hope this helps.


Brent E. Boyko   Telecom Engineer
Loma Linda University Medical Center
[e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 06 Jan 95 09:25:45 CST
From: L.W.Westermeyer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: More CO Codes for Each NPA; Any Telcos Take Advantage?


In response to Dave Leibold's note in volume 12 of the Digest, Southwestern
Bell Telephone is opening up 314-516 on January 20, 1995.


Voice: [phone]              [e-mail]   (Bitnet)
Fax:   [phone]              [e-mail] (Internet)
Mailing Address: University of Missouri - St. Louis
                 8001 Natural Bridge Road
                 St. Louis, MO 63121 USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Adam Dingle)
Subject: Re: Phone Card Reader Wanted
Date: 6 Jan 1995 14:29:54 GMT
Organization: Charles University
Reply-To: [e-mail]


This topic is described in:

ftp.funet.fi/pub/doc/telecom/phonecard/chips/How_chips_work

I tried it. There are bugs but it works!


Jan Kotas

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

From: [e-mail] (JayK372)
Subject: Re: Seeking White Pages on CD or Disk
Date: 6 Jan 1995 08:50:29 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JayK372)


NYNEX offers a CD based product that I believe has nationwide listings.
It is available through the NYNEX Information Resources Co., which pub-
lishes NYNEX directories.

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

Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 09:42:59 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: PCN Auction Info


Total bids now over two billion;

ALAACR is now at 253 for NYC;
Chicago licenses now at 63 (PCS Primeco) and 65 ATT.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Conran)
Subject: New Alert - 911 Access
Date: 6 Jan 1995 22:22:18 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470


ACTION ALERT...ACTION ALERT

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (Notice)(Docket Number 94-102) on October 19, 1994
in the Matter of Revising the FCC Rules to ensure Compatibility with
Enhanced 911 Systems.  The rulemaking states as one of its primary
objectives that all 911 enhanced services be broadly available to all
consumers.  We believe that this rulemaking will not guarantee 911
emergency access to cellular phone users.  The proposed rulemaking
requires wireless carriers to provide this service only to "service
initialized" users or users that purchase their cellular phones from a
wireless service provider.

This proposed arcane requirement is quite contradictory to the FCC's
ultimate objective of providing "broad accessibility" to 911 services.
Cellular users will have the expectation that when they use their
phone to contact 911 during an emergency, they will have immediate
contact with the operator.  Consumers will not think to question the
reliability of their cellular phone or the wireless service providers,
instead public confidence on the 911 emergency system will be
jeopardize.

The Alliance for Public Access to 911 (Alliance) believes that in
order for the FCC's proposed rulemaking on the "broad availability of
911 and enhanced 911 services" to be fully recognized, the FCC must
require all cellular switches to accept all 911 calls.  In addition,
the FCC should require all cellular phones to be equipped to access
the strongest cellular base station signal when 911 is called.
Finally, the FCC should make the 911 provision an issue as it
currently reconsiders cellular license renewal applications.  The
issue of safety and security for all Americans is too important an
issue to be compromised.

The Alliance has submitted comments to the FCC which address the
concerns of several of the country's leading consumer interest
organizations.  These organizations have collectively come together
for the purpose of presenting their shares views of the Notice.  The
Alliance is a collective of non-profit, safety concerns whose members
include Consumers First, the Center for Public Interest Law, Consumer
Coalition of California, Consumer Action, the Alliance for Technology
Access, Towards Utility Rate Normalization (TURN), and the Utility
Consumer Action Network (UCAN).

Internet users concerned with this issue can find more information
including a copy of the rulemaking, comments prepared by the Alliance
and a sample letter that can be forwarded to the Commissions at the
FCC.

This information is located at:

http://watson.policy.net/cf/cf.html
gopher://watson.policy.net:70/11/.cf
email: [e-mail]


Jim Conran   Executive Director  Consumers First    [e-mail]
P.O. Box 75237   Los Angeles, CA 90010
213/251-4620     510/253-1937   510/253-1359 (Fax)

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Segallis)
Subject: Information Wanted on Novatel 825
Organization: Harris, GCSD
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 17:19:30 GMT


I am looking for info on how to program the Novatel 825 handheld
cellular phone.  I am also looking for tech info on the jacks located
on the bottom of the phone.

If you can help please email me (or post here).


Thanks,

Greg

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Dankert)
Subject: Need Information on EXCEL
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 17:58:20 GMT


Has anyone heard of, or participated in, Excel Telecommunications,
Inc.?  It is a long distance service provider that uses network
marketing instead of a sales force.  Please post, or email me
directly, any comments concerning Excel.  Your help will be greatly
appreciated.


Bill   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (D. Matte)
Subject: GSM in Canada?
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 95 11:41:05 -0800
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada


I have been doing some initial research on the development of the PCS
market in Canada.  Recently some of the players that have received
licenses to test 1.9GHz systems have been touting GSM as the way to go
(Telezone & Microcell 1-2-1).  If GSM is implemented would it mean
that users would not be able to make use of their terminals in the
U.S. as GSM is not likely to be adopted by the U.S. on a large scale?
It would seem to me that having a system that is compatible with our
largest trading partner would make for a more attractive service
offering.

Any thoughts or insight on this would be appreciated.


Cheers,

Dan Matte   REON    [e-mail]

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

Date: 06 Jan 1995 19:31:48 UT
From: Erik Naggum <[e-mail]>
Organization: Naggum Software; [phone]
Subject: Request For Information on Local Rates


I'm covering Norway's telecommunication privatization effort for a
local newspaper, and need some information that I have not been able
to collect from Telenor (the newly renamed Norwegian telephone
company) or other PTT's directly. Please mail me answers -- I'll post
the article here after it has been published.

1.  Local, analog, single-pair leased lines, i.e., the basic local loop for
    ordinary telephone service, only now as a leased line to another
    subscriber in the same CO.  I'm looking to compare the cost of
    acquisition and rent for one year.

2.  Local, digital, 64 kbps leased lines, i.e., the base rate ISDN
    subscriber loop, only now as a leased line to another subscriber in the
    same CO.  Similarly to (1), I'm looking to compare the cost of
    acquisition and rent for one year.

3.  24-hour local phone call, i.e., an ordinary phone call to a subscriber
    in the same CO as yourself -- one call that lasts 24 hours straight on
    a weekday. A 24-hour call is used to obtain comparable numbers across
    all kinds of reduced rates.

4.  24-hour local ISDN call, same as (3), but now with one 64 kbps B
    channel.

If there are differences between business and residential rates, please let
me have both, or specify which you include. Please let me know which
service provider you use if there is a choice.

The purpose of this comparison is to tablate the cost of calling a
local point-of-presence for Internet providers, competing telephone
companies, and other service providers that may have their own networks.
This will be one data point in a comparison of countries as to how
easily the regulated services allow access to private services over
the regulated access lines.

Your help will be highly appreciated.


#<Erik>

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

From: Subroto Mukerjea <[e-mail]>
Organization:  E & A Services, Univ. of Maryland
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 15:19:13 EDT
Subject: International Call Back Co-Locating With Telco


Dear Editor:

Recently there has been much talk about International Call back
companies co-locating their switches with national telecom companies.
Sort of having a direct connect agreement with a country in Europe,
preferably.

Does anyone have any experience with this or can point me to a source
that would deal with this.


Thanks in advance,

Subroto Mukerjea

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

From: [e-mail] (Jared Enzler)
Subject: ISDN Over Wireless
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 00:17:32 UNDEFINED
Organization: Internet for the Olympic Peninsula


I live in an area where the telephone co. shows no interest in
offering ISDN.  But the area is well covered by cellular phone
systems.

Questions: There appear to be several varieties of digital cellular on
the way.  Do any of these have the potential to offer ISDN?  Which
ones?  What sort of technical or other barriers are there to wireless
ISDN?

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

Date: Fri, 6 Jan 1995 01:18:47 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Campus Wiring Innovations


This information may be of interest to network services -- voice and
data network groups.

I can provide information on how to change existing utp from a single
voice circuit to 24 or 32 64Kb voice circuits up to seven miles (11
km).  Change existing utp to E-1 or T-1 for lan to lan connections up
to seven miles (11 km).  Allow ethernet to be extended on existing two
wire copper up to 3000 feet (990 m) at lOMbps.

Also latest information on wireless lan bridges at 2Mbps for campus
area networks. Works both inside with roaming range of 800ft(260m),
and outside to remote locations up to 3 miles (5km).  No FCC license
required in North or South America. Includes SNMP management.

For specific product information, please contact:

     Router Solutions
     5527 Preston Fall City Road
     Fall City, Wash. 98024 USA
     800-837-4180 (USA and Canada)
     206-644-6082 (elsewhere)
     206-222-7622 (FAX)
     [e-mail] (Email)

Or check our FTP site:
     ftp.halcyon.com    /pub/local/router_solutions

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: MANs in USA
Date: 6 Jan 1995 09:55:49 GMT
Organization: AGH, Krakow, POLAND


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This message appeared a week or so ago
here, but for whatever reason did not get very good circulation in the
comp.dcom.telecom group. I'm repeating it in the hopes someone can
provide some answers to this fellow.  PAT]

Hi netters !

I need some help in getting info about Metropolitan Area Networks
in USA. The questions are:

1. What is the physical structure of MANs (fiber, coax)?
2. If fiber what is the protocol (fddi, atm)?
3. Who is the main investor (banks)?
4. Does banks use MAN for data transmission?
5. What services are provided, and which are most popular?

I will appreciate any help.


Roman Rumian    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie)
Subject: Re: Memorized Area Codes
Date: 6 Jan 1995 16:51:51 -0500
Organization: Center for High Performance Computing of WPI


> At one of the large theatres at the park, there is a fellow who does
> an audience warm-up act for a show.  As part of his act he has the
> audience call out their favorite area codes and he tells them their
> location.  He is quite good and is virtually never stumped.

I wonder how he answers "710"


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If he is smart, he answers by saying
'government special services' or 'special government services'; whichever
is actually correct I don't know. I sure wish someone who does have more
detailed knowledge of this one would write a nice article for the Digest
explaining it all. The last time I even alluded to 710 here, some people
in the Defense Department were shocked that their 'top secret' was not
all that secret. Let's shock them even further! Details on 710, please.

Now if he is really clever, he would answer by saying "710 is *not* an
'area code', any more than '500' or '800' or '900' are area codes. It,
like 500, 800 and 900 is an 'access code'. It accesses certain features
in the nationwide telephone network which are not geographically dependent
on any certain state or city."  Yes, we say 'area code 800' when talking
about toll free numbers, but check it out sometime; to be precise about
it, when we dial an eleven digit number, we dial 1 plus [area code *or*
access code] plus the seven digit local number.

I hope all of you have a great weekend. If you have not yet checked out
the book reviews and other re-organized features in the Telecom Archives
please do so. Also, please give some thought to the idea I proposed a
couple days ago of having short biographies of readers on line in the
Archives available for review *by others who have also submitted a
biographical sketch of themselves*. The response thus far has been good
but I'd like a wider sampling from readers.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #14
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17659;
          9 Jan 95 15:56 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21407; Mon, 9 Jan 95 08:01:11 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21396; Mon, 9 Jan 95 08:01:07 CST
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 08:01:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #15

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 9 Jan 95 08:01:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 15

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Gary Sanders)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Michael J Graven)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Bill Sohl)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Richard Solomon)
    Re: Cellular NAM and ESN (Alan Shen)
    Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T (Ari Wuolle)
    Re: 101xxxx: Not Yet (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: British Telecom Cuts Rates to Canada and U.S. (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Wally Ritchie)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Gary Sanders)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Columbus Ohio.
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 1995 18:18:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Christopher Zguris <0004854540@
mcimail.com> wrote:

> Cell phones are another matter, a listener with a scanner modified to
> get that range will hear little "snippets" of conversations before the
> phone changes frequencies or cells, that's definately "random". But as
> for cordless phones, most/all will stay on the same frequency for the
> entire call, much to the delight of the avid snooper with nothing
> better to do.

You have been listening to to many cell phone sales guys. First, many
scanners don't need to be modified (although new ones may) to listen to
cell phones. They come out of the box with cellular. As for snippets I
would beg to differ, I know some one who is an active cell listner
(-:)) and depending on your local cell configuration you will hear
most of all phone calls that are placed. "my friend" listened to
someone trying to explain how secure a cell phone is becuase its
allways changing freq.  Was interesting considering the entire call
was 15 minutes long and never changed cells/freq.

As for me, I dont have a scanner. I have an R7000 communications
receiver -:)


Gary W. Sanders (N8EMR) [e-mail]
AT&T Bell Labs 614.860.5965


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know where you shop, but all the
Radio Shack units make a point of cutting out the cellular frequencies.
So do quite a few others, and they have for a few years now.   PAT]

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

Date: Sun, 8 Jan 1995 13:27:23 -0500
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
From: [e-mail] (Michael J Graven)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael J Graven)


Pat wrote:

> Cordless phone monitoring is merely the 1990's version of what nosy people
> used to do many years ago. [...]

I am reminded of my great-uncle, who lived on an out-of-the-way farm
near Shepherdsville, Kentucky, in the early part of the century.
According to his sister, my grandmother, their house was the first
drop on the loop ("two shorts on six, please, operator.")  Dwight
appeared to be a bit ahead of his time: he inserted a knife switch
into the loop after the home telephone so he could cut off the
eavesdroppers while he was talking with his girlfriend.

A man after your own heart, Pat.


Michael J. Graven     [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Telco used or uses the same concept to
afford absolute privacy from being overheard by extensions on the same
line. They call it an 'exclusion key'. Remember the old two-line turn
button phones and how the switchook plunger on the left side was made
a little differently than the one on the right side? You would lift it
to put the line you were *not* talking on on hold ... well some single
line phones had that funny plunger on the left side also, but in those
cases it would split the pair. To provide an exclusion, one of the
phones on the premises had to serve as the 'master phone'. The pair from
the telephone exchange came to that instrument first. It came in on
the first (red/green) pair, the looped back out on the second (yellow/
black) pair. Lifting that plunger a quarter inch or so forced a couple
of metal contacts inside the phone to spread apart, thus preventing the
loop out from ever getting out of the phone. From the phone it went
out on the second pair, *then* back to the demarc where normal distribu-
tion began. When the user of the master phone wanted no one else to hear
what was being said, he would raise that plunger; instantly all the other
extensions in the house went dead.

When old style answering services were very common, and a subscriber line
was simply bridged or jumpered in the central office to a pair going to
the answering service, exclusion keys were used a lot so the answering
service would not 'see' your calls. It was the same principle, but an
'exclusion switch' would generally be mounted near the front door of
your premises. The CO sent your calls in on a pair; someway or another
it got looped back through that switch mounted near your front door,
and back to the CO for the jumper to the answering service. When you came
in you were expected to remember to flip that switch one way, to cut
off the extension going to the answering service. When you left for lunch
for for the day or the weekend or whatever you were expected to remember
to flip the switch the other way, thus putting the answering service
back on line for your calls.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Sohl  Budd Lake)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 9 Jan 1995 04:15:51 GMT
Organization: Planet Access Networks - Stanhope, NJ


In response to several prior comments, Pat wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not only is it illegal for a store to
> sell such units, it is often times against corporate policy to even
> discuss the possibility of modification.

Pat, the sale of such scanners is NOT illegal, see my proposed FAQ
on this subject below.

> but back then 'secret government radio stations' -- oh, the RS clerks
> knew them all. Then about ten years ago as 800 meg scanners were
> becoming more common, those mysterious mod sheets ("I dunno who left
> it here in the store, but we made some copies for customers ..")
> discussed how to change RS scanners to pick up cellular phones by
> clipping a diode here and there.

> But then the feds came to Fort Worth one day with a blunt message
> for all concerned: "Can the shit!" said the FCC. You betcha!

Maybe that was true, maybe not, regardless, all the MODS are readily
available today and are often written up in publications such as
"Monitoring Times" and other communications hobbyist magazines.

> Within a few days a memo was hanging on the back wall in the office
> of every Radio Shack store which said there would be no further
> discussion of 'mods' with customers under any circumstances. Not only
> that, if the customer mentioned making mods, the clerk was to *decline
> the sale* rather than possibly be later found to be part of a
> conspiracy or a scheme.

What kind of "conspiracy"?  Not meant as a flame, but other than
modifying CBs for out-of-frequency operation or for illegally
increasing the CBs power, modifying most other equipment such as
scanners violates nothing.

The above response by Pat, comp.dcom,telecom moderator, contained a
few errors with regard to the sale of equipment (i.e. scanners) that
can or could be used to listen to cellular telephone calls.  To
clarify things a bit, here's the current perspective on the laws that
affect the actual act of listening versus the equipment that might be
used to listen.

I have written this as a set of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) which
I offer to Pat (or anyone else) to use as they see fit.


FAQ: Listening to CELLULAR or CORDLESS Telephone Conversations

                Version 0.1 (draft), last updated 1/8/94

Send any suggested text changes/corrections updates to Bill Sohl.

                      email:   [e-mail]


Q1 - Is it illegal to listen to CELLULAR telephone converstaions?

YES - The 1986 Electronics Communication Privacy Act made it illegal for
anyone to listen to cellular telephone conversations.  Doing so since
then has been and still is a federal violaion of the ECPA.

Q2 - Did the 1986 ECPA impact the legality of scanners and/or other radio
receivers that can be used to receive CELLULAR telephone conversations
(segments of the 800 MHz band)?

NO - The ECPA did NOT in any way make it illegal to own, manufacture,
import, sell or personally built yourself, the equipment that could be
used to listen to cellular telephone calls.

Q3 - Didn't manufacturers alter their scanner designs to exclude the
CELLULAR frequencies?

YES - Some manufacturers did modify their line of scanners to eliminate
the ability to receive or tune to cellular frequencies (e.g. the Tandy
line of Radio Shack scanners).  Even in the case of those manufacturers
that changed their design to eliminate the CELLULAR frequencies, the
design change usually was a simple memory lock-out that was easily
"restored" by simply clipping a diode inside the scanner.  Additionally,
some other manufacturers continued to offer radio receivers and scanners
that covered the entire spectrum of frequencies including celllar (800
MHz).

Q4 - Are manufacturers still making scanners that can receive CELLULAR?

NO, not in the USA - As mentioned above, the original ECPA legislation
in no way made such equipment illegal The current REGULATIONS covering
radio scanning receivers (i.e. the receiving equipment) came about by
order of Congress in 1993 (at the prompting of the CELLULAR industry)
to force the Federal Communications Commission to promulgate design
requirements to eliminate "Scanner" manufacturers from making or
importing scanners which could receive CELLULAR frequencies.  The FCC
did promulgate such rules and as of April 26, 1994 it became illegal
to manufacture or import any scanner which could receive CELLULAR
frequencies OR which could be "easily modified" to receive cellular
frequencies.

Q5 - How come scanners are still being advertised for sale as being
capable of receiving CELLULAR?

It is important to note that the FCC design rules impact only NEW
equipment built or imported after April 26, 1994.  Thus, any store
which has any existing stocks of "pre-4/26/94" CELLULAR capable
scanners can continue to sell them until they have no more stock.

Q6 - What is the legality of owning a scanner that can receive CELLULAR?

It is perfectly legal.  None of the already existing scanners in the
USA (probably a million or more) which can receive CELLULAR or be
easily modified to receive CELLULAR are illegal to own or sell.  Thus,
it is perfectly legal to offer for sale any scanners which may be
cellular capable and where built before the 4/26/94 FCC deadline.

Q7 - Is it illegal to modify a scanner so it can receive CELLULAR?

NO - There is no law which makes it illegal to modify an existing
radio (or scanner) to receive CELLULAR...or, for that matter if one
has the technical ability to do so, from building their own CELLULAR
receiver from scratch.  The FCC regulations against manufacture and
importation are design requirements placed on MANUFACTURERS and not on
individuals who might construct their own radio receiving equipment,
even if it happens to be capable of receiving CELLULAR.

Q7 - What are converters which make it possible to receive CELLULAR
frequencies on scanners that can't receive CELLULAR?

Converters (AKA block converters) receive a range of frequencies and
convert them to another range of frequencies.  A CELLULAR converter
typically will receive the entire 800-900MHz band and convert it to a
range of 400-500MHz which can easily be received by almost any scanner
ever built.

Q8 - Are converters for CELLULAR illegal to manufacture or import?

YES - The same FCC April 26, 1994 deadline for CELLULAR capable
scanners also affected CELLULAR Converter manufacture and importation.
BUT ... the design and construction of a block converter involves, in
general electronic terms, a relatively trivial circuit.  Today there
are several converter "kits" on the market which provide to the
purchaser the circuit design, a how to set of instructions and all the
electronic components to build such a converter themselves with just a
small soldering iron.

Q9 - What about listening to CORDLESS telephone conversations?

A late 1994 congressional action amended the ECPA's listening
prohibition to now include CORDLESS phones.  Prior to that change, it
was completely legal (except in a handful of states with state laws
prohibiting CORDLESS listening) to listen to CORDLESS telephone
conversations.  With the amended ECPA, it is now illegal on a federal
basis (and thus everywhere in the USA) to listen to CORDLESS telephone
conversations as well as CELLULAR conversations.

Q10 - What about scanners that can receive CORDLESS frequencies.

There are no design regulations which prohibit the manufacture or
importation of scanners that can receive the CORDLESS frequenices.
Unlike CELLULAR frequencies which are in the Ultra High Frequency
(UHF) range which was not included in many inexpensive scanners, the
CORDLESS frequencies (46-49 MHz) are in the Very High Frequency (VHF)
range and can be received by literally EVERY scanner ever made
(probably several million).

Q11 - Will it ever be illegal to own receivers (scanners) that can
recieve CELLULAR and/or CORDLESS frequencies?

Speculative answer follows: In as much as there are millions of such
recievers/scanners already legally owned, it is quite unlikely that
any federal or state law would be passed that would make such
equipment illegal to own and, therefor, force peole to turn in to some
government entity.  This is further underscored by the fact that the
CORDLESS and CELLULAR frequencies are only a small segment of the
frequencies that are receivable by any scanner and thus all such
scanners have numerous legal listening capabiliies (police, fire,
rescue, amateur radio, TV, aircraft, etc.) despite their ability to be
used illegally to listen to either CORDLESS or CELLULAR frequencies.

Q12 - How effective are these laws in stopping people from listening
(eavesdropping) on CELLULAR or CORDLESS conversations?

Probably not very effective at all.  Since millions of receivers/scanners
exist already, such listening, although illegal, probably goes on all
the time.  Illegal listening is impossible to detect and thus
impossible to stop.  The only possible way to learn of someone
eavesdropping on CORDLESS or CELLULAR is if the individual admits
doing so on their own and that isn't very unlikely.

Q13 - Should I be concerned that my CORDLESS or CELLULAR conversation is
being listened to?

The probability that any individual call is being listened to is very
low, however, it makes good sense to treat any CORDLESS or CELLULAR
conversation as if it was being listened to .. .don't discuss highly
confidential information (especially credit card numbers) on such
calls.

Q14 - Will CELLULAR or CORDLESS conversations ever be safe from
eavesdropping?

If and only if such calls are encrypted will any measure of increased
security be available to users.  The technology is available, but the
deployment of encryption will take time and require current users to
change their equipment (their current non-encrypted CORDLESS and
CELLULAR telephones).

                    -----end of FAQ-----

Bill Sohl  K2UNK     (Budd lake, New Jersey)      ([e-mail])


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are wrong on a couple things, however
that is because of confusion over contradictory laws. Aside from what
the Electronic Commuications Privacy Act says, the Federal Communications
Commission addresses the question of radios which have been modified.
Illegal modification (i.e. modification by an unlicensed person) voids
your FCC authority to operate the radio. Furthermore, no *licensed*
person is going to make illegal modifications to a radio and risk having
such handiwork be traced back to his bench, at the possible risk of his
loss of his license. Quoting from memory from a conversation over a year
ago with Bill Bartels, District Sales Manager for Radio Shack for the
northern district of Illinois (this does not include Chicago, considered
a district of its own), after seeing the memorandum sent to RS store
managers on this topic, I noted to Mr. Bartels that 'it looks to me like
the feds put some heat on RS corporate in Fort Worth ...' and he responded
that he and several of the DSMs and RSMs (District and Regional Sales
Managers) had met in Fort Worth when 'the topic came up', and 'I would
have to say you are correct, but I cannot discuss it further ...'.

There was no EPCA discussion in this, other than as it coincidentally
occurred. It was simply a case of the FCC telling Radio Shack to 'get
your clerks to quit screwing around with all this illegal stuff', and
Tandy's attornies were sufficiently impressed with what they had been
instructed by the FCC that down through channels it went. The store here
in Skokie has it hanging in the office in back; a newspaper account of
some company which got banged hard by the FCC; a memo from Tandy to the
RSM/DSM people (that's the *only* people corporate speaks with; they
never deal direct with the store managers, and certainly never the
clerks, that is the job of the DSM's), and the manager's note to his
employees: "*NEVER* discuss illegal mods with any customer for any
reason."

The 'conspiracy connection': the law provides that if you knowingly
transfer ownership of some item to some other person, knowing (or if
you should have known) that the person intends it to be used illegally
then whatever beef the government has with him later on, if it can
be demonstrated that you knew his intentions then you can be charged
as a co-conspirator. It does not have to be radios. For example, you
go to a store and buy a device to automatically tape record what is
said over the phone. You say to the clerk, "I am buying this so I
can spy on my neighbor's (wife's, whoever) phone calls ..." If the
clerk sells it to you knowing your intended use, he aided and abetted
you in the commission of your crime. Haven't you ever noticed how when
someone famous gets shot or killed, along the way there is always an
attempt to drag the gun dealer who sold the weapon to the deranged
person into the process?  Apparently Radio Shack has gotten sued here
and there by the victims of someone spying on them over the radio or
telephone, etc. No one is saying it is against the law to *discuss*
illegal things; merely that you cannot *do* illegal things. Radio
Shack says you won't even *discuss* illegal things if you want to
remain on their payroll. As it was told to me, a few years ago when
FCC agents were raiding the homes/workshops of guys who specialized
in building/selling pirate, out of band CB radios, and guys who were
willfully causing interference on cellular phone frequencies, time
and again they'd find RS equipment being used, and crude typewritten
notes 'published' by RS clerks showing how to do whatever was being
done. The FCC said that could be taken as conspiracy and the Tandy
attornies agreed with the assessment.

How seriously does RS take this?  They even send 'shoppers' out from
corporate unknown to local store personnel who go to the local RS
store to check the store out secretly for general purposes. In the
process, they wave a big wad of money around implying they want to buy every
peice of radio equipment in the store's inventory, cash of course, 'but I
would rather not give my name for your computer, and I will need some
advice on how to fix these units to work the way I want them to ...'
In other words, they egg the hungry, paid by commission clerk on, trying
to get him to spill his guts right there in the store. They'll ask
the same questions over and over, a half-dozen different ways, and
let the clerk keep politely dodging the issue. It makes no difference
what magazines publish articles on these things any more than it
matters that 'true detective' magazines publish articles on bank
robberies and how they were done. It's just that you cannot drive the
getaway car for the bank robber any more than you can be the person
who actually robbed the bank.    PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 7 Jan 1995 16:32:35 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Richard Jay Solomon)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges


Patrick:

In Digest #9 you ran an AP story, "Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to
Criminal Charges." Is your bracketed comment in #11 that this was an
overheard play rehearsal related to the original story? Am I missing
something here? I never saw an official press item about the play
rehearsal, just your bracketed comments?


Richard Solomon


[TELECOM Digest Egitor's Note: That part (the overhearing of play
rehersal and the inappropriate actions taken) was a separate incident
not related at all to the originally reported event.    PAT]

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

From: Alan Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular NAM and ESN
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 1995 21:13:53 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Thu, 5 Jan 1995, Greg Segallis wrote:

> Can two cellular phones be programmed to the same NAM, while their
> ESN's are different, so that either phone can be used on one number?
> Assume only one phone can be on at a time (e.g.  I have a car phone I
> use while on the road and a portable I use when I'm away from my car).
> Does the cellular carrier use the NAM to connect calls or the ESN, or
> both?  If the ESN must be the same, can I alter the one to match the
> other?  This would not be done to steal anyone else's service, just to
> allow me the convenience of using both my phones as the situation
> requires/allows.  What are the legal issues in doing this?

Call your cellular carrier about this. Some will allow you to have one
NAM for two different phones (with different ESN numbers) for an extra
charge usually from about $5-$8 a month.

Of course, you are correct in stating that you can use only one phone at
a time. But it sure does beat the heck outta paying for another monthly
service!


Daniel Kao

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

Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Sun, 08 Jan 95 17:32:36 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (Donald J. Zanolla) writes:

>> You might want to call AT&T up and tell them you don't appreciate them
>> slamming your line.  (Their ears perk up nicely when they hear "slam"
>> too).

> Please define SLAM in this context.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: "Slamming" has always been defined in this
> context as the unauthorized switching of long distance carriers on a phone
> line. If for example you are a customer of AT&T and one day you discover
> that your default (one plus or zero plus) carrier has been changed to
> Sprint -- just an example -- without your permission or knowledge, then
> we say that (in this example) Sprint 'slammed' your line.   PAT]

Here's how the FCC defines "slamming":


NEWS    Report No. DC-2681     ACTION IN DOCKET CASE      November 10, 1994

      FCC TAKES FURTHER ACTION TO PREVENT UNAUTHORIZED SWITCHING
              OF LONG DISTANCE CARRIERS
                 (CC DOCKET NO. 94-129)

     Citing over 4,000 complaints received in the last two years, the
FCC today asked for comments on ways to eliminate the practice of
changing a customer's long-distance telephone company without the
customer's knowledge or approval.  This practice is commonly known as
"slamming."

     Current FCC rules require that a company must obtain the
customer's authorization in order to change his or her long distance
service.  One method of obtaining this authorization is by a Letter of
Agency (LOA), by which the customer indicates, in writing, that he or
she wishes to switch long distance companies.  The Commission's
investigation of "slamming" complaints has revealed that a significant
cause of the problem has been confusion regarding the purpose of the
LOAs.  The Commission's proposed rules are designed to prevent such
consumer confusion.  At present, many long distance carriers combine
LOAs with promotional inducements, such as contest entries, prize
giveaways, and checks, which are designed to attract new customers.
As a result, recipients may be unaware that by signing the document to
enter the contest, claim the prizes, or cash the checks, they also are
supposedly "authorizing" the company to change their long distance
carrier.

     In order to further protect consumers from these misleading
inducements, the Commission has proposed to require (1) that LOAs be
separate from other promotional or inducement materials; (2) that the
LOAs be limited strictly to authorizing a change in long distance
carriers; and (3) that they be clearly identified as an LOA.  Further,
the Commission has proposed that the language in the LOA be clear and
unambiguous and that the print be of sufficient size and readable
style to be clear to the consumer that the document, if signed, would
change his or her long distance company.

     Noting that it is very concerned about the problem of slamming in
the non-English speaking community, the Commission is also seeking
comment on whether it should adopt rules to govern bilingual or
non-English language LOAs.  For example, the Commission seeks comment
on whether it should require all parts of the LOA to be fully
translated if any parts are translated.

     Finally, the Commission seeks comment on several other issues
pertaining to unauthorized changes of consumers' long distance
companies that have come to its attention as a result of consumer
complaints.  For example, comments are requested concerning: (1)
whether and to what extent consumers should be liable for the long
distance telephone charges billed to them by the unauthorized carrier;
and (2) whether all LOAs should be captioned "An Order to Change My
Long Distance Telephone Service Provider" or a similar title that
makes it clearer to consumers that the LOA authorizes a change in
their long distance service.

     Action by the Commission, November 10, 1994, by Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (FCC 94-292).  Chairman Hundt, Commissioners
Quello, Barrett, Ness and Chong.

                     -FCC-

News Media contact:  Susan Lewis Sallet at [phone].
Common Carrier Bureau contacts: Donna Lampert at [phone] and
                                Wilbert  Nixon, Jr. at [phone].

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

Date: Sun, 8 Jan 1995 03:10:03 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Ari Wuolle)
Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T


> Well, we'll find out how this works over here in a couple of years.
> Austria just joined the EU, and the EU has decreed the end of telecom
> monopolies by the end of 1996 (or is it 1998)? We will all be faced
> with the same problems and privileges then.

Finland also just joined EU, but our local and long distance monopolies
ended already 1st January 1994. International call traffic was deregulated
fully in summer 1994.

So far none of the three LD carriers have started sending checks to
persuade customers selecting their service as default service. Only
one carrier offers extras others don't. Since switching carriers
doesn't cost anything here in Finland, LD carriers don't even need to
offer to pay for swiching.

There were few small price cuts last spring, but since then prices
have been steady. (Telecom Finland had been reducing their rates
already before LD competition, so their charges were competitive to
other carriers right from begining of 1994.) Even new year didn't
change long distance call rates here in Finland.

If you choose Telecom Finland to be your default carrier and accept
direct billing from them, you will get three extras - free itemised
bill on your Telecom LD calls, 1 second increment billing and
"Tasarahaetu". Tasarahaetu means that if your LD calls (within one
billing period, two months) are over 100 FIM, your LD bill will be
rounded down to next 50 FIM. E.g. 149 FIM will round to 100 and 155
FIM will round to 150 FIM.

If you have meter pulses sent down on your line for e.g. payphone or
hotel PBX then you cannot have these three extras - result would be
getting meter pulses only for local call part and not for LD call.

Other two carriers bill traditionally only through your local telco in
meter pulses.

You can always choose different carrier by dialling its carrier code
before telephone number you are calling to. Telcom Finland is 101,
Telivo 1041 and Kaukoverkko Ysi 109.

Currently you cannot choose default international carrier - you must
use correct international access code, which are now carrier
dependent, 990 for Telecom Finland, 994 for Telivo and 999 for Finnet.
(Old international access code was 990.) Hopefully this will change in
1996 when new 00 international access code will take over old ones.

If someone is interested, here are current Finnish LD rates:
 FIM/minute         Mon-Fri  Mon-Fri & Sat-Sun    Everyday
 incl. tax           08-17    17-20     08-20       20-08

Telecom Finland      0.40    1)  0.33, 0.09     1) 0.33, 0.09
Telivo               0.33        0.23              0.23
Kaukoverkko Ysi      0.40        0.25              0.20
NoZj} carrier 2)        0.40        0.33              0.33

1) First 5.6 minutes of call is charged 0.33 FIM/minute, following
   minutes are charged 0.09 FIM/minute.
2) If you do not choose any carrier you are charged a rate defined by
   ministry of traffic and communications (read: the highest rate any
   carrier uses. Actually now it is higher than with any carrier
   after working hours.) This type of calls are divided between LD
   carriers in respect of their market share. All money also goes to
   LD carriers - ministry won't get any leftovers.

1 FIM is about US$ 0.21

Distance doesn't matter with LD calls - if it is within a
telecommunications region it is local, if it is to another
telecommunications region it is long distance. Finland is divided into
13 telecommunications regions.


Ari Wuolle

Disclaimer: All opinions are mine, not HUT's.

e-mail        [e-mail]    s-mail    Kolkekannaksentie 10 B 4
telephone    + 358  0 509 2073        02720  ESPOO
cellphone    + 358 49 431 140                FINLAND
fax        + 358  0 428 429  (temporary)

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 101xxxx: Not Yet
Date: 8 Jan 1995 04:19:41 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> In attempting to do a carrier check from a 301-587 number in
> Montgomery County, Maryland, I got a time out and a recording of
> inability to complete the call, when attempting to dial

>1010288 1 700 555 1212

> The call timed out as if I was trying to call

> 10102 881 7005

> E.g. making a local call using carrier 10102 instead.

> So it's not set up yet.

I tried the same thing on the 3rd and it worked fine in Southern Bell
Ft. Lauderdale.

1010XXX calls all route permissivly with 10XXX, regardless of IXC.


Wally Ritchie     Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: British Telecom Cuts Rates to Canada and U.S.
Date: 8 Jan 1995 04:34:24 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave Leibold) writes:

> British Telecom calls from the UK to Canada and the U.S. will cost
> about 20% less effective February 1995, according to a BT announcement
> reported by the Associated Press. The cuts were reportedly authorized
> by the UK regulator last year as part of a price reductions scheme.

> The sample rate given was for a three minute call at the lowest rate
> period: the former rate was equivalent to CAD$3.14; the new rate will
> be CAD$2.49.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do you think this price reduction is
> somehow tied in with the recent ability to dial 1-800 numbers in the
> USA from the UK as Clive pointed out a couple days ago?    PAT]

Wow! How is BT going to survive. This reduction reduces there gross
margin from about 89% to 85% on these calls. Poor monopoly. :)

If they only realized that it works like a tax cut. Reduce the rate
and you take in more revenues. In a truly competitive environment at
both ends, US/UK calls would be about $0.25 per minute in either
direction.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 8 Jan 1995 05:02:38 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Andy Spitzer) writes:

> [e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber) writes:
<snip>
> On a "quiet" idle channel (AB bits both 0), using u-Law PCM, pattern sent
> over the channel would be: (in hex, LSB last)
>   FF FF FF FF FF FE  FF FF FF FF FF FE ...

> The difference in voltage of a standard CODEC (A/D converter for PCM)
> from FF to FF is about 2 mV (on a scale from -8031 to +8031 mV).  So,
> converted to an analog signal, the above waveform is a series of 2 mV
> impulses occuring every 8000/6 = 1333.3 Hz.  This waveform is rich in
> harmonics, so it "sounds" like a very high pitched, (although rather
> quiet) whine, similar to the "ringing in your ears" sound.

> Once the line is taken offhook (aka AB bits both become 1), then the
> pattern becomes:
>   FF FF FF FF FF FF  FF FF FF FF FF FF ...

> which is dead quiet.  (And since LSB=1, and AB=1 there is no distortion!)

> Thus the noise associated with robbed bit signalling can be viewed as
> superimposing the intended signal with the above impluse train.
> Perhaps armed with this information, someone else can calculate the
> noise/distortion measurments you are seeking.

The above discussion concerns only idle circuit noise.

For voice-band modem transmission (or actual speech) the bit stolen
bit will be wrong on average 1/2 of the time. The absolute magnitude
of the error will depend on the absolute level being encoded. The
impact on the S/N ratio is on the order of 2db.

Other types of bit errors are much more serious that robbed bit
because they are likely to affect more signficant bits and are likely
to cause a great enough error to affect the demodulation resulting in
an error in one more data bits.

In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (sohl,william
h) writes:

> Final comment, where you would possibly have ribbed bit signaling from
> the premise to the central office is if there is a PBX which is connected
> to the central office using a DS-1 trunk/tie line arrangement, but I don't
> think that was what the original poster was questioning.

 .. Or a D4/AMI channel bank in the loop plant at either or both ends.
 .. Or a D4/AMI EC interoffice trunk at either or both ends.
 .. Or a D4/AMI Feature Group D trunk at either or both ends.
 .. Or a D4/AMI Intermachine Trunk in the IC's network.

There must have been about four godzillion lines of D4 equipment
deployed in the networks. If you guys have replaced it all with B8ZS,
where I can I buy the "old" D4's and M13's :) Or are they all buried
in a hole somewhere so they stay in the rate base ? ;)

Also, I'm interested in the number of Feature Group D trunks that are
now both B8ZS ... AND ... SS#7.  If this number is more than a few
percent it means that the LEC's and IC's together accomplished the
quickest large scale technical deployment in the history of the world.

I can believe that SS#7 penetration is growing fast. This, however,
does imply elimination of the AMI trunks. The IC's can selectively
route the few clear channel calls over B8ZS tandem trunks and take
years to slowly replace the AMI trunks.


Wally Ritchie   Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #15
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19899;
          9 Jan 95 20:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06062; Mon, 9 Jan 95 14:52:06 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06054; Mon, 9 Jan 95 14:52:03 CST
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 14:52:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #16

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 9 Jan 95 16:52:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 16

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd (Mark Robert Smith)
    New: Telecom Policy On-line (Jeff Richards)
    EtherFRAD for T1? (Pete Kruckenberg)
    Sprint and Calls Within Your Service Area (Javier Henderson)
    Phone Rates (Paul Robinson)
    Vice President Al Gore to Speak on Telecom at Summit Jan. 9 (Nigel Allen)
    FCC Proposes To Fine AT&T $1,000,000 For Comm Act Violations (Alan Boritz)
    Phone Rates From Israel (Jean B. Sarrazin)
    PABX/IVR/Computer Integration Help Wanted (Alan Meier)
    Hayes Optima VS DEC SERVER 200 Revised (John Stewart Pinnow)
    1-900 = $100,000 Fraud (James Bellaire)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Mark Robert Smith)
Subject: Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 08:34:39 EST
Organization: New Jersey Computer Connection, Lawrenceville, NJ



Here's the press release, fresh off the Bell Atlantic WWW Server
(http://ba.com/):


January 4, 1995                     Steve Fleischer(BAM) 908-306-7539
                                         Brian Wood(BAM) 908-306-7508
                                        Kim Ancin(NYNEX) 914-365-7573
                                       Jim Gerace(NYNEX) 914-365-7712

     LEADING CELLULAR CARRIERS JOIN FORCES TO PROTECT CUSTOMERS
                   FROM BECOMING PHONE FRAUD VICTIMS

BEDMINSTER, NJ, AND ORANGEBURG, NY -- Two of the nation's largest
wireless carriers are teaming up in a unique program to prevent their
customers from being victimized by criminals who steal cellular
service.

The new effort combines a Personal Identification Number (PIN) code
system recently pioneered by NYNEX Mobile Communications in New York
City with a new Fraud Protection Zone technique developed by Bell
Atlantic Mobile.

Starting January 9, Bell Atlantic Mobile will designate a Fraud
Protection Zone restricting calling throughout the greater New York
City area for its customers from Washington, DC; Baltimore;
Pittsburgh; and greater Philadelphia, including Delaware and southern
New Jersey.

Customers from those markets who want to use their phones at standard
"roaming" rates in New York City must first contact Bell Atlantic
Mobile by dialing 211 from their cellular phone.  After they provide
proper identification and select a PIN code, the company will
deactivate the fraud zone restriction.

Once the PIN feature is activated, it gives customers protection from
fraud whenever they use it to place calls in New York, their home
market, or any market with a PIN system.

The Fraud Protection Zone will not be activated for the company's
northern New Jersey customers, because New York City is part of their
local calling area.  Since customers who travel frequently into New
York City are at risk from cloning, Bell Atlantic Mobile strongly
recommends that northern New Jersey customers sign up for the PIN
system.  Eventually all new customers will be required to use PINs.

Bell Atlantic Mobile will start notifying its customers of the new
program today.  However, those who are not aware of it will still be
able to place calls in New York with a credit card, until they sign
up for the PIN. They will not receive incoming calls.

"By combining our fraud protection systems, Bell Atlantic and NYNEX
offer customers the best of both worlds," said Rick Conrad, Bell
Atlantic Mobile executive vice president and chief operating officer.
"We protect Bell Atlantic customers by making their phone numbers
difficult to clone, or copy, for use in New York, while providing easy
access to the New York cellular system through the PIN feature."

Fraud costs the cellular industry more than $1 million per day.  By
teaming together, Conrad said, the carriers reduce its impact on
customers. "A customer who has been cloned experiences a great deal of
inconvenience. This is not a victimless crime," he added.

"We demonstrated with our unique PIN code initiative, that the use of
state-of-the-art technology can prevent the theft of cellular
service," said Cynthia J. White, NYNEX Mobile executive vice president
and chief operating officer. "PIN codes, and the pursuit and
prosecution of those who commit these crimes, have put a significant
crimp in the illegal business of cloning.

"The NYNEX/Bell Atlantic effort sends yet another message to phone
cloners that carriers can and will work together to protect the public
from this crime."

Just as PIN systems increase security for banking and long distance
telephone customers, the PIN feature will severely limit the possibil-
ity of cellular phone numbers being cloned and used in any city where
carriers use PIN technology.

In the rare instance that they are cloned, customers only need to call
their home carrier and receive a new PIN to restore service.  By con-
trast, customers not using PINs must bring their phones back to a
carrier or dealer for a new phone number, notify business associates
and friends of the number change, or even modify business cards and
stationery.

With a PIN system, customers simply dial the desired phone number,
press "send," enter their PIN code, and press "send" again.  The net-
work then completes the call.  There is no extra charge and the
feature will not affect commonly used cellular services like voice
mail or call waiting.  Calls to 911, 611 and 411 do not require a PIN.

Bell Atlantic and NYNEX have announced that they will combine their
cellular operations in the mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Southeast, and
Southwest. The proposed company will serve over two million customers
and be a strong national force in the wireless industry, with 55
million potential customers in seven of the top 20 cellular markets.

The companies expect to close the transaction in the second quarter
of 1995.
                              ###
                  -------------------------------

What they don't tell you is that the exclusion zone includes parts of
Northern New Jersey, specifically the Jersey City switch which goes as
far north as Secaucus and south to New Brunswick.  They also fail to
mention that once you get a PIN number, you must use it to make all
calls, even those outside the zone.

I'm really disappointed that they've imposed this on the customer
OUTSIDE the area, while allowing those in the area to make calls
without a PIN.  At least that's how I read the release, though a
friend who has B.A. told me before this was announced that he had to
use a PIN.

Why don't they start spending the money they spent on ECPA lobbying to
invent a more secure system?!?!?!?


Mark Smith    Mercerville, NJ

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

From: Jeff Richards <[e-mail]>
Subject: New: Telecom Policy On-line
Date: 9 Jan 1995 13:19:37 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470


The Alliance for Competitive Communications (formerly the MFJ Task
Force) announced today that it has named former USTA Chairman Gary
McBee to coordinate the seven regional Bell Companies' 1995 effort to
reform telecommunications laws.

Information about this announcement can be found at the newly-revamped
<bell.com>.

        http://bell.com
        gopher://bell.com

Additions include:

        - Pointers to recently-added legislative resources;
        - An archive of the 103rd Congress Telecommunications actions;
        - A new, easier-to-follow format;
        - A listserver for individuals who want to receive regular updates
          on telecommunications legislation. To subscribe send a message to:
          [e-mail]
          with the message:

          subscribe bell firstname lastname

<bell.com> will be updated on a regular basis for individuals wanting to
follow telecommunications reform legislation.

Please feel free to reply to me with any comments.  Please address
questions to: <[e-mail]>.


Thanks,


Jeff Richards
Alliance for Competitive Communications |   Internet:   [e-mail]
http://bell.com     gopher://bell.com

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Kruckenberg)
Subject: EtherFRAD for T1?
Date: 9 Jan 1995 06:57:20 -0700
Organization: DahlinSmithWhite, Inc.


US West told me they sell a (Codex) "Bandguard" Ethernet FRAD
(Ethernet <=> frame-relay) with DSU for 56k frame-relay service, but
not for T1. I'm curious to know if there is such a thing for T1
frame-relay. Also, what has people's experience been with using
EtherFRADs with a Unix IP router vs. CSU/DSU and "normal" router?


Thanks,

Pete Kruckenberg    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Sprint and Calls Within Your Service Area
From: [e-mail] (Javier Henderson)
Date: 6 Jan 95 16:54:34 PST
Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA


I just got off the phone with Sprint's customer service. Their special
offer of one cent per minute for calls within your service area applies
to all of Sprint customers, regarldess of what calling plan you're on.

You need to dial 10333, but considering the savings, I don't mind. The
charge is the same regardless of mileage.

The offer will expire on Feb 28, 1995.

I'm not associated with Sprint, other than as a mostly satisfied customer.
The above applies to residential lines in Southern California. Other areas
within California may have the same deal, you'd better check.


Javier Henderson (JH21)    [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 09 Jan 1995 01:23:52 EST
Subject: Phone Rates
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>


Eric Naggum writes:

> I'm covering Norway's telecommunication privatization effort for
> a local newspaper, and need some information that I have not been
> able to collect from Telenor (the newly renamed Norwegian
> telephone company) or other PTT's directly. Please mail me
> answers -- I'll post the article here after it has been published.

> 1.  Local, analog, single-pair leased lines, i.e., the basic local loop for
>     ordinary telephone service, only now as a leased line to another
>     subscriber in the same CO.  I'm looking to compare the cost
>     of acquisition and rent for one year.

Last time I checked, which was about four years ago before Internet
accessibility was affordable, if I wanted to get a 64K line from my
site, say to Suranet which is at the University of Maryland, College
Park, the rate quoted from C&P telephone was US $115 plus $4 per mile,
per month.

Note in the rates below, these rates do not include taxes which
probably range in the 2% figure, and installation of phone lines is
extra.

> 3.  24-hour local phone call, i.e., an ordinary phone call to a
> subscriber in the same CO as yourself -- one call that lasts 24 hours
> straight on a weekday. A 24-hour call is used to obtain comparable
> numbers across all kinds of reduced rates.

Residential service here comes in three flavors, per call, timed per call
and unlimited.  Business can get per call and timed per call.

Unlimited service costs a residential customer about US $20 a month
plus taxes, and allows unlimited calls of unlimited duration between
phones in the same service area.  Here in the Washington Metropolitan
area, figure that as being roughly a circle extending for 20 miles in
each direction from the Washington Monument.  In essence, the calling
area here is: All of Washington DC, all of Prince Georges county in
Maryland, the lower half of Montgomery County in Maryland, All of
Fairfax and Arlington Counties in Virginia plus the independent
cities, as far as Dulles Airport in Chantilly, VA.

People who live in the Maryland suburbs have extended local service
outside this area, so I can call parts of Gaithersburg MD as a local
call that someone in Northern Virginia would have to pay as a
short-distance toll call.  Someone in Northern Virginia will have
extended reach into Virginia, of course.

On all local area calls, if one doesn't have unlimited service, the
rate is either 9.0c for residential and 9.9c for business for each
call placed, of unlimited connection time.  In theory you could pay
$20 for two business phone lines, place a call between them and keep
the line up all month for around $40 or so, as opposed to paying much
more for a dedicated line.

I changed one of my lines from residential to commercial service.  The
Commercial rate is around US $19.00 a month plus taxes.

If you take timed service, the rate is 1.3c for the connection, and 1c
for each minute after the first minute.  100c = US $1.  You can do the
math for the local currency there using current conversion rates.

A residential customer can get service where he gets 65 call units
included in his bill for $8.50 a month plus taxes.  As an example of net
costs, for three phone lines in my house each having 65 call units (a call
unit being one phone call of unlimited length), the cost is US $55 a month
to have three phone lines and an aggregate of 195 call units a month, then
9.0c each after 195, if I ever use that many.  (My rate is higher because
I have a number of optional services including a virtual telephone number,
call waiting and three-way calling on one of my lines.)  I have routinely
spent 6 hour calls on the phone to my Internet service provider reading
and writing mail and news, and downloading files gotten via FTP.

These numbers are meaningless unless you have value of money figures.  My
brother has an ordinary job as a cashier at a drugstore chain, he makes
$5.50 each hour, and works 40 hours a week (and it took him two years to
get to that rate; "minimum wage" here is $4.50 per hour if I remember
correctly.)  A 16oz bottle of soda here is about 75c, a loaf of bread
about 65c to  $1.25 depending on what one buys, a pound of hamburger
about $1.65, a gallon of milk about US $2.40.

In Long Beach, California when I was there seven years ago, a local call
for a business number cost the customer 5c for each five minutes or
fraction thereof, e.g. a five minute and one second call was 10c.

Outdoor Public Coin telephones here are 25c per call, untimed.

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

Date: Sat, 7 Jan 1995 03:10:25 -0500
Subject: Vice President Al Gore to Speak on Telecom at Summit Jan. 9
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Internex Online


Here is a press release from U.S. Vice President Al Gore.  I
downloaded the press release from the PR On-Line BBS in Maryland at
410-363-0834. I do not work for the U.S. government.

Vice President Gore to Give Keynote at Federal-State-Local Telecom
Summit Jan. 9

   News Advisory:

     Vice President Al Gore will give the keynote address at a
conference of federal, state, and local officials on the role of the
federal government in promoting competition, lowering prices, increasing
choices and achieving universal service in telecommunications
services.  He will join other officials at all levels of government
from across the country to discuss these telecommunications issues.

     The Vice President will speak at 9 a.m. (ET) at the Department of
Commerce Auditorium, 14th and Constitution Ave, NW.  The Vice President's
speech is OPEN PRESS.

    The Annenberg Washington Program and the Administration's
Information Infrastructure Task Force are sponsoring the day-long
conference.  The morning session of the summit will be open to the
public and the press.  In addition to the Vice President Gore, Members
of Congress, Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, Federal Cmmunications
Commission Chairman Reed Hundt, and elected and appointed state and
local telecommunications officials also will participate including
representatives from the National Association of Counties, National
Black Caucus of State Legislators, the National League of Cities and
the United States Conference of Mayors.

     Media who would like more information about press coverage
should contact Stephanie Schoumacher at the Department of Commerce
202-482-1551.

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

Subject: FCC Proposes To Fine AT&T $1,000,000 For Comm Act Violations
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 95 00:05:30 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


 From ftp.fcc.gov:

NEWS Report No. CC 95-2            COMMON CARRIER ACTION January 4, 1995

    FCC PROPOSES $1 MILLION FORFEITURE AGAINST AT&T
      FOR FAILING TO PROVIDE SERVICE TO RESELLERS

     The Commission has notified AT&T of its apparent liability for
forfeiture in the amount of $1,000,000 for violating the Communications
Act by failing to provide service to three reseller customers who
requested service under an AT&T contract tariff.  The Commission
additionally has directed AT&T to show cause why it should not be
required to furnish the service requested to GE Communications
Systems, Inc. and Public Service Enterprises, Inc.  within 30 days of
the release of the Commission's Order.  The third reseller customer
has informed the Commission that it no longer wishes to obtain service
under that contract tariff.

      The Communications Act requires common carriers to furnish
interstate communication service upon reasonable request.  The
Commission found that, although three resellers ordered service under
AT&T's Contract Tariff Number 383 in August and September of 1993,
AT&T has not yet delivered service to the two reseller customers who
still wish to receive service, nor has it provided a satisfactory
reason for its delay in providing the service.  The third reseller
customer never received service under the contract tariff, and
withdrew its request in late June 1994.

     The Commission has admonished carriers in the past to make all
efforts to provide a requested service, and states further in the
Order that "[t]his admonition is particularly relevant when an
important Commission policy, such as our resale requirements, is
thwarted by a carrier's refusal to provide service."  The Commission
has previously stated that unrestricted resale of communications
services provides a valuable stimulus to competition, by creating
incentives for carriers to offer services at prices that more closely
reflect the underlying cost of providing the service.  The unrestricted
resale policy also reduces the likelihood of undue discrimination in
the marketplace.

     The Commission stated that AT&T is apparently liable for a
forfeiture of the statutory maximum of $1,000,000 because of the
apparently intentional and continuing nature of the apparent violation
of the Communications Act. Pursuant to Commission rules, AT&T must
either pay the proposed forfeiture within thirty days, or file a
response showing why the proposed forfeiture should not be paid or
should be reduced.

     Action by the Commission, December 30, 1994, by Notice of
Apparent Liability for Forfeiture and Order to Show Cause (FCC
94-359).  Chairman Hundt, Commissioners Barrett, Ness and Chong, with
Commissioner Quello concurring in part and dissenting in part.

                 -FCC-

     News Media contact:  Susan Lewis Sallet and Audrey Spivack at (202)
418-0500.
     Common Carrier Bureau contacts: Donna Lampert at [phone] and Debra
Sabourin at [phone].

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 11:03:48 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Jean B Sarrazin)
Subject: Phone Rates From Israel


Would anyone know the phone rates from Israel to the US, Canada, UK, and
Argentina?


Thanks!

Jean B Sarrazin    Ekkosys Communications BV   Amsterdam

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Meier)
Subject: PABX/IVR/Computer Integration Help Wanted
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 1995 21:42:18 +1100
Organization: Suzanne Paul (Australia) Pty Ltd


We are an inbound Telemarketing organization and I have been charged
with the responsibility of putting together a system that will allow
our Unix based database application work in concert with both a PABX
and IVR equipment.I need some advice as to whether I am making the
right equipment choice or not and I was hoping that someone with more
knowledge than my own limited experience with Telepony equipment may
be able to assist me.

The PABX I have chosen is the NEX 7400 series as it seemed the only
PABX that had a decent computer interface into the PABX. I have also
looked at the voicemail systems and had settled on teh DECVox system
although it does seem rather expensive they are asking 25,000
Australian dollars for an eight port VoiceMail/IVR System.

Could someone please advise me as to whether my choice in equipment is
wise and if not what equipment should I be considering.

Thanks in advance to all those who reply to me.


Hoping for some relies,

Alan Meier

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

From: [e-mail] (John Stewart Pinnow)
Subject: Hayes Optima VS DEC SERVER 200 Revised
Date: 9 Jan 1995 03:23:30 GMT
Organization: Tmoh Research, Milwaukee, WI


Well, I have tried with or without autobaud enabled and with autobaud enable
I have modems seeking a weird DTE:

Port 3:                                Server: SERV02

Character Size:            8           Input Speed:        4800
Flow Control:            XON           Output Speed:       4800
Parity:                 None           Modem Control:   Enabled

Access:                Local           Local Switch:       None
Backwards Switch:       None           Name:             PORT_6
Break:              Disabled           Session Limit:         4
Forwards Switch:        None           Type:               Soft

Now the port works, the other modem connects at 19200, but is jerky.

I have configured one Zyxel (spelling?) and one Intel modem (With no
manual to be found) to work on the same server and it just so happens
their input and output speed is at a cozy 19200.

The Optimas are doomed ... does anyone out there know what is going on?

I ditched CTS/RTS ... and use Xon/Xoff.

The future doesn't look bright for this modem pool.


Tmoh Research  Net: [e-mail] Net: [e-mail]
John S. Pinnow      [e-mail]  Url: http://www.uwm.edu/~jspinnow
[414] 761-1537

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 07:12 EST
From: [e-mail] (James Bellaire)
Subject: 1-900 = $100,000 Fraud!


The phone fraud files are open again!  From the evening news ...

> From WFRN-FM (Elkhart, IN) Radio News ... 1-6-95
(Names may be misspelled due to this being transcribed from a tape of a
radio news broadcast.)

The case of a Kosciusco County teen accused of using other people's credit
card numbers to charge $100,000 worth of 1-900 calls is a reminder to keep a
close eye on our long distance bill.

Eighteen-year-old James Rhinehart (SP?) of Etna Green was jailed for
theft and fraud.  Mary Lee Cesna (?) of GTE in Elkhart says she's
never seen a case like that here in Michiana.  She says anytime we are
billed for a long distance call we did not make we should contact the
phone company who sent the bill.  "You need to have that as a record
that you did not make that call, even if it's 20 cents, because the
following month it could be $20.  And you want to make sure that
whoever is your billing company knows that you did not make those
calls." (Spokeswoman) Cesna says the company uses that information to
pursue an investigation into the posibility of fraud such as in the
Rhinehart case.

WSBT-TV 28 (Elkhart, IN) Eleven O'Clock News added the following ...

Police say Rhinehart made 30 - 40 900 calls per day to a sex line,
charging them to area residents.  Even the local sheriff was hit in
this scam. [The sheriff then explained the scam.] GTE said they would
remove the charges from the bills.

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

How did he do it?

The Etna Green telco is an old GTE telco that does not provide ANI
information.  The 900 service asked callers who did not come with ANI
info to enter their number to continue, Rhinehart just entered other
people's numbers at random.  GTE's spokewoman assured Elkhart
customers that their exchange provided ANI directly and was not
vunerable to this kind of fraud.

Sounds like the 1-900 sex line has the responsibility here.  Manual
input of your ANI should never be allowed!  When I first heard this I
thought this brat was a misguided genius.  I didn't know the 900
service had made it so easy!


[e-mail]     James E. Bellaire


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are very few places left where ANI
does not come with the territory, so to speak. There are very few places
where telco information providers  do not get all the records they need
to accurately bill for their services. I thought in those few instances
where ANI could not be provided for whatever reason, the IP simply did
not give service, or required some other method of billing such as a
credit card. Like yourself, I'm amazed the IP took the customer's word
for it. In regular long distance calling (or any call where a toll is
involved) it is rare, but occassionally there will be an ANI failure for
whatever reason, and in those cases the long distance operator will come
on the line and ask 'what is the number you are calling from?'. People
sometimes lie about that also, but I guess it is not quite as critical
with the small amount of money involved nor is it as likely to be abused
as are sex phone lines.

Old people like myself on this mailing list will remember how many years
ago the long distance operator had to ask the caller for his phone number
on every single call. Even the local /0/ operator only got the prefix or
exchange you were calling from ... not the last four digits. The way the
switching machinery worked in those days, by the time your call reached
its destination -- even if that was just the operator -- the last four
digits had been lost in the matrix. There was no easy way to prove or
disprove what the customer *said* his phone number was short of having
one of the guys in the frames walk around rack after rack, row after
row looking at the switches as one led to the next and the next, etc.

AT&T did not invent the Electronic Switching System (ESS) purely to
combat fraud, but that certainly was one side-affect; some icing for
the cake. It had gotten in the early 1970's to the point where for
all intents and purposes the public telephone network in the USA was
completely out of control. Too many subscribers knew too much about
how the system operated for AT&T's comfort. In 1970 toll fraud was at
an all time high. At a hearing that year when New York Telephone wanted
to raise their rates, a commissioner of the state utility regulators
asked NYT how much they had to write off the year before due to toll fraud
and the answer was about eight million dollars, by 1969 values ... that
news was shocking enough that it received a large write up in quite a
few newspapers nationally.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #16
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20394;
          9 Jan 95 21:44 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10316; Mon, 9 Jan 95 16:43:16 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10305; Mon, 9 Jan 95 16:43:12 CST
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 16:43:12 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #17

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 9 Jan 95 16:43:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 17

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Cellular Telecommunications - GAO Report (Keith Bonney)
    MCI Paging Announcement ([e-mail])
    FCC Proposes to Restrict Access to Cellular 911 (Doug Reuben)
    DQDB and SMDS (Kristoff Bonne)
    Looking for X.25 Concentrator (Paul D. Guthrie)
    Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs? (Linc Madison)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks 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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (gao-docs)
Subject: Cellular Telecommunications - GAO Report
Date: 9 Jan 1995 08:42:46 -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:    Telecommunications: Status of Research on the Safety of Cellular
          Telephones
          RPTNO: RCED-95-32                  DOCUMENT DATE: 11/04/94

ABSTRACT:

On the basis of present scientific knowledge, federal agencies have no
reason to take regulatory action on the use of portable cellular
telephones because no research has been completed on long-term human
exposure to the low levels of radiation generated by these phones and
research findings on exposure to other sources of low-level
radio-frequency radiation are inconclusive. According to the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Science Foundation, both
epidemiological and laboratory studies are needed to determine any
link between cellular telephone use and human diseases.  The cellular
telecommunications industry plans to do both types of studies. If
federal regulators want to use this research, they need assurances
that it will be carried out objectively.  FDA is working with ellular
telephone manufacturers on the possibility of redesigning portable
cellular telephone and on providing users with instruction for proper
use.  The Federal Communications Commission has proposed revising
standards set by the American National Standards Institute for
radio-frequency radiation; this standard may be applied to cellular
telephones.

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

This report is available both in print and electronically.

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

Table of Contents

- ELECTRONIC ORDER INFO

- PRINTED COPY ORDER INFO

- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON GAO REPORTS

- GAO'S DAYBOOK VIA INTERNET NEWSGROUPS

- GAO'S DAYBOOK VIA FAX

- GAO ANNUAL INDEX

- SUBSCRIPTION: GAO'S MONTHLY CATALOG OF REPORTS & TESTIMONY

- GAO REPORTS CATALOGED ON OCLC

- SUGGESTIONS/COMMENTS

- FUTURE PLANS

- BACKGROUND

***************** ELECTRONIC ORDER INFORMATION ****************

To access GAO 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 (Menu Selection #22 on FEDWORLD);

(***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 re-try 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 "File Library System - 6";

4) Select "S - Select Library";

5) Type:  "GAO_RPTS";

6) Select file name: Telecommunications: RC95032.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.

Telephone requests can be made 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
During non-business hours, leave a voice mail message with
complete information, including the report number and postal
mailing information.

Copies may also be picked up at the GAO headquarters at:

        700 - 4th St., NW, Washington, DC.

Sorry, 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 <capaccess.org>,
- 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 INTERNET NEWSGROUPS

GAO's Daybook is also available via INTERNET Newsgroups.

Daily postings are made to:

                      alt.politics.org.misc

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

                      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.

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

                          FUTURE PLANS

Future plans for electronic distribution of GAO's reports include
establishing a dedicated INTERNET site.  The GAO INTERNET site
will host the full text of all newly released GAO reports and
search and retrieval options.

Current plans call for establishing a GOPHER service, Anonymous
FTP capablitity and a WAIS server.  Details are still being
developed and implementation is expected in 1995.

The future GAO INTERNET site will NOT charge for downloading
information.

Watch this space for further details and progress reports.

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

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.  Please see information above.  Thank you!


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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 09:36 EST
From: Hardwire <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Paging Announcement


CONTACT:  Ed Bergstraesser/Frank Walter
          MCI Business Markets
          1-312-938-4958
          1-800-644-NEWS

          Carol Aarhus
          MCI Consumer Markets
          1-800-436-9749


MCI ENTERS NATIONAL WIRELESS MARKET THROUGH MAJOR PAGING INITIATIVES

Agreements with SkyTel and PageNet to make wireless messaging services
more available to MCI residential and business customers


WASHINGTON, DC, January 6, 1995 -- Capitalizing on the continued
growth of the wireless messaging market, MCI today announced
agreements with the nation's leading paging companies, Paging Network,
Inc. (PageNet) and SkyTel Corporation, to provide wireless messaging
services nationwide to consumers and businesses under the MCI brand
name.

     "MCI's goal is to provide, through one-stop shopping for
consumers and businesses, an ever-broadening range of communication
services under the MCI brand name," said Timothy F. Price, executive
vice president and group president, MCI Communications Services.

     "Already, the wireless marketplace has attracted 20 million
customers.  In ten years, the market will skyrocket to nearly 90
million people and be valued at 40 billion to 50 billion dollars.
Through alliances like these -- and many more on the way -- MCI
expects to capture a significant share of that market."

     With this announcement, MCI is the first major long distance
company to offer paging and wireless messaging services with the
nation's largest wireless messaging companies.

         Paging Integrated with Friends & Family Service

     Leveraging its own successful marketing and branding strategies,
MCI will provide local and nationwide messaging services to its
millions of Friends & Family customers as part of the company's
just-announced Friends & Family Connections program.  Friends & Family
Connections is the industry's first package of services designed to
meet the total communications needs of today's teleconsumer by
offering E-mail and residential 800 services -- and now paging -- to
complement its long distance telephone services.

            Wireless Services Also Target Businesses

     Targeting the growing mobile work force, MCI will market paging
and messaging services to businesses under the brand name, networkMCI
Paging.  The company will utilize its extensive national sales
organization to market networkMCI Paging to businesses of all sizes.
In addition to offering businesses paging along with long distance
services, MCI will integrate paging with MCI's latest business
communications software package, networkMCI BUSINESS.  Users of
networkMCI BUSINESS will be able to send and receive wireless messages
via the package's e-mail component and also receive news bulletins on
the pager from the package's news service, infoMCI.  Business
customers of networkMCI Paging will be able to customize the scope of
their paging services to reflect their individual local or national
requirements.

     "The two agreements have immediate and significant appeal to both
mobile professionals and consumers who want the convenience of paging
and messaging services, along with simple bill payment," added Price.
"Customers reap the benefit of unparalleled customer service and
responsiveness provided by MCI and the integrity of its network.  In a
sense, MCI is creating a new market, one where paging services combine
with traditional telephone service to become part of everyday
communications."

     The agreements extend already strong relationships between MCI
and the two companies.  MCI is already primary provider of 800 phone
service for both companies in separate contracts.

     SkyTel, the pioneer in nationwide and international messaging,
offers the broadest range of service options to meet the needs of
business professionals who travel locally, regionally or nationwide.
With the SkyTel network, customers receive text messages, electronic
mail, fax and voice mail notification, and news and information
updates wirelessly using paging and computing devices.  The SkyTel
network offers service to all major business corridors.  SkyTel will
also offer, in the second half of 1995, the first two-way paging and
messaging services using its Destineer network.  In 1994, the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC) awarded the first-ever Pioneer's
Preference License solely to Destineer, SkyTel's sister subsidiary.
Destineer also purchased two additional licenses at the narrowband PCS
auctions.

     PageNet owns and operates the country's most extensive nationwide
digital transmission network covering more than 90 percent of the U.S.
population.  The company was recently awarded three nationwide
licenses at the narrowband PCS auctions conducted by the Federal
Communications Commission.  With more than 4.1 million subscribers,
PageNet is the largest wireless messaging company in the United
States.  The company provides messaging services to the United States,
Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.  It also markets local,
regional and nationwide paging services as well as news and stock
updates, voice mail, fax forwarding and wireless data transmission to
palmtop computers.  PageNet expects to begin testing the world's first
wireless pocket answering machine, VoiceNow (R), in the second half of
1995.

     MCI, headquartered in Washington, D.C., has grown from its core
long distance business to become the world's third largest carrier of
international calling and a premier provider of data communications
over the vast Internet computer network.  With annual revenues of $12
billion, the company today provides a wide array of consumer and
business long distance and local services, data and video communications,
on-line information, electronic mail, network management services and
communications software.

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

From: [e-mail] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: FCC Proposes to Restrict Access to Cellular 911
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 02:31:09 PST


I saw this post (which is somewhat edited for Telcom relevance) on the
Telecommunications Roundtable Policy Forum ([e-mail] FOR
POSTS!), and thought that the Digest may be interested in this recent FCC
cellular proposal. My comments/responses to the Roundtable are included
below the commented text.

Doug
                  -----------------------------

Recently,  Jim Conran <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a Notice of Proposed
> Rulemaking (Notice)(Docket Number 94-102) on October 19, 1994 in the
> Matter of Revising the FCC Rules to ensure Compatibility with Enhanced 911
> Systems. [...] The proposed rulemaking requires wireless carriers to
> provide this service only to "service initialized" users or users that
> purchase their cellular phones from a wireless service provider.

This is an innane idea, probably suggested by some of the more stingy
cellular companies who want to squeeze every dime of airtime out of
customers that they can. They basically don't want people getting a
phone on their commission, dropping service after the minimum service
period, and as a result gaining an essentially free (or close to it)
phone which they can always call emergency services with "just in
case" and not have to ever pay a monthly charge.

This ruling is also contradictory (I suspect) with the FCCs "roaming
operator" regs. which seem to require carriers to allow non-validated
roamers to place credit card or calling card calls while roaming on a
system. Typically, this is encountered when a roamer enters a non-home
service area where there is no service on the same "side" (A/B) as the
roamer's home serive provider, and thus he/she is forced to switch to
the other side to place calls through the roaming operator. Since all
calls are placed and paid for by use of a credit card or calling card,
there is no need to validate a given user. (I've used the roaming
operator on phones with totally invalid ESN/MIN combos, such as a MIN
with 312-000-1212, and it worked fine.)

Does this new FCC proposal take this into consideration at all?

> This proposed arcane requirement is quite contradictory to the FCC's
> ultimate objective of providing "broad accessibility" to 911 services.
> Cellular users will have the expectation that when they use their phone to
> contact 911 during an emergency, they will have immediate contact with the
> operator.  Consumers will not think to question the reliability of their
> cellular phone or the wireless service providers, instead public
> confidence on the 911 emergency system will be jeopardize.

Indeed ... one of the main reasons I tell people NOT to lock out the
"other side" from their phones is that if they ARE in a dead spot
with, for example, the "A" carrier, the phone will seek the "B"
carrier while the "A" carrier signal is too weak, and thus a call to
911 will then go through.  If a phone IS locked to one's preferred
"side", and they encounter a dead spot, it will at best take them some
time to switch sides (if they know how to do so), and at worst be
tragic if they are unable to report an emergency in time.

> The Alliance for Public Access to 911 (Alliance) believes that in order
> for the FCC's proposed rulemaking on the "broad availability of 911 and
> enhanced 911 services" to be fully recognized, the FCC must require all
> cellular switches to accept all 911 calls.

Hmmm ..."require" all "switches"? Don't you mean "carriers". The switches can
accept anything, including state police numbers, non-emergency numbers for
disabled motorists (#77 in MD for example), etc. I think the regulations
should:

A) Mandate that ALL carriers allow access to 911/*911/etc. services and
that they can NOT block access to these services for non-validated phones.
They may, however, block access to phones on the STOLEN ESN list (not
just ESN deny, you can get ESN deny for a lot of reasons other than true
fraud, and you don't want to prevent people who are erroneously placed on
the "denied" list [it happens a lot!] from making 911 calls while they
wait for their carrier to fix the "deny" situation.)

B) Allow local authorities (state DPUCs, etc.) to mandate further codes
which as in "A", state that cellcos MUST allow free and unrestricted 911
access, and which manadate that they are not allowed to block such calls,
except for STOLEN ESN phones. This would allow MD to keep #77, Mass to
keep *MSP, etc.

(You don't want to create a market for stolen phones: If 911 would work
even from stolen phones where the actual physical equipment were stolen,
people would have a reason to take them. By preventing 911 on stolen
phones, you prevent this from ever becoming a problem, even if it would
only be a limited problem anyhow.)

> In addition, the FCC should require all cellular phones to be
> equipped to access the strongest cellular base station signal when 911
> is called.

Just 911? There are a lot of codes which shoulds be allowed, and in
some cases 911 won't even work. How will this work in Canada? Won't
the CRTC have to go along with this change in the AMPS format treats
911 calls? I don't think it's a good idea to mess with the AMPS
protocol after the fact. Cell phones (well, the switches) normally
seek the strongest signal path when available, so the only important
thing here is to make switching from A to B easy (ie, have simple
codes or mechanisms by which a customer can override the "A" only or
"B" only settings.)

What you MAY want to do is have the FCC require that user equipment
manufacturers ALLOW 911 calls to go through from a given phone even if
the SID for a given roaming system is blocked. Frequently, the "A"
carrier in a given market will block the "B" carrier in the same
market by blocking out the "B" carrier's SID code when the phone is
being programmed. So, if a given user encountered a dead spot on the
"A" side and tried to use the "B" side to place a call, the call would
be denied by the PHONE, not the switch. As a result, no call is even
SENT to the switch, and the cell customer is stuck without a way out
unless he/she knows how to reprogram the phone on the spot (not likely
for most customers.)

> Finally, the FCC should make the 911 provision an issue as it
> currently reconsiders cellular license renewal applications.  The
> issue of safety and security for all Americans is too important an
> issue to be compromised.

Indeed ... as it is they "overlook" a great deal too many things when
reconsidering a cellular license; universal 911 access should NOT be one
of them.


Doug Reuben             [e-mail]             (203) 499 - 5221
Interpage Network Services Group
E-Mail/Telnet Gateway to Faxes, Alpha and/or Numeric Pagers.

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 17:54:56 +0000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: DQDB and SMDS


Greetings to all,

Can anybody explaine me what the difference and/or connection is
between DQDB (Distributed-Queue dual-bus) and SMDS (Switched
Multi-Megabit Data Service).


Many thanks in advance,

Kristoff Bonne, BelgaCom IS/TeLaNet           netwerk planning en - beheer
(C=BE;A=RTT;P=RTTIPC;S=Bonne;G=Kristoff)      fax         :  [phone]
[e-mail]    voice mail  :  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul D. Guthrie)
Subject: Looking For X.25 Concentrator
Date: 9 Jan 1995 12:37:06 GMT
Organization: Vorpal Software


I'm looking for a piece of equipment that I can best term as an X.25
concentrator.  I have a need to connect a number (4 would be good) of
X.25 host connections at low speeds (up to 56K) into a single X.25
host connection (again low speed - 56K).  I can't use stat muxs, etc,
because I need a single X.25 channel at the other end.  I don't really
term this as a switch because I will only be making calls from one
direction, from the individual ports to the "multiplexed" port.  In
theory, this should be simple to do because there is no address
resolution to be done (any inbound call goes out a single port).  This
is essentially to support a multidrop X.25 type setup for devices that
do not support multidrop X.25.

Has anyone seen something that can do the above?  Price is important
because I would buy quite a few.  I've looked at low end switches,
such as the Netrix series 100, but at $4K approx entry price, this is
a little too pricy for the small amount of functionality I am looking
for.

Please email any suggestions.


Paul Guthrie   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 06:26:20 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs?


In some of the recent discussions of the swarm of new area codes
coming this year, I've seen notations that the wireless companies are
challenging plans to move wireless services (cellular, beepers, etc.)
into an overlay area code.  The challenges are being made to the state
regulators and/or to the FCC.

My question is, on what grounds are they challenging the overlays?  It
seems to me that the tariffs have always been pretty clear that the
telco does not in any way guarantee that you will be able to keep a
given number or area code.

It seems to me that the wireless companies are being very silly in
fighting the new area codes.

One of the places where I saw such a footnote on the area code list
was Chicago, where 630 was supposed to enter service yesterday with
wireless services from 708, but the wireless companies are fighting
it.  What is the status?  Is 630 up and running or delayed?


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



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 630 was put in service over the weekend,
although I don't think there are any subscribers in that 'area code'
yet. The wireless people are fighting it because they say it will impose
a hardship on just their customers who will *always* have to dial an
eleven digit number to call elsewhere in what is essentially one large
metro area. On the other hand the people in 312 or 708 will presumeably
be able to dial seven digits for many/most of their calls, needing only
to go eleven digits when calling the other code or *any* wireless number.

So the wireless people are saying let's spread the grief out equally
among everyone. If necessary, divide northern Illinois in three parts
(in place of the present two) and have a more or less equal distribution
of 312/708/630 (and of course bits of 815, but not many) among both land
line and wireless customers. The last report I recieved early Monday was
that Ameritech has agreed to put 'some of' the new subscribers 'beginning
next year sometime' in 708 into 630. They have not said what communities
will be affected. They did say all existing 708 subscribers would be
grandfathered 'if they wanted it' in 708. It will probably be one of those
deals where if you move then you lose your grandfather status and wind up
in 630. I can't really say for sure. No one has contacted me about changing
the 708 number on my pager, and the local Radio Shack manager says no one
at the pager or cellular offices he works with have told him very much about
giving out 630 numbers ... yet here it is the day after it has officially
been started. The local RS guy does not sell that many pagers or cell
phones so that may be why. He said they told him next time he calls in to
get a new subscriber turned on they will 'probably' give him a 630 number.

My feeling is you won't see much activity out of 630 for several months
to a year. I tried a few known cellular exchanges at random just now with
630 as the area code; every single one was intercepted 'not in service'.
However 630-555-1212 *is* working; at least I *think* I reached it as
dialed ... she told me she was in downtown Chicago (312)!  It could be
the local central office plucked it away when it saw the 630-555 and
simply handed me to local directory assistance.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #17
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24168;
          10 Jan 95 6:57 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21479; Tue, 10 Jan 95 02:23:10 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21472; Tue, 10 Jan 95 02:23:07 CST
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 02:23:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #18

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 10 Jan 95 02:23:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 18

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    GSM Cellular Operators List (Robert Lindh)
    Looking For a CE3 Interface (34 MB/s Euro Std) (Gianni Paglia)
    Used Phone Systems and Parts - Want to Buy (David M. Russell)
    800 Numbers and Caller ID? (Glenn Foote)
    Standard Voice Recording/Sheila Andersen? ([e-mail])
    Source Code For Audio-Voice Modem Programming? ([e-mail])
    First NNX Area Code Officially in Service is 630? (Carl Moore)
    Looking for C7 Information ([e-mail])
    Some Questions About the LDDS Calling Card (Yeechang Lee)
    Cellular Phone Technology (Stan Brown)
    Correction: Communications FTP Server in Australia (Iaen Cordell)
    Congresspersons Interested in Telemarketing Policy? (Anthony E. Siegman)
    Wanted: Info on Fax/Modem Hookup For Motorola Lazer Cell Phone (M Chapman)
    Video Servers (Alwin Mulder)
    Is TeleScript Already Available? (Paul Boots)
    Looking For Areacode Program (Al Cohan)
    911 Providers: Watch For 912 Calls (Scot E. Wilcoxon)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Rick Duggan)
    Re: Finland Data Transmission (Kimmo Ketolainen)
    Re: MANs in USA (Chuck Poole)
    Multiple ESN's per NAM (Chris J. Cartwright)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Robert Lindh)
Subject: GSM Cellular Operators List
Organization: Ericsson Telecom AB
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 15:11:07 GMT


Australia    Optus
             Vodafon
Belgium      Belgacom
Denmark      Tele Danmark
             Sonofon
Estonia      EMT
Finland      Telecom
             Radiolinja
France       Telecom
             SFR
Germany      D1, DeTeMobil
             D2, Mannesmann
G Britain    Cellnet
             Vodafon
Greece       Panafon
             STET
Holland      Telekom
Hong Kong    Smartone
Hungary      Pannon
             Westel
Iceland      Telekom
Ireland      Telecom
Italy        SIP
Luxemburg    Telekom
Norway       Tele-Mobil
             Netcom
Portugal     TMN
             Telecel
South Africa MTN
             Vodacom
Sweden       Comviq
             Europolitan
             Telia
Switzerland  Telekom
Turkey       Turkcell
             Telsim

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

From: [e-mail] (gianni.paglia)
Subject: Looking For a CE3 Interface (34 MB/s Euro Std)
Date: 9 Jan 1995 13:59:17 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Reply-To: [e-mail] (gianni.paglia)


Hello,

    I'm looking for a Channelized E3 interface (34 Mb/s European
standard) for PCI, ISA or VME bus.

The interface board I need should have a 34 Mb/s E3 output, with
multiplexed E1 channels (@ 2.0Mb/s) individually accessible from the
board driver.

I would like to know if an interface of this sort is commercially
available.


Thanks a lot for your info.


Gianni Paglia   Digital Equipment SPA - Milano (Italy)
E-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David M. Russell)
Subject: Used Phone Systems and Parts - Want to Buy
Date: 9 Jan 1995 17:42:47 GMT
Organization: Integrity Telecommunications


I buy used phone systems and parts. Please fax inventory to
214-357-7485.  My voice number is 214-357-7484 if you need assistance.

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn Foote)
Subject: 800 Numbers and Caller ID
Date: 9 Jan 1995 13:44:24 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet


Can someone explain IF, not why, full telephone numbers of people
calling 800 numbers are shown (either on the bill, or as part of the
call) to those who OWN the 800 numbers?


Many thanks,

Glenn L Foote ...... [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The answer is yes. People who have 800
numbers receive the ANI -- not the Caller-ID, although the resulting data
output is almost always the same -- of the calling party, regardless of
whether or not the calling party blocks their ID. Either they get it in
real time (that is, as the call is in progress) or on a delayed basis
with their monthly billing. The reason for this is the company or person
paying for the call has a right to know what they are being required to
pay for. Do not have privacy expectations when dialing an 800 number.  PAT]

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

Subject: Standard Voice Recording/Sheila Andersen?
From: System Operator <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 95 12:49:20 EST
Organization: Decode Systems


Stephen Tihor <[e-mail]> writes:

> I am trying to find in the archives the reference to the woman who did
> various of the standard voice recordings.  I recall reading the
> article some time back but am having little luck finding it in the
> archives.  Can anyone supply a pointer.  The name "Shiela Andersen"
> probably misspelled was suggest to me by someone but I want ot check
> the archives for the Straight Dope. :)

The January/February 1995 issue of _Health_ magazine has an article
beginning on page 38 entitled "What Your Voice Says About You."  In
it, the author describes meeting Joan Kenley, the telephone lady, who
"is the digitized operator of directory assistance in most cities and
towns from Spokane to Savannah."  She is also the voice that instructs
"The number you have dialed is not in service.  Please check the
number and try again."  She is 53 years old and lives near Oakland,
California.


[e-mail] (System Operator)
Cryptography, Security, Privacy BBS  [phone]   Data/FAX

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

Subject: Source Code For Audio-Voice Modem Programming?
From: System Operator <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 95 13:02:27 EST
Organization: Decode Systems


Hello,

I'm looking for any sample or public domain source code used to
control an audio-voice (AT+FCLASS 8) modem used in any kind of
interactive application.

Any pointers to FTP sites, etc, would be appreciated.


Dan   [e-mail]
[e-mail] (System Operator)
Cryptography, Security, Privacy BBS  [phone]   Data/FAX

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 15:53:47 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: First NNX Area Code Officially in Service is 630?


Mail to the digest indicates that area 630 (an overlay on 312 and 708,
at least for now) is the first NNX area code to go into service.  334
in Alabama and 360 in Washington state are to kick in Jan. 15.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, but as noted yesterday in the Digest,
don't expect a lot of activity in that code for a few months. It was to
be an overlay only for wireless users, but now the wireless carriers are
fighting with Ameritech to get 630 distributed equally over the entire
312/708 region, with wireline users included. Ameritech says 630 will
'eventually include some wireline users' in the next year or so. No one
knows for certain yet just what all will be included.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (seen)
Subject: Looking For C7 Information
Organization: Ripco BBS, Free Trial account [phone]
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 21:15:52 GMT


I am looking for any information on CCITT #7. If you have any
tutorials or texts, please let me know!


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Yeechang Lee)
Subject: Some Questions About the LDDS Calling Card
Date: 9 Jan 1995 23:27:04 GMT
Organization: Trilateral Commission, Columbia University student chapter
Reply-To: Yeechang Lee <[e-mail]>


Well, I got the fabled LDDS calling card in the mail.  You know, the
one its salesmen annoy people in every newsgroup with ads about?  It
_is_ supposed to have much better rates than my AT&T or Sprint cards,
and I guess I'll find out as soon as I need to use it.

Anyway, a few questions:

a) All I got in my envelope was the card (in a paper carrier).  No
brochure w/rates or anything.  I sorta know the rates but would have
liked a paper reference.  Was there something missing?

b) My card has the logo of "American Travel Network" on the
upper-right-hand side.  I also hear "Metromedia" associated with the
LDDS name, but it doesn't appear on the card.  Who's ATN, are there
different versions of the card, and if so are there different rates?


Anyway, thanks!

Yeechang Lee  ([e-mail])|Nevada Las Vegas Mission Jul'92-'94
Columbia University/New York City|Celestial Kingdom through Taco Bell

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

From: [e-mail] (Stan Brown)
Subject: Cellular Phone Technology
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 17:02:01 GMT


    Having recently acquired a cellular phone, I suddenly find
myself curious about how the systems operate.  Could someone point me
to a good reference on the operation of cellular systems?  I am
particularly interested in the technical side (not economics) of
roaming, and follow me.


Thanks,

Stan Brown     [e-mail]    404-996-6955
Factory Automation Systems   Atlanta Ga.

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

From: [e-mail] (Iaen Cordell)
Subject: Correction: Communications FTP Server in Australia
Date: 10 Jan 1995 13:18:36 +1100
Organization: DIALix Services, Sydney, Australia.


Please note:

The FTP address in Australia is: happy.dotc.gov.au --  not happy.doc.gov.au.
                                       ^^^^                      ^^^

iaen cordell [bad typing can create lots of e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 20:08:12 PST
From: Anthony E. Siegman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Congresspersons Interested in Telemarketing Policy?


   Are there any members of the current Congress who are particularly
concerned about telemarketing policy (in particular policies or legislation
for controlling its use)?

   If you email responses to [e-mail] I'll summarize.

   Thanks much.

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

From: Mike Chapman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Wanted: Info on Fax/Modem Hookup For Motorola Lazer Cell Phone
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 16:59:49 GMT


I got a Motorola Lazer pocket cell phone hoping to use it with my
notebook, but when I asked how much the device to do this costs, I was
very shocked to find that it was almost $300!!

Is this price ridiculous?  Is there a cheaper place to get the
Motorola device?  Are there any other options?


Thanks!

[e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alwin Mulder)
Subject: Video Servers
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:47:30 GMT
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology


Hello,

I am a graduation student at the University of Technology at
Eindhoven, and I am working on a VOD project. I was wondering if
anybody could tell me where I could find some information on
video-server-systems. Are there any specific newsgroups and/or
WWW-pages?


Thanks in advance,

Alwin Mulder

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 12:42:22 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Paul Boots)
Subject: Is TeleScript Already Available?


Hi all,

Would there be anybody who can tell me if TeleScript is allready
available.  I heard and read a lot about it and I would love to get
hands-on experience.

So far all my inquiries at several companies produced no answer.


Thanks,

Paul Boots  ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Cohan)
Subject: Looking for Areacode Program
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Al Cohan)
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 00:15:01 GMT


I used to have an areacode/zipcode/V&H/Lat.& Lon. lookup program.
Now, I can neither find it or remember where I got it. It was a
massive 700K+ program in .zip format.

If anyone can be of assistance, I would surely appreciate it.


Thank you,

Al

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

From: [e-mail] (Scot E. Wilcoxon)
Subject: 911 Providers: Watch For 912 Calls
Date: 9 Jan 1995 22:14:43 -0600
Organization: FieldDay


The FOX TV show "The Simpsons" tonight had a joke where the punch line
was that for better service, call the secret emergency number 912.

As has been reported before, some older switches will connect to 911
when "91x" is dialed.  Those readers who are involved in operating 911
centers might like to know this explanation if you notice a spike in
hangup and other no-service calls.


Scot E.  Wilcoxon  [e-mail]  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rick Duggan)
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 9 Jan 1995 18:25:07 -0500
Organization: College of Computing


In article <[e-mail]>, sohl,william h <[e-mail].
com> wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>, Matthew P. Downs <[e-mail]>
> wrote:

>> Unless you use ISDN, you are using robbed-bit signalling between your
>> premise and the Central Office. Unless like a previous poster had
>> stated, the robbed bits only become important during call set-up and
>> tear-down.  Ie. going on-hook and off-hook.  Otherwise the robbed bits
>> will be 1's.

In a sense, the robbed bits are only important during call set-up and
tear-down.  However, since (a) we don't know when set-up/tear-down
occurs and (b) we don't have control over where our PCM data goes, we
can't use those bits at all.  Which gets back to why it's called
robbed-bit signaling in the first place.  Their presence still affects
the bandwidth that can be obtained.

> If we are only talking about analog modems then the premise to Central
> Office is probably not a DS0 channel, but rather a two wire circuit ...
> and if the premise to the central office is an analog two wire circuit,
> then there is NO bit-robbing from the premise to the Central Office.

I disagree.  Even assuming analog modems, the presence of a digital
loop carrier in the path between the subscriber and the CO will likely
mandate the use of robbed bit signaling.  TR57 and TR08 both specify
robbed bit signaling formats, and I'm pretty sure both types of
interfaces are still in use today.  I think even TR303 uses RBS for
call progression.

> It is, therefore, quite possible with today's trunking network to have
> an end-to-end analog phone call (both ends are two wire, conventional
> POTS lines) and the entire interoffice trunking for the call consisting
> of 64 clear trunking (i.e. no robbed-bit signaling trunking at all).
> As the network continues to evolve, that will be more and more the
> likely connection until, at some future time, all robbed-bit trunking
> is gone.

I don't think we're necessarily talking about RBS on the trunking, but
on the subscriber line from the CO to the remote digital terminal.  I
think, in fact, that an RDT is a lot more likely these days than a
pure analog connection from premises to CO.  I do agree with you that
we are on the way to 64 clear all the way around.


Rick Duggan - [e-mail] -or- [e-mail]
Member of Scientific Staff at BNR    OPC Software Development

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

From: [e-mail] (Kimmo Ketolainen)
Subject: Re: Finland Data Transmission
Organization: Turun yliopisto - University of Turku, Turku, Finland
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 23:32:58 GMT


[e-mail] (Jack Pestaner) wrote:

> We have been communicating to a site in Finland with autoranging 14.4k
> modems.  On a good day we can run at 9600, but typically at 2400.

I'd suggest using the Internet for doing file transfer. Internet
connections are available in most cities in Finland by Telecom Finland
and the co-operating local companies of Telegroup of Finland.


Kimmo Ketolainen University of Turku     home [phone]
[e-mail]                 shoe [phone]
FIN-20540 Turku                          work [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chuck Poole)
Subject: Re: MANs in USA
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 09:33:23
Organization: Voiceware Systems, Inc.


> I need some help in getting info about Metropolitan Area Networks
> in USA. The questions are:

> 1. What is the physical structure of MANs (fiber, coax)?

They are always constructed of fiber.

> 2. If fiber what is the protocol (fddi, atm)?

Both of these protocols are used, many times on the same network.  These
are both emerging standards (in the scheme of things).

[From Newton's Telecom Dictionary (ISBN 0-936648-47-3)   216-691-8215 ]

"FDDI is a 100 Mbps fiber optic LAN.  It is an ANSI standard.  It uses
counter rotating token ring topology."  This is a topology that is
primarily used to connect servers together (data only).

"... FDDI-II allows portions of the 100Mbps bandwith to carry low
delay, constant bit rate, isochronous data like 64Kbps telephone
channels."  This would allow for voice/video applications.

"ATM.  Very high speed telecom transmission technology.  ATM is a high
bandwidth, low delay, packet-like switching and multiplexing
technique." ..  "The CCITT has selected ATM as the future broadband
network..."  I could not find specs on the actual speed, but it would
not appear to matter as ATM divides its' data into 53 bye "cells" and
throws them onto the pipe (whatever the speed it may be).  Ofcourse,
you could run into a problem trying to run too much video/voice/data
if your pipe is not big enough.

> 3. Who is the main investor (banks)?

Governments, Commercial fiber owners (like MFS, AT&T, SPRINT), Joint
Ventures, etc.  Banks would usually just be a large customer.

> 4. Does banks use MAN for data transmission?

Banks use different means to transmit different data.  There are
established packet switched data networks for wire transfers.  Usually
point to point data circuits are used between branches.

> 5. What services are provided, and which are most popular?

In addition to all voice/data services, the sky's the limit!  Video,
Interactive services, and many more.


Hope this helps,

Chuck Poole   Voiceware Systems, Inc.  407-655-1770  X14

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris J. Cartwright - ELF)
Subject: Multiple ESN's per NAM
Organization: National Naval Medical Center
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 14:01:57 GMT


On my way home last night I called Cell One from my carphone about a
minor service problem that I wanted to clear up.  While on hold for
ten minutes ( :(, at least the air time was free) I was pitched an ad
for FlexPhone.  It sounded like they were talking about multiple ESN's
per NAM and since I also have a hand held it was a good match for what
I wanted the phones to do since I got them two years ago.  Wasting no
time I stopped at the Cell One office before I got home.  The ad was
true!  Cell One in Maryland is now offering up to three ESN's per NAM.
The details are:

CellularONE (SID 00013/0000D, 301-742-XXXX)

- Two ESN's on one NAM    $17.95/mo + reg. service price;
- Three ESN's on one NAM   29.95/mo + reg. service price;
- Activation within a minimum of 48 hours (yet to be seen);
- Only the "primary" ESN can roam (??);
- All calls are billed to a single number and no determination is made as
  to which phone placed the call.

The above comes from the one page sheet I filled out at the office.
It contains very little information over what you supply, ESN, MIN,
Name, etc.  and none of the *legal speak* I would expect on the back.
What I found out by talking to the rep is that I was the first in
their office to sign up <sigh> and that if both phones are on at the
same time whichever one rings is the one that gets the call (no
kidding!).

I find this more than interesting since last week I talked with BAM
about switching both of these phones and getting a single number for
both.  The tech was very good about telling me what I *could* ;) do to
accomplish this but the BAM party line is that two ESN's per NAM is
forbidden in the Atlantic corridor (DC to Boston) because of the
concerns about fraud.

My FlexPhone service won't be enabled until Monday so I'll have to
wait and see how it works before I give any kind of report.  I do a
fair amount of interstate traveling so I should have an answer on the
roam for secondary ESN's in short order.  Reading through back issues
I've seen this mentioned from time to time as a technical discussion
but this is the first time I've seen it available as a service.


Chris Cartwright, Technical Engineer
E-Mail  [e-mail]
C-Serve 71614,2441


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Having two or more phones on the same
number *used to be* a technical problem for carriers. If anyone else over
on the east coast tries out this new arrangement and wishes to report on
it to the Digest, I'm sure others will appreciate your report.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #18
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24580;
          10 Jan 95 8:10 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22106; Tue, 10 Jan 95 03:42:13 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22098; Tue, 10 Jan 95 03:42:09 CST
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 03:42:09 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #19

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 10 Jan 95 03:42:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 19

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Mike J. Sutter)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Coast Guard Communications)
    Re: Is There a Telecom Group in Chicago? (Bernard Cerier)
    Re: Is There a Telecom Group in Chicago? (Randall Hayes)
    Re: Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd ([e-mail])
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Christopher Zguris)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (John Higdon)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Bennett Z. Kobb)
    Re: GSM in Canada? (Rupert Baines)
    Re: GSM in Canada? (John Leske)
    Re: Phone Card Reader Wanted (Kimmo Ketolainen)
    Re: Britain-Japan Fiber Cable (Kimmo Ketolainen)
    Re: Computer Caller-ID (Maurice Dykes)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Mjsutter)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Date: 9 Jan 1995 21:50:33 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mjsutter)


Jim Conran writes:

> In addition, the FCC should require all cellular phones to be
> equipped to access the strongest cellular base station signal when 911
> is called.  Finally, the FCC should make the 911 provision an issue as
> it currently reconsiders cellular license renewal applications.

This is a good idea. However, it could be at odds with another good
idea which is that the cell ID that the caller is using be passed
through the cell switch to the tandem so tha the 911 database can use
the cell ID as an approximate location of the caller. In metro areas
the size of the cell would be very small indeed. Less that a year ago
a life would have most likely been saved in Rochester N.Y. if this
capability had been available.


Cheers,

mike

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

From: [e-mail] (USCG TELECOMMS)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Date: 9 Jan 1995 17:56:15 GMT
Organization: U.S. Coast Guard


I believe the closing date for comments in this FCC proceding is
January 9th.  The FCC proceding highlights some serious problems with
911 access from wireless systems, particularly satellite systems due
to be available shortly.

Coast Guard comments on this FCC proceding are available by Internet
also, through the Fedworld gateway: "telnet fedworld.gov", log on, and
enter "udd54" at the first menu.  Once on the CG NIS computer (you
have to log onto this also), find the file 911.TXT under Maritime
Communications, Coast Guard Communications.  Try downloading using
KERMIT.

(We plan to be up on WWW/gopher/ftp etc by this summer, by the way)


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

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 12:56:14 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is There a Telecom Group in Chicago?


Pat,

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] asks about
a telecommunications association in the Chicago area that has
meetings, seminars and get-togethers, a little newsletter, etc. etc.
for a hundred or two bucks a year.

CICA, Inc. is the oldest organization in the US.  It predates the ICA.
They have a monthly newsletter, meet monthly (usually at Marshall
Fields downtown) and have educational seminars.  Dues are less that
$50.

The Executive Secretary is:
Robert C. Hagglund
1905 W. Leland Avenue
Chicago, IL 60601
312-271-7088   Fax [phone]

President
Patti Wolff
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
230 S. laSalle Street
Chicago, IL 60604
312-322-8200  Fax [phone]

Through the newsletters you can be put in touch with specialized user
groups: Midwest ROLM Users Group, Midwest Meridian SL1 Users
Association, Centigram Voice Mail Users Association, etc.


Bernie Cerier
15520 Mill Creek Blvd. H-103
Mill Creek, WA 98012


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks very much for passing this on.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 9 Jan 95 16:35 CST
Subject: Re: Is There a Telecom Group in Chicago?


> I'm looking for a group (in Chicago) that has meetings, seminars, and get-
> togethers, a little newsletter.....

The Chicago Industrial Communications Association ia a non-profit
organization which promotes the exchange of ideas and information
among telecom professionals.

They are a part of the Midwestern Telecommunications Conference, which
is a group of 13 midwestern telecom organizations (I belong to ITUG --
the Iowa Telecom User Group).

For information, contact Steve Willuweit at 708-291-2106 or John Gacek at
312-663-3366.


Randy Hayes

[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 20:29:56 PST


Mark Robert Smith said:

>     LEADING CELLULAR CARRIERS JOIN FORCES TO PROTECT CUSTOMERS
>                  FROM BECOMING PHONE FRAUD VICTIMS

> The new effort combines a Personal Identification Number (PIN) code
> system recently pioneered by NYNEX Mobile Communications in New York
> City with a new Fraud Protection Zone technique developed by Bell
> Atlantic Mobile.

What happened to that fraud protection (was it made by TRW?) device
that examined the radio signal from the cell phone? Last I heard, it
was going to revolutionize the cellular industry and eliminate fraud.


Steve   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 00:30:13 EST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux)
Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd


This evening I was in the Bell Atlantic store in Union, NJ and I
overheard another customer asking about the PIN stuff.  He wanted to
know whether or not he would need a PIN.  The sales person told him
that that was "Only for customers whose phones have been cloned."
They would NOT assign a PIN unless you'd been cloned, because
customers who had already been cloned were "most at risk."  This
seemed to me to be a completely screwed up way of handling the
situation. I wonder if the sales person was quoting the old rules or
the new rules ...


reb  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Or maybe you have to wonder if the
sales person knew what the rules were at all ... :)   PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 19:35 EST
From: Christopher Zguris <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges


[e-mail] (Gary Sanders) writes:

> You have been listening to to many cell phone sales guys. First, many
> scanners don't need to be modified (although new ones may) to listen to
> cell phones. They come out of the box with cellular. As for snippets I
> would beg to differ, I know some one who is an active cell listner
> (-:)) and depending on your local cell configuration you will hear
> most of all phone calls that are placed. "my friend" listened to
> someone trying to explain how secure a cell phone is becuase its
> allways changing freq.  Was interesting considering the entire call
> was 15 minutes long and never changed cells/freq.

What recent scanners come with cellular enabled? _Recent_ equipment,
that is. Regarding snippets, I'm sure it _does_ depend on the layout
of the cells, but it _also_ depends on how fast the cellular phone is
moving. If it is moving fast -- as opposed to stationary -- it will
break up and move on to another cell/freq. If "your friend" is located
in a major suburban area, he probably won't pick up many complete
calls that last more than a minute or two. You've brought up _one_
instance of hearing an entire cell phone call. If that 15 minute call
is the best "your friend" has heard -- especially when you consider
some people talk on the phone for 30 or more minutes (hours on a
"regular" phone) -- I'd say that kinda proves my point!


Christopher Zguris  [e-mail]
(just another happy MCI customer)

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 18:47:02 -0800
From: John Higdon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are wrong on a couple things, however
> that is because of confusion over contradictory laws. Aside from what
> the Electronic Commuications Privacy Act says, the Federal Communications
> Commission addresses the question of radios which have been modified.
> Illegal modification (i.e. modification by an unlicensed person) voids
> your FCC authority to operate the radio. Furthermore, no *licensed*
> person is going to make illegal modifications to a radio and risk having
> such handiwork be traced back to his bench, at the possible risk of his
> loss of his license.

But this only applies to radios manufactured and offered for sale to
the public and does NOT cover modifications made by an individual for
his own use, or use by another. In fact, there is no prohibition of
any kind with regard to the construction of a radio from scratch by an
individual.  Patrick, I know you are old enough to have possibly built
the radios described in the various scouting handbooks. There was no
requirement that one build the radio exactly as described, nor was
there any requirement to have the completed device "certified" in any
way. There has been no change in the basic rules in this regard since
then that I am aware of.

Transmitters are another story. FCC rules require that all transmitters
be maintained and adjusted by a properly licensed technician. As the
holder of such licenses since the 1960's, I am completely unaware of
any grades of license requirement to service any receive-only equipment.
Furthermore, I am unaware of any "FCC authority" required to operate
any receive-only equipment. As scanners are incapable of transmission
(the local oscillator incidental radiation notwithstanding), their
possession, modification, or use are of absolutely no concern to the
FCC.

Using radio receivers in the commission of crimes is, of course, another
matter. But after consulting the volumes of rules that I have handy, I can
find no provision, nor specification of license grade, involved with
maintenance, repair, modification, or adjustment of a radio receiver.

What the Feds tell Radio Shack that it may or may not do is Radio
Shack's problem and does not extend to you and me. I have probably a
half-dozen scanners and service radios capable of receiving the
cellular band. Two of them have that capability because I gave it to
them. I don't think my FCC license is in any jeapardy. If I wanted to
buy another, I would go to Japan and pick one up, or have a friend
simply bring one with him on his return.  Customs does not seize them --
they only want to know what they cost!

Note that I am NOT claiming that I listen to cellular transmissions
(that would be illegal). My only claim is that I legally possess
radios capable of such activity and will probably continue to do so in
perpetuity.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Pelliccio)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 10 Jan 1995 03:49:50 GMT
Organization: Brown University - Providence, RI USA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know where you shop, but all the
> Radio Shack units make a point of cutting out the cellular frequencies.
> So do quite a few others, and they have for a few years now.   PAT]

Actually the AOR-2500 comes through with the cell band intact. Or at
least it did until the FCC attempted to clamp down on it. The nice
thing is the AOR-2500 is considered a communications receiver and not
a scanner and last I heard the whole thing was still tied up in
hearings.

Of course if you really want to follow a cell call just get a DDI and
hook it up to your PC. The interesting thing is that the company that
sells the DDI will only release software with ESN capability to law
enforcement people. Makes you wonder doesn't it?


Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR, VE ARRL/W5YI Tel. [phone]
Box 1908, Providence, RI 02912      Fax. [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bennett Z. Kobb)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Organization: New Signals Press
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 13:23:35 GMT


The amendment to include cordless came in with the Digital Telephony
Bill, I believe. EFF did not object to the amendment but questioned
its propriety without public dialogue on the subject.

It may not be settled that random scanning, even of cellular spectrum,
violates the ECPA due to the high standard of culpability placed in
the law in the late stages. An excellent reference and opinion paper
on this is "Don't Touch That Dial: Radio Listening Under the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986," by Fred Jay Meyer, in
the New York University Law Review, V63 N2, May 1988.

I'm reminded of Rep. Carlos Moorhead's assurances that "ECPA is not
intended to penalize someone who just happens upon the frequency."


Bennett Kobb  [e-mail]
Editor and publisher   Spectrum Guide

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

From: [e-mail] (Rupes)
Subject: Re: GSM in Canada?
Date: 10 Jan 1995 01:49:27 -0500
Organization: Concentric Research Corporation


[e-mail] (D. Matte) writes:

> I have been doing some initial research on the development of the PCS
> market in Canada.  Recently some of the players that have received
> licenses to test 1.9GHz systems have been touting GSM as the way to go
> (Telezone & Microcell 1-2-1).  If GSM is implemented would it mean
> that users would not be able to make use of their terminals in the
> U.S. as GSM is not likely to be adopted by the U.S. on a large scale?
> It would seem to me that having a system that is compatible with our
> largest trading partner would make for a more attractive service
> offering.

You are right -- being able to use the same system as the US would be
great.  The only problem is that the US is unlikely to the the same
system as the US ... <G>

For the PCS band (1.9GHz) there are seven 'standards' in the running. So,
in principle, Canada might adaopt one -- and then be able to operate in
only one in seven US areas ...

It won't be quite that bad, as each area will have several operators
(with different standards?), and only a few standards will be adopted,
but ...

To answer your original post, up-banded GSM (aka PCS1900) is one of the
stronger contenders for PCS in the US, probably second in popularity to
the IS95 (Qualcomm CDMA) variant.  The former has existing market, safe
technology and volume advantages, the latter is more technologically
elegant and potentially cheaper.  (A friend describes tham as PC vs Mac ...)


Rupert Baines

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

From: [e-mail] (John Leske)
Subject: Re: GSM in Canada?
Date: 10 Jan 1995 01:47:11 GMT
Organization: Centre for Telecommunications Information Networking
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (D. Matte) writes:

> I have been doing some initial research on the development of the PCS
> market in Canada. [snip]

> If GSM is implemented would it mean that users would not be able to
> make use of their terminals in the U.S. as GSM is not likely to be
> adopted by the U.S. on a large scale?  It would seem to me that having
> a system that is compatible with our largest trading partner would
> make for a more attractive service offering.

Hi Dan,

A few comments on your concerns regarding GSM.  Strictly speaking GSM
operates in the 800MHz band.  There is a varient called DCS1800,
(which curiously enough operates in the 1800MHz band) which is used as
a PCS system in the UK (Mercury 1to1, and Orange). Basically the only
difference is the operating frequency, with all that that implies
about cell size, transmission characteristics etc. GSM handsets do not
work with DCS1800 or vice-versa.

Since in the USA and Canada, 1.9GHz is the band available for PCS,
carriers are looking at a varient of GSM in this frequency. There are
carriers in both the USA and Canada considering this as a solution for
PCS. One major attraction of doing this is that all the network
details (protocols, charging, roaming, loading etc) have already been
sorted out in GSM. The manufacturers can adjust their equipment to the
new frequency and have an entire stable network up in months.

My current reading of news reports seem to indicate that a number of
different PCS systems will be installed, each in different areas
depending on who bought the license. SO there will be CDMA, TDMA and
other systems. None of these handsets will work with the AMPS network,
nor with each other (in the first instance anyway).


John Leske   Research Engineer
Centre for Telecommunications Information Networking
University of Adelaide

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

From: [e-mail] (Kimmo Ketolainen)
Subject: Re: Phone Card Reader Wanted
Organization: Turun yliopisto - University of Turku, Turku, Finland
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 23:40:27 GMT


Keith Jason Uber <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 09I am looking for an article on building a Phone Card Reader
> that connects to a pc. I saw it two or three days ago when browsing
> gopher or WWW (I can't remember) and thought "That's cool ... but
> Australia doesn't use Smart-cards for their phones".
> The very next day, I met a German exchange student who gave me
> a German phonecard! Subsequently I've spent about four hours searching
> through veronica, www etc with no luck.

The phonecard pages can be found with Lycos <http://lycos.cs.cmu.edu/>
by entering the keyword "phonecard". The article in question is behind
<ftp://www.funet.fi/pub/doc/telecom/phonecard/chips/>. The author of
this article is currently serving a year long sentence :) in the
French Army, and he'll be back on the net later this year.

> Any help or direction would be great ... I intend to modify it
> to use it as an electronic key to start my car!

Sorry Keith, but the chip in question is not rewritable, you can only
decrease its value (counter). In fact, none of the conventional chips
in phonecards are reusable.


Kimmo Ketolainen University of Turku            home [phone]
[e-mail]                 shoe [phone]
                        work [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kimmo Ketolainen)
Subject: Re: Britain-Japan Fiber Cable
Organization: Turun yliopisto - University of Turku, Turku, Finland
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 23:50:34 GMT


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

> An international circuit is two "half circuits" with the price at
> each end completely controlled by the carriers at each end, one or
> both of which is normally a monopoly PTT. Only US/Canada and US/UK
> circuits are priced at anything even reasonably related to cost.

Don't forget Finland -- three international carriers with quite
competitive charges. It may sound weird, but the telecomm market in
the country is already less monopolized than that of the US.



Kimmo Ketolainen University of Turku            home [phone]
[e-mail]                 shoe [phone]
                        work [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Maurice Dykes)
Subject: Re: Computer Caller-ID
Organization: Thinkage Ltd. Guest Account
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 01:37:04 GMT


> Does anyone know of a software program that enables you to have your
> computer identify caller's phone numbers? I saw a movie called Brainscan
> that had a computer, using caller id, identify the caller and tell the
> person in an "igor" voice, which I perticularly liked, that "Bobby is
> calling master". The idea was really interesting to me and I would like
> to get something like it.

There is a shareware app called IdentaFone version 1.6 on ftp.halcyon.com
in local/identafone. It does not support sound.

The verbage that's in the readme states:

Overview:

IdentaFone, in conjunction with Caller ID/Call Display service from
your phone company, will log incoming calls and perform database
lookups to place complete caller information at your fingertips before
the phone has rang twice. You can also configure it to show a large
barker screen that can be seen across the room or you can just have
the icon display the calling number. Includes a Speed Dialer for 32 of
your favourite numbers, dialer from the database or return call dialer
in log window.  You can launch a program or Windows macro when a
designated number calls. *NEW* if you have a numeric pager IdentaFone
will send the calling party's number to your pager.


Maurice Dykes
[e-mail]       [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #19
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25097;
          10 Jan 95 9:21 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22710; Tue, 10 Jan 95 04:29:11 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22702; Tue, 10 Jan 95 04:29:08 CST
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 04:29:08 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #20

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 10 Jan 95 04:29:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 20

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Tim Gorman)
    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T (Sam Spens Clason)
    Re: ISDN Over Wireless (John Lundgren)
    Re: Erlang Capacity (Phil Ritter)
    Re: Need an EBCDIC Spec - ebcdic.rq [1/1] (John O'Keefe)
    Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Re: Sprint and Calls Within Your Service Area (Al Cohan)
    Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code (Mark Fraser)
    Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code (Joe George)
    Re: More CO Codes For Each NPA - Any Telcos Take Advantage? (David Leibold)
    Re: Flat Rate Cellular Phone Service ([e-mail])
    Re: MANs in USA (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Cellular NAM and ESN (Eric Tholome)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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, 9 Jan 1995 20:55:49 -0500
From: Tim Gorman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?


[e-mail] (sohl,william h) writes in TELECOM Digest V15 #11:

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

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

>>> What kind of noise/distortion does American-style bit-robbing cause to
>>> voice band signals transmitted through PCM channels?

>> In the U.S., most intermachine trunks are common channel direct
>> connections so only the robbed bit at each end of the IC/EC connection
>> introduces the robbed bit (as well as ny non CCS systems in the EC).

> Today, most end-to-end voice connections do not include any trunking
> which uses robbed bit signalling.  The great majority of local
> trunking, especially in metro areas, has all been converted to CCS.

> One way to determine the probability of what type of local trunking is
> in your area is if caller ID is available.  If you can have caller ID,
> then the local trunking is using CCS and thus no robbed bit signaling
> is involved at that end of any connection.

This is probably a little misleading. While the robbed bit signaling was for
use in per-trunk signaling for passing supervision information, merely
converting to SS7 signaling (i.e. making caller id available) doesn't
automatically make the robbed bits available. This also requires conversion
to B8ZS/ESF signaling.

I think you will find lots of places that have converted to SS7 still
have the older AMI/SF facilities in place thus limiting circuit bandwidth
to 56kb.


Tim Gorman   Southwestern Bell Tel Co   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 10 Jan 1995 09:11:06 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Rick Duggan)
writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, sohl,william h <[e-mail].
> com> wrote:

>> In article <[e-mail]>, Matthew P. Downs <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:

>>> Unless you use ISDN, you are using robbed-bit signalling between your
>>> premise and the Central Office. Unless like a previous poster had
>>> stated, the robbed bits only become important during call set-up and
>>> tear-down.  Ie. going on-hook and off-hook.  Otherwise the robbed bits
>>> will be 1's.

> In a sense, the robbed bits are only important during call set-up and
> tear-down.  However, since (a) we don't know when set-up/tear-down
> occurs and (b) we don't have control over where our PCM data goes, we
> can't use those bits at all.  Which gets back to why it's called
> robbed-bit signaling in the first place.  Their presence still affects
> the bandwidth that can be obtained.

It doesn't matter if the robbed bit is steady 0, steady 1, or whatever.
The robbed bit steals the LSB of the encoded PCM word and introduces
an error.  The effect, though small, is present NOT JUST during call
set up and tear down but wherever Robbed bit signalling is used.

Furthermore, the number of individual signalling links will effect the
total noise introduced. This is because the robbed bits occur every 6
frames and the multiframes of the Local Loop A, EC/IC Trunk A, IC/ED
Trunk B, and Local Loop B are NOT aligned. For MOST (that is more than
50% and much more likely 90%) of all long distance connections in the
US there will be more than 2 and as many 6 Robbed Bit links involved.
The impact on the S/N ratio can range from 2 to more than 10 db.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Sam Spens Clason)
Subject: Re: Christmas Greetings From AT&T
Date: 9 Jan 1995 19:29:57 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ari Wuolle) writes:

>> Well, we'll find out how this works over here in a couple of years.
>> Austria just joined the EU, and the EU has decreed the end of telecom
>> monopolies by the end of 1996 (or is it 1998)? We will all be faced
>> with the same problems and privileges then.

Ah, but I just read that the Comission has given in to pressure from
the former monopolies in the new member states Sweden and Finland.  It
was a very small article in todays paper that said that there would be
no EU-laws but rather "recommendations" regarding telco competition
issued by the commission.

Can anyone shed some light on the details of this?

> Finland also just joined EU, but our local and long distance monopolies
> ended already 1st January 1994. International call traffic was deregulated
> fully in summer 1994.

Sweden got deregulated mid 93.  In theory Sweden is more deregulated
than Britain, second only to NZ.  However there is still a de facto
monopoly since there is only one operator that offers local calls --
telia (former dept. of telecom).  That might change when Singapore
Telecom gets their Stockholm operation up and running (they just
bought a cable company with 1/4M subscribing households).  Only nobody
knows when that is going to be.

And since there is only one competitor on LD and int'l calls the
prizes aren't really as low as in Finland during office hours.

> You can always choose different carrier by dialling its carrier code
> before telephone number you are calling to. Telcom Finland is 101,
> Telivo 1041 and Kaukoverkko Ysi 109.

> Currently you cannot choose default international carrier - you must
> use correct international access code, which are now carrier
> dependent, 990 for Telecom Finland, 994 for Telivo and 999 for Finnet.
> (Old international access code was 990.) Hopefully this will change in
> 1996 when new 00 international access code will take over old ones.

We too have carrier dependent access codes.  007 is Tele2 and 009 (the
old access code) is Telia.  To call me using Tele2 would be 007 08 661
3882.  One cannot use Tele2 without being a subscriber, though it
costs nothing and is a pure formality this halts competition a lot.

It's hard to understand that people can't be bothered making *one*
toll free call and sign *one* paper to get 5-10% off their LD and
international calls.


Regards,

Sam Spens Clason   home: 08-661 3882  everywhere: 070-1234567

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: ISDN Over Wireless
Date: 9 Jan 1995 19:02:30 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Jared Enzler ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I live in an area where the telephone co. shows no interest in
> offering ISDN.  But the area is well covered by cellular phone
> systems.

> Questions: There appear to be several varieties of digital cellular on
> the way.  Do any of these have the potential to offer ISDN?  Which
> ones?  What sort of technical or other barriers are there to wireless
> ISDN?

ISDN is 144,000 bits per second, and that would take an awful lot of
bandwidth to transmit over radio.  I don't think CDPD or whatever they
call digital cellular has channels that are anywhere near that wide.

Find out if the phone company has a newer 5ESS switch.  If not then
they can't offer ISDN.  THe central office may have a 5ESS switch, but
the distance to your phone is too far.  They can get around that by
putting in a T1 line that would serve up to 24 subscribers in the
neighborhood, but it would cost money, and some telcos just don't want
to do that.


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] (Phil Ritter)
Subject: Re: Erlang Capacity
Organization: AirTouch Cellular, Los Angeles
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 15:00:15 GMT


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

> [e-mail] writes in TELECOM Digest V15 #2:

>> I am looking for information about Erlang Capacity Calculations for
>> land line based telecom networks. My main question is this:

>> In cellular, typical system design is according to Erlang B or Erlang
>> C traffic tables, and designed for 2% blocking (.02 G.O.S., Grade Of
>> Service).

[stuff deleted]

> Again, it has been a while but I thought Erlang C was not used for
> figuring blockage to offered load on a trunk group but instead for
> figuring holding time in queue while waiting for answer. Are you sure
> you use Erlang C in trunk blocking or do I have my tables mixed up :-) ?

Indeed, Erlang-B is used to predict blocking when a blocked-call is
discarded and Erlang-C is used when a blocked call is queued to wait
for a free trunk.  The ability of a cellular phone to produce a
minimum effort redial (the user just has to press send again -- many
phones will do this automatically) mimics queueing so well that
Erlang-C becomes a better predictor of blocking.


Phil Ritter   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John O'Keefe)
Subject: Re: Need an EBCDIC Spec - ebcdic.rq [1/1]
Organization: Northern Telecom, Network Application Systems
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 14:46:08 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Brent E. Boyko <[e-mail].
edu> wrote:

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

>> I'm working on a project which requires conversion of EBCDIC to
>> ASCII and visa-versa.  Does anyone know where I can find:

>>  1) a spec for the EBCDIC character set,
>>  2) source code which performs such translations and/or
>>  3) a library which performs these translations.

> The Unix utility "dd" can be used to convert USASCII to EBCDIC and
> vice versa.  For example, the following command would read the ascii
> file "text.file" and write it in 80-column EBCDIC format to mag tape
> drive 0, using 8000 byte blocks:

>    dd if=text.file of=/dev/rmt0 obs=8000 cbs=80 conv=ebcdic

> Source code is available as part of the GNU fileutils package. Get the
> file fileutils-3.12.tar.gz from the GNU ftp archive at prep.ai.mit.edu,
> gatekeeper.dec.com, or ftp.uu.net.

A word of caution with the block translation approach with EBCDIC to
ASCII.  If there are any packed-decimal fields in the record, it will
translate garbage. You need a utility that does field-by-field
translations for these fields.


Highest Regards,

John O'Keefe   [e-mail]

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

From: Judith Oppenheimer <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 08:12:32 -0500
Subject: Re:  NANP 800 Numbers From the UK


A week or two back, a query was posted by Jan Joris re free phone calls.

> What's happening? Is the Dutch PTT blocking calls that could be perfectly
> well completed? Or do the Britsh have a special agreement with the Americans
> that not valid in the Netherlands?  Who knows more?

I'm told that most of the decisions on whether to complete calls or
not are based on discussions at the Freephone Fourm.  This is a group
of (mostly marketing) people who provide service around the world.
The Freephone fourm has recently approved a bilateral agreement called
"plus freephone".  To dial a freephone number in an other country, you
dial:

      + (the international access code, 00 is europe 011 in US)
      CC  (the country code of the country the number belongs)
      XXX...XXX (the freephone number.)

So 00-1-800-xxx-xxxx is actually + followed by country code 1 followed
by the number.  If the country has signed up for bilateral agreement,
as soon as it sees 00, it routes to an international gateway function,
then it sees 1 and validates that as a valid country code (USA) and
then looks at the 800 and recognizes that as "suppress billing" and
completes the call.  Otherwise if they don't support this, they
recognize 800 as free and rejects the call after the fourth digit.

All switches must be able to read and route based on the first four
digits.  After Dec 31, 1996 they must be able to read and route based
on the first seven digits.  So it is quite normal for the call the be
rejected after four digits right now, and seven later.  (Dec 31, 1996 is
called Time-T after which all switches will accept phone numbers up to
15 digits (instead of 12) and route on seven digits instead of four).


Judith Oppenheimer

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Cohan)
Subject: Re: Sprint and Calls Within Your Service Area
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Al Cohan)
Organization: The Los Angeles Free-Net
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 07:32:57 GMT


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Javier Henderson) says:

> I just got off the phone with Sprint's customer service. Their special
> offer of one cent per minute for calls within your service area applies
> to all of Sprint customers, regarldess of what calling plan you're on.

> You need to dial 10333, but considering the savings, I don't mind. The
> charge is the same regardless of mileage.

> The offer will expire on Feb 28, 1995.

> I'm not associated with Sprint, other than as a mostly satisfied customer.
> The above applies to residential lines in Southern California. Other areas
> within California may have the same deal, you'd better check.

Most of what you say is *not* true. In response to several of my telecom
clients, I called Sprint (800 877-4040) on several occasions.  I was
misinformed 8 out of 10 calls.

No, I am not kidding.

The first few calls I was told just dialing 10333 is all that I had to
do.  Then I was told "I'm sorry, our promotion is for Sprint Customers
Only"!  In short, they didn't want my business. I never heard of a
"promotion" for existing customers ...

Finally I got a hold of a Sr. Supervisor after two days. The upshot of
what I was told is that you have to subscribe and be validated in
their switch or otherwise the LEC will get the billing at standard
(15c per minute) rates.

Also, the rate outside of the LATA 730 is standard rates and does not
carry the 1 cent per minute charge ... it only applies to residential
customers only, but they are working on a business customer plan to
roll out shortly.

After my account was validated, I called Sprint two more times, got
the name of the telemarketer, confirmation code and was lied to
again ...

I'd hate to be at the end of customer service when all of these 1 cent
calls come in at 15 cents and appear on the LEC billing!

I suggest you call Sprint three times and see if you get three
answers, then verify with a supervisor. I did this twice and both
times was told misleading information. I sure hope that they get this
straightened out because an organization the size of Sprint will have
tremendous problems unraveling this misinformation. Most of there
telemarkets are *not* located in California.

Good Luck. Please e-mail me with your results.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fraser)
Subject: Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code
Date: 10 Jan 1995 04:41:31 GMT
Organization: Wimsey Information Services


And while we're at it, are there any 10XXX[X] codes assigned in
Canada? Mexico?  Since at least Canada is part of the historical
numbering plan, and since we have begun to experience the joys of
competitive toll calling, and since the "dominant" carriers must give
equal access to other carriers when a subscriber dials a leading "1",
it seems sensible that these carriers might just want to have 10XXXX.

Anyone comment?


Mark

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 09:45:54 GMT
From: Joe George <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is this any stranger than a newspaper
> having a three digit number of its own, ie 311, like that newspaper
> in, where is it, Georgia?    PAT]

Yup, in Atlanta the local rag (also known as the {Atlanta Journal-
Constitution} bought 511 from BellSouth for a classified search service
(and other services). It's 50 cents a call but you get three free
calls per month.  BellSouth also sold out on 711 to a job search
company, but I don't know much about it.


Joe George ([e-mail], [e-mail])
(Please don't use '[e-mail]' anymore.)

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

From: [e-mail] (David Leibold)
Subject: Re: More CO Codes For Each NPA - Any Telcos Take Advantage?
Organization: Toronto FreeNet
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 07:18:14 GMT


A correction and a clarification on my article on NXXes in NPAs
(originally posted from gvc.com instead of here) ...

1) While St. John's is the capital of the Canadian province of
Newfoundland, there is the oft-confused Saint John, New Brunswick
which I was a bit too hasty to proclaim as a provincial capital. That
privilege, I believe, actually goes to another of the New Brunswick
cities.

2) There have been N0/1X exchanges in some area codes already, of
course (212, 213, 312, etc). The focus of the posting, to clarify, was
those area codes that did *not* have N0/1X CO codes before now, such
as NPA 506 or 807 where there aren't that many NXX in service. In
other words, will telcos in those cases assign N0/1X codes because
they are now able to, rather than because they have to?


David Leibold     [e-mail]

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

From: Jhupf <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Flat Rate Cellular Phone Service
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 13:09:07 EST
Organization: News & Observer Public Access


On Wed, 4 Jan 1995, Andrew Laurence wrote:

> Jhupf <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Cellular One of Triangle here in the Triangle in North Carolina offers
>> full local access on weekends for $10 a month.  We were considering
>> going for it until we realized we had an accmulation of more than 575
>> minutes of local calling credit we haven't been able to use during the
>> past 14 months.

> Are you saying that Cellular One lets you carry unused minutes from
> your allowance over to future months? GTE Mobilnet here in the San
> Francisco Bay Area has a "use 'em or lose 'em" policy.

Sorry for any misunderstanding; the 60 minutes a month I get with my calling
plan are on a "use 'em or lose 'em" basis. What I have accumulated are the
balance of the bonus time I got when I initially signed on to CellularOne
plus what I got when I renewed my service with them after the first
year. I was surprised when I got my bill to see that they carried the
balance of the first years bonus forward and added to the new bonus!

The balance is available to use after I have gone through my monthly
allocation under the plan I have.

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: MANs in USA
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 12:09:10 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek & Newman Inc.


In article <3ej414$[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:

> I need some help in getting info about Metropolitan Area Networks
> in USA.

You may note that none of the early replies came from the USA, which is
all you asked for!

This is because there are essentially no MANs in the USA.  They aren't
a major commercial force.  The telephone companies cannot offer 802.6
MANs because 802.6 requires that the telephone company own the bridge
at the customer site, but US telephone companies are prohibited from
owning customer premise equipment.

Some US telephone comanies offer SMDS, a connectionless data service
which was originally run over 802.6 facilities.  But most SMDS
nowadays is run over HDLC point-to-point circuits.  Some companies own
private MANs, often using FDDI which may be using "dark fiber" leased
from a telephone company, and in a few cases telephone companies offer
FDDI MAN services.  But none of these amount to a lot of business.
The major high-bandwidth carrier services are DS3 leased lines and,
coming Real Soon Now, ATM.


Fred R. Goldstein   k1io    [e-mail]
Bolt Beranek & Newman Inc., Cambridge MA  USA   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Re: Cellular NAM and ESN
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 1995 21:35:44 +0200


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Greg
Segallis) wrote:

> Can two cellular phones be programmed to the same NAM, while their
> ESN's are different, so that either phone can be used on one number?
> Assume only one phone can be on at a time (e.g.  I have a car phone I
> use while on the road and a portable I use when I'm away from my car).
> Does the cellular carrier use the NAM to connect calls or the ESN, or
> both?  If the ESN must be the same, can I alter the one to match the
> other?  This would not be done to steal anyone else's service, just to
> allow me the convenience of using both my phones as the situation
> requires/allows.  What are the legal issues in doing this?

To which Pat replied that it would be a very bad idea to do it, leaving the
door open for theft of airtime (well, Pat did say many other things, but let
me get to my point :-)

GSM solves the problem of two phones (or more) for one line in a very nice
way: the subscriber identity is totally separated from the terminal: it is
located on a SIM (Subscriber Identity Module) card.  This way, you can
have as many phones as you mant and still have one single phone number:
simply plug your card in whatever phone you intend to use! You may even plug
your card in somebody else's phone, or in a rented car phone, for instance.
Very convenient, indeed. Of course, the terminal still has an identity, and,
if reported stolen, can be blocked by the carrier, no matter who is using it.
And thanks to sophisticated algorithms, it is not easy to steal airtime by
mimicking a SIM card (at least that's we're all being told!).

Does anybody know whether there are other types of cellular networks
offering such a feature (i.e. being able to use different mobile
phones with the same number, without opening the door to phreaks)?


Eric Tholome
23, avenue du Centre            [e-mail]
78180 Montigny le Bretonneux    phone: [phone]
                    France      fax: same number, call first!

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #20
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25643;
          10 Jan 95 10:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23379; Tue, 10 Jan 95 05:20:46 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23372; Tue, 10 Jan 95 05:20:43 CST
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 05:20:43 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #21

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 10 Jan 95 05:20:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 21

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers (M. Weiss)
    Re: Cellphone Now Giving ANI? (Mr. James Holland)
    Re: Need Information on EXCEL (Gerry Gollwitzer)
    Re: Need Information on IS-54 (Glenn Shirley)
    Re: "High-end" Phone Products (Michael N. Marcus)
    Re: Information Wanted on Northern Telecom Phone (Michael N. Marcus)
    Re: MANs in USA (Roger Fajman)
    Re: Emergency Numbers in Various Countries (Carl Moore)
    Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1? (Ted Hadley)
    Re: Phone Rates From Israel (Jay Kaplowitz)
    Re: Interim Results of FCC Auctions (Raj Gajwani)
    Re: NANP Changes (Fran S. Menzel)
    Re: Telecom Texts (Mark Peacock)
    Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK (Ari Wuolle)
    ISDN Wish List (Syd Weinstein)
    General Datacom ATM Switches Sign Deal With Siemens (Peter Granic)
    Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (Robert Casey)
    Digital Cellular in the USA ([e-mail])
    Re: Computer Caller-ID (Seymour Dupa)
    Starting a Ratepayers Association (Aryeh M. Friedman)
    PCS Auction Results (M.J. Sutter)
    ETSI Standards - Where? (Gabor Lajos)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Mitch Weiss)
Subject: Re: AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1995 22:07:04


In article <[e-mail]> A Alan Toscano <atoscano@Starbase.
NeoSoft.COM> writes:

> Calls within the United States, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin
> Islands during off-peak hours (from 5 p.m. to 8 a.m. weekdays, and all
> weekend) will cost 15 cents a minute, whether the caller or receiver
> pays.  Calls during peak hours (from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. weekdays) will
> cost 25 cents a minute.  Rates for some in-state calls may vary.
> Calls made to or from other countries will be charged the regular AT&T
> rates for those countries.

Who pays for the call?  Is it the caller or the owner of the number?
If it is the caller, would I be charged for an international call if I
call someone who happens to be overseas at the time?


Mitchell Weiss   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mr. James Holland)
Subject: Re: Cellphone Now Giving ANI?
Date: 9 Jan 1995 15:49:16 GMT
Organization: Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro, Tennessee


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

> I guess NYNEX Mobile has made some progress, Today I dialed 1-800-MY-ANI-IS
> from my Cellular phone ... and guess what ... it came back with my
> cellular phone number. In the past it would come back with a WEIRD
> number.

> Is NYNEX Mobile the first company to pass along the ANI from cellular
> phones?

The ANI returned on my cellular service (CellOne of Tennessee) is that
of the business office of the local 911 office. Any idea why that is,
or if it's only a fluke? Kind of unnerving to call back the ANI to my
phone and be greeted with "911, can I help you". It's NOT their actual
911 emergency line, and other cell phones in the area get the same ANI
number as I.


James Holland   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerry Gollwitzer)
Subject: Re: Need Information on EXCEL
Date: 9 Jan 1995 15:54:57 GMT
Organization: Exec-PC


Bill Dankert ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Has anyone heard of, or participated in, Excel Telecommunications,
> Inc.?  It is a long distance service provider that uses network
> marketing instead of a sales force.  Please post, or email me
> directly, any comments concerning Excel.  Your help will be greatly
> appreciated.

Bill,

I have been with Excel since the end of July.  I have also been a
telecom consultant for almost four years.  Excel is working great for
us.  They really have put together an great income producing program.

Let me know if you have further interest.


Gerry

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

From: [e-mail] (UL ENG)
Subject: Re: Need Information on IS-54
Date: 9 Jan 1995 21:26:15 +1100
Organization: Stanilite Electronics Pty. Ltd. Sydney, Australia


Dharshana P. Jayasuriya <[e-mail]> writes:

> I would appreciate very much if someone can recommend a good book or
> some other material which has sufficient information on the architecture
> and protocols of the US digital standard IS 54.

> Is it possible to buy a copy of the standard itself? (I mean not the
> whole thousands of pages but a summary.) Or is it strictly proprietary?

You can order the standard (its $US 218) from:

Global Engineering Documents
15 Inverness Way East
Englewood CO 80112
Ph. [phone]
    [phone]
Fax [phone]

Don't forget your international prefix and the 1 for the U.S before
the above numbers. I haven't tried the 800 number above so I don't
know if it works outside the U.S. or not.

My employer regularly buys standards through them (they are the
official EIA/TIA supplier) by mail from Australia so you shouldn't
have any problems.

Note the above phone numbers are for international enquiries (outside
the U.S and Canada) and there are other numbers for the different
regions within North America.


Hope that helps,

Glenn

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

From: [e-mail] (MNM 914)
Subject: Re: "High-end" Phone Products
Date: 10 Jan 1995 08:05:33 GMT
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (MNM 914)


I'm 99.9995832% sure there are no three-line cordlesses, other than
those dedicated to work with specific multi-line phone systems.

Panasonic KX-T3980 is my first choice for two-line analog cordlesses,
and Uniden 9200 and Vtech Platinum (and similar ATT 9132, if it's
finally available) are good 900MHz digital phones.

There is a lot of discussion of these products in the phone equipment
section of the Consumer Electronics Forum on CompuServe (I'm the sysop).


Michael N. Marcus   CompuServe: 74774,2166
AOL: MNM914  Netcom: [e-mail]
Prodigy: Duh?  Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (MNM 914)
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on Northern Telecom Phone
Date: 10 Jan 1995 08:05:37 GMT
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (MNM 914)


Hi, Keith.

Your name is familiar; have we spoken on CompuServe?

It's an amazing piece of equipment. It's even smart enough to put a
message in the right mailbox based on its Caller ID. I'm presently
testing one, and reviews will be in the library of the phone equipment
section of Consumer Electronics Forum on CIS, and in {Teleconnect}
magazine, and probably {Home Office Computing}.


Michael N. Marcus

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

From: Roger Fajman <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 1995  23:06:21 EST
Subject: Re: MANs in USA


> I need some help in getting info about Metropolitan Area Networks
> in USA. The questions are:

> 1. What is the physical structure of MANs (fiber, coax)?
> 2. If fiber what is the protocol (fddi, atm)?
> 3. Who is the main investor (banks)?
> 4. Does banks use MAN for data transmission?
> 5. What services are provided, and which are most popular?

Bell Atlantic (the local phone company) operates a metropolitan FDDI
network (called FNS) in the Washington, DC area.  There are multiple
interconnected FDDI rings covering different parts of the area.  They
offer 10 Mbps Ethernet and 4 and 16 Mbps token ring connections.  The
service looks like a Ethernet or token ring to the customers.  Network
Systems brouters are located in Bell Atlantic central offices.  Fiber
Ethernet or token ring connections run to the customer locations.  I
believe that the fiber is single mode, both for the FDDI ring and the
drops.  Filters in the brouters prevent customers from seeing each
others traffic.


Roger Fajman                        Telephone:  [phone]
National Institutes of Health       BITNET:     RAF@NIHCU
Bethesda, Maryland, USA             Internet:   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 20:59:05 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Emergency Numbers in Various Countries


Telephone dials vary from one country to the next.  As set up
here in country code 1 (U.S., Canada, and part of the Caribbean
area), a zero is 10 dial clicks, and any other digit is its face
value of clicks.  So 112 would use 4 clicks and 999 would use 27
clicks, but those are not in use here for emergency.

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 95 12:56:43 PST
From: [e-mail] (Ted Hadley)
Subject: Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1?


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

> There is a company in California called Cylink.  They make several
> different kinds of crypto gear for communications.  I'm unable to come
> up with a telephone number for them at the moment.

Telephone number is 408-735-5800.


Ted A. Hadley  [e-mail]
Cylink Corporation, 910 Hermosa Ct, Sunnyvale, CA 94086  USA    408-735-5847

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

From: [e-mail] (JayK372)
Subject: Re: Phone Rates From Israel
Date: 9 Jan 1995 19:50:52 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JayK372)


I believe that you can call from Israel for about 80 cents per minute
from midnight Israel time to 8 a.m.  My recollection is that the
highest rate, during the day, is about $1.50 per minute.  This is via
Bezeq, the PTT.


Jay Kaplowitz

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

From: [e-mail] (Raj Gajwani)
Subject: Re: Interim Results of FCC Auctions
Date: 10 Jan 1995 02:15:57 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts


Brian Miner ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Has anyone seen results from the FCC auctions of the PCS licenses on
> the net ?

FTP, gopher, or WWW to "fcc.gov" for full results and documents.

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

From: f.s.menzel <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1995 13:31:32 -0500
Subject: Re: NANP Changes


On 22 Dec 94 Joe Bergstein wrote:

> I thought the NANP changes weren't going into effect until 7/1/95.
> Now I hear that CPE vendors are harrasing small customers with
> outrages upgrade prices to support NANP changes as of 1/1/95.  My
> understanding was that changes were permissive (both old and new A/C
> OK) until 7/1/95, at which point they would become mandatory.  Is this
> correct?  If not, please update.

Since I'm not sure of the dates, I'll assume they're correct and
provide the following humble defense of my employer, a CPE vendor.

Many of our customers will be faced with system upgrades to deal with
the NANP change.  It would be irresponsible for the vendors to wait
until the last minute to inform customers of the issue, since it would
be impossible to fill the demand if all NANP system upgrades were
ordered during the final month of premissive dialing.  For our larger
customers, expenditures for equipment upgrades typically need to be
budgeted in the preceeding year.

A small comment on the "outrageous" upgrade prices: in cases where
customers have older systems, the NANP upgrade is likely to require
bringing the system up the level of systems being currently sold, a
costly procedure.  My employer,for one, did lots of soul-searching
related to NANP issues, and ended up generating NANP releases for many
(but not all) versions of our systems in order to keep the price
reasonable.  On the bright side, once you do upgrade, you'll probably
find lots of things in addition to NANP to appreciate about your
upgraded system.


Fran Menzel, AT&T Global Business Communication Systems

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

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 1995 12:29:47 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telecom Texts


A text that I've used is Engineering and Operations of the Bell System,
2nd Edition, published by AT&T (c) 1981 or 1983.  I may be slightly
off on the title since someone seems to have nicked my copy.  It
doesn't cover recent digital developments but does a nice clear job
discussing the POTS network.  It's not full of jargon; a good
introductory text.  Indeed, I believe it was originally written for
new hires at Bell Labs.


Mark Peacock
Deloitte & Touche Management Consulting
Detroit, Michigan

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 03:37:11 +0200
From: [e-mail] (Ari Wuolle)
Subject: Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK


> All of a sudden, I can now dial 1-800 numbers from the UK. There is a
> few seconds of silence, and then an American female voice tells me
> that this call will *not* be free, but charged at standard direct-dial
> rates.  If I don't want to pay, I should hang up now.

Just the same here from Finland -- but only if I call using Telecom
Finland. (990-1-800-XXX-XXXX).

When I try to call using Telivo, I will get tritone meaning number is
not in use after 994-1-800.

Finnet lets me dial the whole number 999-1-800-XXX-XXXX and then gives
tritone.

(Telecom Finland is former monopoly carrier here. Telivo is owned by
Finnish (electrical) power company Imatran Voima Oy. Finnet is owned
by private telephone companies in co-operation. Telivo and Finnet have
had licence to carry international trafic to everywhere from last
summer.)

> Just for fun, I tried 1-800-MY-ANI-IS. It told me: "702 000 5555" !

I got exactly the same number. Pity that only one carrier here let US
800 calls go through. It would have been nice to see what ANI would
read back when using other carriers.


Ari Wuolle

e-mail        [e-mail]    s-mail    Kolkekannaksentie 10 B 4
telephone    + 358  0 509 2073        02720  ESPOO
cellphone    + 358 49 431 140                FINLAND
fax        + 358  0 428 429  (temporary)

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

From: [e-mail] (Syd Weinstein)
Subject: ISDN Wish List
Date: 9 Jan 1995 12:06:36 -0500
Organization: Myxa Corporation, Huntingdon Valley, PA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Looking for a product that meets a wish list of mine:

Basically I am looking for an ISDN TA with the following
features:

    1. RS-232 interface up to 115.2kbps;
    2. accepts 1B call and performs compression to get
        115.2 async out of it;
    3. Desirable, but not mandataory, can accept two calls, one per
        B, and take each to 115.2 async individually.
        (likewise can make two outbound, one per B using
        each of the RS-232 interfaces);
    4. Dials with the AT style command set.

optional feature:
    O-1. Accepts 230.4kbps RS-232 serial interface and
        uses compression to make use of it via 2B single
        call;

    O-2. Imbedded V.34 modem, accepts calls from POTS lines
        by using modem portion and ISDN lines using
        TA portion.

Anybody know of anything?

Please e-mail to me and I will summarize to the group.


Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP          Elm Coordinator - Current 2.4PL24
Myxa Corporation                       Projected 3.0 Release: ??? ?,199?
[e-mail] or dsinc!syd     Voice: [phone], FAX: [phone]
Welcome Page: http://www.myxa.com  Elm WWW: http://www.myxa.com/elm.html

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Granic)
Subject: General Datacom ATM Switches Sign Deal With Siemens
Date: 9 Jan 1995 20:43:31 -0500
Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-4151  Voice: 416-363-8676


Last week General Datacom announced that it had signed an agreement
with German Telecom multinational Siemens in which Siemens will roll
out their ATM network services with General Datacom switches.  This is
the second big announcement which General Datacom made regarding ATM
switch sales, the other being to a large Canadian telecommunications
provider.

Does anyone know if they are having success in the U.S. right now?  I
did not really know about them being into ATM until a few months ago.
I thought the big players at the moment were shaping up to be Fore
Systems, IBM, Hughes, and Newbridge, but seeing that GDC is rolling
out switches to large data service providers it is obvious that they
are also a company trying to take the ATM market as well.

Have AT&T and MCI announced which ATM switches they will go with?
Fore Systems is apparently the only ATM manufacturer which is making
money on ATM right now.  I would think that this means they are
succeeding with the large U.S. market right now which generates the
most ATM revenue.  They have an excellent range of products, with the
most comprehensive set of desktop to desktop solutions (according to
what I've read).  Our company has not moved to ATM yet (we are just
pondering regular switching!), so I haven't even had a chance to play
with the technology yet.  If somebody has gotten their hands on some
of the switches, and would have an opinion on how they would rate the
products, I would appreciate it if you would email me.


Thanks,

Peter Granic

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Casey)
Subject: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 04:44:41 GMT


Today, I was in the airport that serves Atlanta, GA.  I tried to place a
few 1-800 toll free calls, and had a lot of trouble.  Numbers I know
to be good got responses of "invalid number".  I'd reach for another pay
phone, and got thru to the number. I tried the same numbers later that
day (while getting hung up with the dead Newark airport mess) in the
Atlanta airport and got more "invalid number"; another attempt got me
thru, then I got cut off.  Pay phones were labeled "PTC" (or something
like that) and also said that the local exchange didn't "own" these
phones.  Some phones didnt work at all (bad keypads, or just dead).  I
don't know who "PTC" is, but they really SUCK!

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 01:01:59 EST
From: [e-mail] (Phydeaux's PC)
Subject: Digital Cellular in the USA


Exactly how is digital cellular being implemented here in the US?  I
was under the impression that the control and voice channels were
digitally encoded and then sent between the phone and the tower.
Today a dealer for a cellphone company told me that only the control
signals are encoded.  Somehow I don't believe him.

Assuming that the signals *are* encoded, how are they doing it? Are
they using the same analog bandwidth more efficiently via the digital
signal?


reb   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Seymour Dupa)
Subject: Re: Computer Caller-ID
Date: 10 Jan 1995 00:28:22 -0500
Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc.


Thomas Fitzurka ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Does anyone know of a software program that enables you to have your
> computer identify caller's phone numbers? I saw a movie called
> Brainscan that had a computer, using caller id, identify the caller
> and tell the person in an "igor" voice, which I perticularly liked,
> that "Bobby is calling master". The idea was really interesting to me
> and I would like to get something like it.

  Rochell Communications has caller ID unit with a serial port that
feeds the caller id info to a serial port on a computer.  They also
have a program that reads the computer's serial port, look if the
number has called before, and if so, diaplays the info.  They are at
800-542-8808 or 512-794-0088.

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

From: cash![e-mail] (Aryeh M. Friedman)
Subject: Starting a Ratepayers Association
Date: 10 Jan 1995 10:12:27 GMT
Organization: UCSC Dept of Econ


How do I start a effective ratepayers association to protest among
other things GTE of California's *OUTRAGOUS* service fee hike from
$8/month to $20/month for flat rate?  A similor rate hike has happened
to lifeline and measured costumers.  BTW I have the support of most of
the people I know to do this.  Also I study telecom in school so I
know the basics of the legal aspects of the industry.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Instead of *starting* one why don't you
*join* an existing one?  There are many effective ones throughout the
USA.  Save yourself a lot of hassles by working with one of the established
organizations which deal with these things.  PAT]

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

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 1995 20:59:48 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: PCS Auction Results


When will the results (winners) of the most recent round of PCS
license auctions be made public? How are the results announced? Does
FCC maintain a Gopher that could access this type of info? Thanks in
advance.


Mike


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: See an earlier message in this issue for
a discussion of interim results. The FCC maintains a public file on all
this at 'fcc.gov'. Use FTP, Gopher or similar services to get there.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gabor Lajos)
Subject: ETSI Standards - Where?
Date: 10 Jan 1995 05:00:26 -0600


Hello everybody,

I am looking for ANY information about how to get ETSI (also pre-ETSI)
standards in any form (eg. hardcopy, CD-Rom, postcript file).

It can be an office from where I have to order, or an 'FTP site' or
anything.

I wrote 'FTP site' since I can't do real FTP to the outside world, only
that E-mail operated fake FTP is available for me. Thanks in advance.


Best Regards,

Gabor

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #21
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01381;
          10 Jan 95 19:56 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04640; Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:16:11 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04631; Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:16:09 CST
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:16:09 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #22

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 10 Jan 95 13:16:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 22

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    BA-VA Drops Touch-Tone Charge (Phillip Dampier)
    NPA/NXX Report for January 1995 (David Esan)
    Caller ID Deluxe in N.J. (Phillip Dampier)
    Microwave-Data Problem (Doug H. Kerr)
    Urgent Help Needed With European Phone Systems (Petar Nikic)
    Re: GSM SIM Implementation (Robohn Scott)
    Re: Cell Phone PINs (A. Padgett Peterson)
    Call Unblocking Now Available From US West (Seattle) (Chris Osburn)
    ANI Information in Realtime (Eric Essman)
    AT&T MCI and Sprint E-mail Addresses Wanted (Piotr Roman Jarzynka)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:03:40
Subject: BA-VA Drops Touch-Tone Charge


           BELL ATLANTIC-VIRGINIA DROPS TOUCH-TONE CHARGE;
              BROADENS OFFERING TO LOW-INCOME CUSTOMERS

RICHMOND, VA -- Bell Atlantic-Virginia's telephone bills were reduced
beginning Jan. 1 with the elimination of the charge for Touch-Tone
service, saving customers approximately $23 million a year.

Also, effective Jan. 1, the company expanded the offering of its
low-cost Virginia Universal Service Plan, making it available to all
USDA food stamp recipients.  Both moves were prompted by a order
issued last October by the State Corporation Commission establishing
a new form of regulation for Bell Atlantic.

Residential customers currently pay a monthly fee of 60 cents per line
for Touch-Tone; business customers pay $1.85 per line; larger businesses,
with PBX systems, pay $2.46 for each PBX trunk.

Roughly 90% of the company's two million customers now subscribe to
Touch-Tone.  Technicians are currently converting all of the remaining
rotary lines to Touch-Tone.  Rotary- and pulse-dial phones work on a
Touch-Tone line.

"If a customer wishes to switch from rotary service to Touch-Tone, he
or she needs only to plug in a Touch-Tone phone.  No call to our
business office is necessary," explained Hugh Stallard, Bell Atlantic-
Virginia's president and CEO.

                Virginia Universal Service Plan

The company's expansion of the Virginia Universal Service Plan is
expected to increase the number of customers eligible by roughly 50
percent.

The plan, which the company launched in 1988, is currently offered
only to those eligible for Medicaid. There are some 539,000 Virginians
now receiving Medicaid benefits.  Total food stamp recipients in the
state number over 637,000, some of whom also receive Medicaid.

The Virginia Universal Service Plan (VSUP) provides telephone service
to low-income individuals for $2.50 a month.  Subscribers to this
service are permitted 30 outgoing calls per monthly billing period at
no additional charge.  Every call over 30 is billed at 9.6 cents per
call.  VUSP service does not permit any of the enhanced services such
as call waiting or three-way calling.

Food stamp recipients interested in subscribing to the Virginia Uni-
versal Service Plan should contact the Bell Atlantic business office
for additional details.

Bell Atlantic Corporation, based in Philadelphia, is the parent of
companies which provide a full array of local exchange telecom-
munications 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, including a 42 percent economic interest in Grupo
Iusacell, Mexico's largest independent cellular company.  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] (David Esan)
Subject: NPA/NXX Report For January 1995
Date: 10 Jan 95 16:19:51 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corporation, Pittsford NY


This is my quarterly report on the number of exchanges in each NPA in
the NANP.  It is derived from information in FCC #10.  This is article
#15 in the series.  (Note: I missed the 3rd quarter 1994 article.
Busy busy on a new database, and preparing for the 1995 numbering
changes.)

FCC #10 is a tariff issued by BellCore that contains all the area
codes, exchange combinations in the North American Numbering Plan
(NANP).  It also contains lata information and V&H coordinate
information.  There is a lot of additional information that I don't
use, so I won't add here.  It is available through a number of
sources.  The one closest to the FCC is ITS, which can be contacted at
202-857-3800.  My company compiles this information for use in its
products and does not seem to be interested in selling this
information.  Queries are still flowing through the bureaucracy.

I have used pages that are effective prior to January 20, 1995.  I am
not responsible for the information supplied in FCC #10.

I have not included the following in my counts of exchanges:

  - NXX's that are not dialable by a standard user (ie nxx's that begin
    with a 1 or 0).

  - Mexican exchanges in the 52? series of area codes.  I've got them,
    you can dial them with 011, but they're not really NPAs.

  - Exchanges that are non-dialable in the 88? series of area codes.  I've
    got those also, but you can't dial them, so I'm not including them.

    Numbers that begin with 88 are nondialable stations in the US, Canada and
    Mexico.  They are ranches in the middle of the Nevada or Texas desert,
    or isolated outpost of civilization (always wanted to use that phrase) in
    the tundra of Canada.  I find place names like the Bar J Ranch, Double B
    Ranch, and JD Dye, Texas, Amargosa, Corncreek and Reese Valley, NV, and
    Chick Lake, Redknife and Taglu, NT.  I gather they are ringdown stations,
    or radio-telephone stations.  [It has been noted in c.d.t. that at least
    two of these numbers are for a bordello on the NV-CA border.]


The fields are:
                        ------------ rank last in July, 1994
          213: 736 (1, 7)
  area code --^^^  ^^^     ^------- number of new exchanges
                    |-------------- total number of exchanges

206: 775 (52,  4)  713: 719 (33,  7)    404: 668 (61, 19)   212: 653 (11, 10)
205: 764 (24,  1)  703: 679 (15,  8)    503: 666 (46, 17)   214: 652 (45, 20)
602: 753 (41,  6)  813: 673 (13, 11)    615: 660 (32, 12)   314: 639 (34, 22)
215: 735 ( 9,  3)  303: 671 (28,  9)    216: 657 (34, 14)   203: 630 (46, 25)
708: 732 (17,  5)  803: 669 (47, 15)    305: 653 (42, 18)   604: 623 (-1, 13)


1. 206 - split is in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.
2. 205 - split is in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.
3. 602 - split is planned.      Number should be reduced by split.
4. 215 - split is in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.
5. 708 - split is in progress.  Number should be reduced by split.

6. 713 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.
7. 703 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.
8. 813 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.
9. 303 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.

11. 404 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.
13. 615 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.
15. 305 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.
19. 203 - split is planned.  Number should be reduced by split.

Note: The Los Angeles Area (213/818/310) area will receive an overlay area
      code.  While none of these NPAs are in the top 20 this is an area of
      rapid telephone growth.  There is also at least one split (the Bahamas)
      in the 809 area code, and perhaps a second (Puerto Rico).

->  The NPA that is largest and is not splitting nor has plans, at this time,
    to split, is 803.

->   The 3 smallest NPA's remain the same

      413: 143 - Western Massachusetts  (+6 exchange)
      906: 117 - Michigan's Upper Peninsula (no change)
      807: 109 - Western Ontario (+1 exchange)


->   The NPAs with the greatest growth rates are:

     NPA   % growth

         917   26.73
         810   11.46
         910   10.83
         404   10.04
         508    8.79
         816    8.63
         312    8.02
         919    7.92
         210    7.74
         408    7.60

->   The 10 NPAs with the least growth rates are:

     NPA   % growth
         807      0
         418      0
         316      0
         306      0
         304      0
         604     -0.16
         204     -0.27
         802     -1.06
         706     -6.29
         313    -43.51

-> There are 70 NPAs (48% of the total) that have exchanges that are in the
   x00 to x19 range.  They are:

         201      214        314          503    615      714        818
         202      215        317          506    616      718        903
         203      216        334          510    619      803        904
         204      301        360          512    630      805        905
         205      303        404          517    703      808        908
         206      305        407          519    704      809        909
         209      306        408          602    706      810        910
         210      310        410          609    707      813        916
         212      312        415          610    708      816        917
         213      313        416          612    713      817        919

-> Just for grins:

   The most used NXX (not counting 555) is 754 used in 122 npas.

   The least used are:
        211 and 311 used only in 212, and 959 used only in 808.

I should note here that these are exchanges that are truly in use, not for
special calling, but in general day to day use.

All the NPAs and the number of nxx's in each are listed below:

206: 775  612: 616  818: 493  810: 418    605: 373  819: 317  806: 268
205: 764  904: 612  407: 493  504: 418    418: 371  610: 312  709: 268
602: 753  501: 602  410: 488  301: 415    805: 369  613: 311  608: 265
215: 735  809: 592  412: 481  313: 414    207: 365  218: 310  706: 262
708: 732  312: 592  614: 478  801: 413    505: 363  202: 308  603: 259
713: 719  310: 592  913: 472  219: 408    419: 361  334: 307  917: 256
703: 679  619: 586  508: 470  213: 407    204: 359  808: 303  417: 229
813: 673  817: 568  601: 466  914: 401    618: 358  606: 300  308: 219
303: 671  804: 566  415: 462  908: 401    517: 356  903: 298  707: 211
803: 669  405: 565  515: 461  316: 401    319: 354  812: 295  719: 209
404: 668  717: 543  516: 458  502: 400    304: 353  712: 294  630: 196
503: 666  816: 541  306: 458  408: 396    702: 351  518: 292  307: 194
615: 660  414: 523  402: 451  919: 395    609: 344  360: 290  506: 188
216: 657  514: 520  714: 450  406: 394    915: 337  315: 287  802: 185
305: 653  317: 517  416: 442  512: 390    909: 334  507: 283  607: 183
212: 653  718: 511  910: 440  510: 389    409: 334  705: 282  401: 160
214: 652  513: 510  716: 439  318: 389    208: 334  902: 281  302: 146
314: 639  916: 504  209: 428  912: 384    905: 333  814: 278  413: 143
203: 630  201: 503  704: 424  701: 383    815: 333  901: 274  906: 117
604: 623  617: 501  616: 423  217: 381    918: 325  509: 271  807: 109
403: 622  210: 501  907: 421  519: 376    715: 325  309: 270


David Esan      [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phillip Dampier)
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:03:53
Subject: Caller ID Deluxe in N.J.


               BELL ATLANTIC PLANS NEW CALLER ID SERVICE

Newark, N.J. -- Bell Atlantic customers in New Jersey will be able to
see both the telephone number and name of the person calling with a
new Caller ID service the company proposed December 30th.

If approved by the state Board of Public Utilities (BPU), Caller ID
Deluxe could be available early next year to residential and business
customers in areas equipped for the service.

"Caller ID Deluxe offers our customers a better way to manage their
calls and to achieve an added sense of security," said Dennis Bone,
Bell Atlantic-New Jersey vice president-externally affairs.  "In our
customer research, nearly 100 percent of customers said that the
ability to see the phone number and names of callers is a valuable
feature for them."

The customer research was done by Bell Atlantic in Richmond, Virginia,
where the company conducted a successful trial of Caller ID Deluxe.
Statewide introduction of the service began in Virginia in August
(1994) and it subsequently was introduced in the Bell Atlantic
territory in Maryland, and West Virginia.  Nationally, a total of 24
states now offer Caller ID Deluxe.

Caller ID Deluxe displays the name as it appears on a residential
customer's telephone account, not necessarily as it appears in the
Bell Atlantic telephone directory, up to 15 characters, with the last
name appearing first.  For example, a call from the John Doe household
may show, "Dow John."  The Doe telephone number also would be dis-
played.  If no one answers when the call comes in, the Dow name and
number could be held in memory and accessed later.  The names and
phone numbers of businesses will be displayed as they appear in the
white pages of their Bell Atlantic telephone directories.

The proposed monthly charge for the new service is $7.50 per month for
residential and $9.50 for business customers.  Customers also need a
display unit that is capable of displaying a name and telephone number.
The units may be purchased from a Bell Atlantic affiliate or from a
number of other retailers.  Display unit prices range from about $35
for a basic unit to about $120 for one built into the telephone.

Bell Atlantic-New Jersey was the first company in the country to offer
Caller ID statewide beginning in 1988 after a one-year trial.  The
company will continue to offer regular Caller ID that displays the in-
coming caller's telephone number and costs $6.50 per month for resi-
dential and $8.50 per month for business customers.

Those who do not want their name or phone number shown on a Caller ID
or Caller ID Deluxe display unit can elect, at no charge, to have
their information blocked from going forward 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.  It's
available automatically to Caller ID customers and also would be
avail- able to Caller ID Deluxe customers under the company's
proposal.  To activate it, Touch-Tone users dial *77 and rotary users
dial 1177.  It can be deactivated by dialing *87 and 1187.

Bell Atlantic Corporation, based in Philadelphia, is the parent of
companies that provide a full array of local exchange telecom-
munication 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, including a 42 percent economic interest in Grupo
Iusacell, Mexico's largest independent cellular company.  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: Doug H. Kerr <[e-mail]>
Organization: Amarillo College PCAD-ML
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 09:28:33 GMT-6
Subject: Microwave-Data Problem


I'm having a problem here at our college with a remote site which I
connect via microwave. We have two NEC 2400 connected and also use a
data channel off the T-1 for our router which connects our lans. I
have not had any problems with my telephones but the lan has had
severe problems. Here lies the problem: the data people say it's the
microwave or T-1. I run a data channel also that is used for a CCIS link
between switches and have no problems with this so I assume it is not
in the micro or T-1. How can you prove the origin of the problem, or
monitor the system without the high cost test equipment?

Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Petar Nikic)
Subject: Urgent Help Needed With European Phone Systems
Date: 10 Jan 1995 08:30:33 GMT
Organization: Helix Internet


What should I do to make a cordless phone work in Europe? I bought it
in Canada. There are two problems with the plugs: the phone plug and
the plug for the recharger. Both of them are different than those
which Europeans use.

I am sure that somebody else has been faced with these problems. So, I
would appreciate any help.

I am leaving tomorrow night, so please respond ASAP.


Thanks,

Petar

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

From: Robohn Scott <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: GSM SIM Implementation
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 08:27:00 PST


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Eric Tholome) wrote:

> GSM solves the problem of two phones (or more) for one line in a very nice
> way: the subscriber identity is totally separated from the terminal: it is
> located on a SIM (Subscriber Identity Module) card.  This way, you can
> have as many phones as you mant and still have one single phone number:
> simply plug your card in whatever phone you intend to use! You may even
> plug your card in somebody else's phone, or in a rented car phone, for
> instance.

> Very convenient, indeed. Of course, the terminal still has an identity, and,
> if reported stolen, can be blocked by the carrier, no matter who is using
> it. And thanks to sophisticated algorithms, it is not easy to steal airtime
> by mimicking a SIM card (at least that's we're all being told!).

Does anyone know how the SIM is implemented (i.e., PCMCIA card, SIMM, some
other standards-based approach, or proprietary?)  How much information is
actually stored on it?  Have there been any problems with it in practice?

How long has the SIM been available commercially?


Scott Robohn     Booz, Allen & Hamilton     [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 08:33:33 -0500
From: [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone PINs


Mark Smith    Mercerville, NJ writes:

> BEDMINSTER, NJ, AND ORANGEBURG, NY -- Two of the nation's largest
> wireless carriers are teaming up in a unique program to prevent their
> customers from being victimized by criminals who steal cellular
> service.

> The new effort combines a Personal Identification Number (PIN) code
> system recently pioneered by NYNEX Mobile Communications in New York
> City with a new Fraud Protection Zone technique developed by Bell
> Atlantic Mobile.

Sorry but I seem to be missing something here. If the PIN is sent in
the clear then anyone grabbing the cell phone number off the air will
also get the PIN.

> In the rare instance that they are cloned, customers only need to call
> their home carrier and receive a new PIN to restore service.

Oh, I see, once a phone is compromised, and the customer gets the
bill, they can change the PIN and start all over again. True the
customer could deactivate/change the PIN daily (hourly?) but how many
will?  How fast can the cloners react?

Then we have the problem of "customers" calling up to report a problem
and asking to change the PIN -- but how will the Telco know who is
calling?  AH! They will need a PIN to change their PIN 8*).

> By contrast, customers not using PINs must bring their phones back to a
> carrier or dealer for a new phone number, notify business associates
> and friends of the number change, or even modify business cards and
> stationery.

Don't understand the last part, the ESN is what needs to change, not
the phone number, guess someone does not understand the difference.
This is from a telco press release?

> Why don't they start spending the money they spent on ECPA lobbying to
> invent a more secure system?!?!?!?

There are several means already available but since most involve some
form of encryption they seem to be too dangerous for the public to
have. With the PIN, the carriers can say they have done *something*.


Cooly,

Padgett

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

From: Chris Osburn <[e-mail]>
Subject: Call Unblocking Now Available From US West (Seattle)
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 09:06:00 PST


Hooray for Pacific Northwest Bell, er, I mean US West (sigh).

Last year when Caller ID was made available here, I immediately signed
up for line blocking.  The down side I had to accept was that my call
would be refused by someone who didn't feel like taking a call from a
faceless stranger.

Starting 1 January 1995, US West tackled the problem with a (free!) call
unblocking feature.  I can dial *82 before the number and allow myself to be
announced to the recipient when I feel the need.

Kudos to US West for this feature.  (Now I have to make sure it works....)


cheers!

Chris Osburn, [e-mail]
Seattle, Washington, USA
ICBM: 47 42 58 N  122 16 41 W

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

Date: 10 Jan 95 09:57:42 EST
From: ESSMAN <[e-mail]>
Subject: ANI Information in Realtime


I currently have 800 service through AT&T and I receive ANI
information with my bill once per month.  I'd like to receive the ANI
info real-time but no one at AT&T seems to know what I'm talking
about.  They keep asking me to go back to NYNEX to get Caller ID.
When I explain that Caller ID and ANI are two different things, that's
when the fun really starts.  Anyone out there have any suggestions?


Thanks,

Eric Essman


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even though ANI and Caller-ID are two
separate things, the end result -- the number produced for your review --
is as often as not the same. With this in mind, at least one carrier
providing 800 service *does* display in realtime the ANI of the calling
party via the Caller-ID display unit. I've forgotten which company it
is ... someone remind me. Maybe what AT&T is trying to tell you is that
if you get Caller-ID from NYNEX you'll get the information you are
seeking. Maybe ... I don't know. Maybe they are trying to say if you
get a Calelr-ID display unit from someone, they (AT&T) will be in a
position to send you the information. Any other guesses on this, anyone?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Piotr Roman Jarzynka)
Subject: At&T MCI and Sprint E-mail Addresses Wanted
Date: 10 Jan 1995 15:15:25 -0000
Organization: Dept. of Computing, Imperial College, University of London, UK.
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Piotr Roman Jarzynka)


I'm looking for the AT&T, MCI, and Sprint e-mail addresses.


Thanks a lot,

[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, considering all three of them run
huge email networks of their own it should not be too hard to find out
how to reach them. You might try 'postmaster@' att.com, mcimail.com and
sprint.com for starters. You did not say what department, location or
person you were seeking and that is going to be needed to properly send
your mail.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #22
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02010;
          10 Jan 95 21:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07003; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:24:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06994; Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:24:02 CST
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:24:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #23

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 10 Jan 95 14:24:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 23

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing? (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Michael Deignan)
    It is Legal to Modify Receivers (Ed Mitchell)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Wayne Huffman)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Gerald Serviss)
    800 Numbers From Overseas (Robert Hall)
    Re: Cellular Phone Technology (Wally Ritchie)
    SS7 ISUP to SS7 TCAP Conversion (Fernando Vicuna)
    Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System (Paul Hebert)
    Re: Video Servers (Wayne Huffman)
    Re: DQDB and SMDS (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Source Code For Audio-Voice Modem Programming? (Russell Nelson)
    Biographies/Sketches of Our Participants (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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: Noise Introduced by Bit-Robbing?
Date: 10 Jan 1995 14:34:39 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, Tim Gorman <[e-mail]> writes:

> [e-mail] (sohl,william h) writes in TELECOM Digest V15 #11:

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

>>>> What kind of noise/distortion does American-style bit-robbing cause to
>>>> voice band signals transmitted through PCM channels?

>>> In the U.S., most intermachine trunks are common channel direct
>>> connections so only the robbed bit at each end of the IC/EC connection
>>> introduces the robbed bit (as well as ny non CCS systems in the EC).

>> Today, most end-to-end voice connections do not include any trunking
>> which uses robbed bit signalling.  The great majority of local
>> trunking, especially in metro areas, has all been converted to CCS.

>> One way to determine the probability of what type of local trunking is
>> in your area is if caller ID is available.  If you can have caller ID,
>> then the local trunking is using CCS and thus no robbed bit signaling
>> is involved at that end of any connection.

> This is probably a little misleading. While the robbed bit signaling was for
> use in per-trunk signaling for passing supervision information, merely
> converting to SS7 signaling (i.e. making caller id available) doesn't
> automatically make the robbed bits available. This also requires conversion
> to B8ZS/ESF signaling.

> I think you will find lots of places that have converted to SS7 still
> have the older AMI/SF facilities in place thus limiting circuit bandwidth
> to 56kb.

Lets beat this horse one more time and see if we can keep him down for
awhile :)

1. An end to end connection will be clear channel IF AND ONLY IF all
transmission facilities (and switches) connected in tandem are clear
channel. This includes the EC local loops, the EC/IC trunks, and the
IC network (or the international equivalents).

2. T1 is clear channel ONLY if it is B8ZS. However, a B8ZS facility is
NOT NECESSARILY clear channel. Any B8ZS facility that uses D4 or ESF
signalling WILL NOT BE CLEAR CHANNEL on the channels that use D4 (AB)
or ESF (ABCD) robbed bit signalling. (European E1's, on the other hand
are always clear channel).

3. USING SS7 or any other CCS system does NOT IMPLY that AMI facilities
cannot be used. The fast majority of EC/IC connections are AMI and
therefor not clear channel EVEN WHEN SS#7 is used on the trunk group.
The main reason for this is that the installed base of AMI trunking is
just too large. There is no pressing need to replace all AMI facilities
with B8ZS. CCS does not imply Clear Channel. Clear Channel, however,
implies either CCS or other or some other form of signalling other
than robbed bit.

4. The trend is to use B8ZS for new facilities. AMI facilities will be
converted as necessary (not just for fun) to meet the demand for ISDN
clear channel switched calls. There is no way to obtain any kind of T1
subscriber connection to an EC that does not use robbed bit signalling
unless you count PRI (which is still a dream for the most part).

5. Even if ISDN were to eventually account for 50% of calls, there
would still be no justification to replace existing AMI IC/EC
facilities that are fine for the non-ISDN subscribers.  A regulated
carrier that tried to do this would be subject to charges that it was
trying to inflate its rate base.

6. As a practical matter, you get clear channel ONLY with ISDN and
only with bearer classes of service that are clear channel. Otherwise,
the robbed bits is gonna get you unless you are extremely lucky.
(Fortunately the effect is relatively small).

7. If I got ISDN, why would I be screwing around with modems anyway.
To interwork is the only reason and that means I am coming from clear
channel to the robbed bit world unless I'm very lucky (which I'm not).

8. Finally, an AMI intermachine channel, through not strictly clear channel
(due to Zero Byte Suppression) is effectively clear channel for modem
transmission when robbed bit is not used (i.e. CCS). This is because there
is no need to ever transmit the signal level encoded by the zero octet.


Wally Ritchie   Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 10 Jan 1995 14:34:14 GMT
Organization: The Ace Tomato Company


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Tony Pelliccio) writes:

> Of course if you really want to follow a cell call just get a DDI and
> hook it up to your PC. The interesting thing is that the company that
> sells the DDI will only release software with ESN capability to law
> enforcement people. Makes you wonder doesn't it?

Actually, the software that comes with every DDI has the capability of
displaying ESNs. You just make a few minor software patches to the
executable. Not that *I* would ever do such a thing, mind you.


MD

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

From: Ed Mitchell <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 08:37:36 PST
Subject: It is Legal to Modify Receivers


Pat writes in reply to Bill Sohl's FAQ on Cellular and Cordless
telephone monitoring:

> Aside from what the Electronic Commuications Privacy Act says, the
> Federal Communications Commission addresses the question of radios
> which have been modified.  Illegal modification (i.e. modification by
> an unlicensed person) voids your FCC authority to operate the radio.

Pat this is not true at all except for transmitters. You do not need a
license to operate a receiver (If you have one, I'd like to see it!).
You do not need any certification to modify a receiver. There are no
laws prohibiting your own modification or maintenance of your own
receiving equipment. The only thing that self-modification does is to
void your warranty. If someone wishes to make modifications for any
number of purposes, often legitimate and not merely for scanning
illegal frequencies, there are many BBS, online services and Internet
sites that have files on modifying nearly every radio or transmitters
or transceiver ever built.

In addition to the millions of existing scanners that receiver these
frequencies, many will remember that the cellular frequencies were
carved out of what had been television specturm (channels 71 to 83 of
the UHF spectrum). Such televisions and VCRs (with built in tuners)
continued to be sold until the late 1980s. Such TVs can very much be
used to receive cellular frequencies by tuning with the fine tuning
control through the old channels. Before it was illegal to do so, I
did use a common TV to tune through and intercept cellular calls just
to prove how silly was the then proposed prohibition on the sale of
cellular recievers. Because estimates suggested there were over 100
million such tuners capable of receiving cellular phones coupled with
the gradual phase in of digital networks, I believed then that the
legislation concerning the sale of cellular receivers should have been
declared moot. There are too many receivers out there now -- digital
networks are being deployed now and their deployment will soon
accelerate. New technology will obsolete the need for the legislation.


Ed Mitchell  [e-mail]
[e-mail] tcp/ip packet net

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

From: [e-mail] (Wayne Huffman)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Date: 10 Jan 1995 12:13:15 GMT
Organization: Netcom


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

> This is a good idea. However, it could be at odds with another good
> idea which is that the cell ID that the caller is using be passed
> through the cell switch to the tandem so tha the 911 database can use
> the cell ID as an approximate location of the caller. In metro areas
> the size of the cell would be very small indeed. Less that a year ago
> a life would have most likely been saved in Rochester N.Y. if this
> capability had been available.

This reminds me of a time when I was an AT&T Account Executive working
in my sales territory near the Capitol and Union Station in Washington, DC.
I was about to be mugged outside a fast food place, and I dialed 911
from my (Bell Atlantic Mobile) cell phone. I was connected to the 911
dispatcher in Arlington, VA! They were able to connect me back to DC,
but I was quite surprised to get Virginia, when I was in the middle of
DC. I hope they can get this straightened out for good.


Wayne Huffman


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: So when you reached the DC police did they
respond in a timely manner to keep you from getting mugged?  When they
arrived, did they arrest you for bothering them? :)  Were you able to
identify the mugger? Did he by chance resemble Mayor Berry? :)  How are
things in Our Nation's [Drug Sales and Murder] Capitol these days, anyway?
Did the mugger steal your cellular phone as well?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerald Serviss)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Date: 10 Jan 1995 17:02:19 GMT
Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola


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

> Jim Conran writes:

>> In addition, the FCC should require all cellular phones to be
>> equipped to access the strongest cellular base station signal when 911
>> is called.  Finally, the FCC should make the 911 provision an issue as
>> it currently reconsiders cellular license renewal applications.

> This is a good idea. However, it could be at odds with another good
> idea which is that the cell ID that the caller is using be passed
> through the cell switch to the tandem so tha the 911 database can use
> the cell ID as an approximate location of the caller. In metro areas
> the size of the cell would be very small indeed. Less that a year ago
> a life would have most likely been saved in Rochester N.Y. if this
> capability had been available.

I theory, 911 access for cell phones is a good idea. The problem is
reducing that theory to practice.

Let's consider a metro area as the previous poster suggests. In our
most dense operations that I am familiar with the smallest cell radius
is 500 meters. This gives an area of 785,000 meters-square or about
.25 miles-square.  If you consider that in a metro area where this
cell would be located is built up and that the average number of
floors covering this area is just say four (source ... PFA) you have
one square mile of area that this caller could be located in. Even if
we include information on the sector of the origin of the call we are
down to .33 or .16 square miles of area. Compare this to the typical
911 call from a land phone which can isolate the caller to a specific
location (home, office, payphone ...) and you can see that the
information that a cellular system can provide currently is hardly
useful for delivering a 911 call to the proper dispatch center.

In a suburban setting where there are lots of jurisdictions and cell
placement and thus coverage is dictated by traffic patterns there are
just as many problems. The use of the strongest signal is no guarantee
of routing the call correctly, especially if you are in a building.
The closet cell may have its line of site thru a wall and the next
closet thru a window. In this case the location data is even less
useful.

Sure we could add GPS receivers and exact positioning information to
the 25 million cell phones in use in the US, of course, you would also
have to replace or modify all the fixed equipment in all the systems
to use that information and the the air specs would have to be
updated.

And we thought that rolling out digital service was a hard problem to
solve. It pales by comparison with this problem ;-)

I think that the FCC exemption is based on good engineering and the
realization that today we do not have the capability to locate the
caller easily, if at all.


Jerry Serviss   Motorola Inc   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 22:41:29 HKT
From: Mr Robert Hall <[e-mail]>
Subject: 800 Numbers From Overseas


Judith Oppenheimer and Ari Wuolle have both discussed the fact that it
is now possible to access U.S. 800 numbers from international locations.
Following Judith's dialing suggestions, I attempted to call a number
of 800 numbers from Hong Kong.  For example, I dialed:

011                 International Access Code
   1                Country Code for U.S.
     800-555-1212   800 Directory Assistance

The call appears to have been processed by the Hong Kong switch, but I
get a recording in a very American voice telling me:

"access to the 800 number you have dialed is not free when dialed from
outside the United States.  If you proceed with this call, you will be
billed international direct dial rates for this call.  If you do not
wish to proceed with this call, hang up now".

So, I wonder if the assumption that it's up to my local IDD provider
to just turn on access to U.S. toll-free numbers is, in fact correct,
or whether the U.S. 800 service provider has a say in the deal as
well.  Are there all of the usual tariff negotiations between the
carriers?

What about calls from the U.S. to other countries' toll-free numbers?
Since Hong Kong is a small country and local calls are free, the use
of 800 numbers here has been pretty much limited to accessing a
particular foreign carrier's "home direct" service.  For example, from
within Hong Kong, I dial 800-1111 to get the AT&T "bong" to place
calls charged to my AT&T card.  If someone Stateside dials
011-852-800-1111 do they loop back to AT&T's "bong"?

I'd be intersted to see this thread continue as there are some real
business applications for my company with this.


Thanks,

Rob Hall    Hong Kong

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Technology
Date: 10 Jan 1995 18:25:17 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Stan Brown) writes:

> Having recently acquired a cellular phone, I suddenly find
> myself curious about how the systems operate.  Could someone point me
> to a good reference on the operation of cellular systems?  I am
> particularly interested in the technical side (not economics) of
> roaming, and follow me.

There was an FCC technical report describing the system. You might try
fishing around gopher.fcc.gov.

I do know that it was published in full in the federal register a few
years back. You can probably sneakernet it from your local library.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Fernando Vicuna)
Subject: SS7 ISUP to SS7 TCAP Conversion
Date: 10 Jan 1995 10:01:41 -0300


I am looking for a provider of a solution to the following problem.
There is a telephone switch that accepts SS7 ISUP signalling, and I
have a computer that accepts SS7 CCITT TCAP signalling. Is there some
kind of gateway that can translate the information provided by ISUP
into a TCAP query? Do I have to look for a switch provider that
has a Service Switching Point (SSP)?

The interface I am looking for will be used to provide Intelligent
Network Services.  Does anybody have experience in IN?  Thanks for
your help.


Fernando Vicuna   [e-mail]

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

Date: 10 Jan 1995 11:18:32 -0500
From: Paul Hebert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System


My company is doing research for selection of a voice mail system. We
have presentations scheduled with Octel and Centigram. Would anyone
have some technical or user related insight into these systems? We
have an NEC 2400 switch. Any interface issues we should be aware of?


Paul Hebert   MARKEM Corp
Keene, NH     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wayne Huffman)
Subject: Re: Video Servers
Date: 10 Jan 1995 11:38:45 GMT
Organization: Netcom


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Alwin Mulder)
writes:

> I am a graduation student at the University of Technology at
> Eindhoven, and I am working on a VOD project. I was wondering if
> anybody could tell me where I could find some information on
> video-server-systems. Are there any specific newsgroups and/or
> WWW-pages?

I have found a new publication that may be of help to you. It is
called Interactive Week. It is new, but they have already had VOD
articles.  You can reach them at the following addresses:

http://www.interactive-week.com

or e-mail them at [e-mail]. I don't work for then but
I like the publication so far.


Wayne Huffman

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 10:14:55 -0500
From: Fred R. Goldstein <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: DQDB and SMDS


From: [e-mail]

> Can anybody explain to me what the difference and/or connection is
> between DQDB (Distributed-Queue dual-bus) and SMDS (Switched
> Multi-Megabit Data Service).

Interesting topic, since the two are easily confused.

DQDB is a "Metropolitan Area Network" defined by IEEE 802.6.  It
provides for a cell-based (48-byte payload, similar to ATM) data
transfer, shared media with arbitration (telco speeds, T1/E1/T3/E3/
SONET/SDH as intended PMDs), and a novel combination of MAC services.
It has a "connectionless" service that resembles any LAN (long
variable-length packets) and an "isochronous" service that resembles
circuits (fixed-bandwidth channels).  DQDB was invented by Australians
(QPSX Comms. is its promoter) but never really caught on in a big way.

SMDS is a connectionless packet-switched public network service
developed by Bellcore.  It uses E.164 (ISDN/telephone numbers) for
addresses, allows long (9KB?) packets, etc.

When SMDS was being invented, DQDB was hot, so Bellcore specified that
the data link layer of SMDS would be the DQDB protocol.  This is "SIP
layer 2" and part of "SIP layer 3".  Thus it is possible to implement
SMDS using DQDB multiport bridges.  This is done in some places.  In
effect, SMDS is a service that DQDB delivers using a subset of its
capabilities.

In American practice, most users do not accept DQDB's odd cell-based
datalink, so SMDS now usually uses the "DXI" format, which maps SIP3
packets into HDLC frames.  Some DQDB vestiges (packet header, trailer)
remain but it's really just a packet service now.


Fred R. Goldstein     [e-mail]
Bolt Beranek & Newman Inc.  Cambridge MA
USA [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Russell Nelson)
Subject: Re: Source Code For Audio-Voice Modem Programming?
Date: 10 Jan 1995 15:30:07 GMT
Organization: Crynwr Software


In article <[e-mail]> System Operator <system@decode.
com> writes:

> I'm looking for any sample or public domain source code used to
> control an audio-voice (AT+FCLASS 8) modem used in any kind of
> interactive application.

> Any pointers to FTP sites, etc, would be appreciated.

mgetty+sendfax works with ZyXEL (and possibly ZOOM and Rockwell-voice-chip)
modems.  It works on various unices -- I use it on Linux.  Look for it
on ftp.leo.org.


russ <[e-mail]>    http://www.crynwr.com/crynwr/nelson.html
Crynwr Software   | Crynwr Software sells packet driver support | ask4 PGP key
11 Grant St.      | [phone] (9201 FAX)  | What is thee doing about it?
Potsdam, NY 13676 | What part of "Congress shall make no law" eludes Congress?

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

From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Biographies/Sketches of Our Participants
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 14:00:00 CST


The results to date have been pretty positive. Many of you have written
to say you would like to see a section in the Telecom Archives for the
biographies or 'thumbnail sketches' of the people who participate in this
forum from day to day. So ... I've set it up.

It is located in the Telecom Archives at lcs.mit.edu. It is *not* available
to FTP/Gopher/WWW readers. It is only available/readable via the Telecom
Archives Email Information Service with the PASSWORD command. You get the
current password when your entry has been received, reviewed and installed.
In other words, install your own, then you get to read the others. These
items will not be published in the Digest. It will be up to you from time
to time to get a new 'index' of the biographical files on line to select
the ones you want to read.

What would be appropriate?  Your name, address and phone number if you
wish to include it; a paragraph so so about your education and past or
present employment; if you have published anything you might want to
mention that as well. If you have a .signature file you are particularly
proud of you can include that. Altogether, maybe 150-200 words or so in
a couple paragraphs.

Please note that a log of activity for the Telecom Archives Email Information
Service is available to me on a daily basis; particularly of interest are
those requests to the server which invoke the PASSWORD command. I'll send
full instructions for accessing the biography files to each person who
submits one, and remember, these are closed files available only to the
people who wish to participate. Please report *any* abuses to my attention.
By and large, snoopers, name-/list-gatherers won't have access.

Send your submissions to '[e-mail]' -- not to the Digest.


Thanks,

PAT

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #23
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05631;
          11 Jan 95 5:01 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20000; Wed, 11 Jan 95 00:38:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19993; Wed, 11 Jan 95 00:38:03 CST
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 00:38:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #24

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 Jan 95 00:38:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 24

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T Enters Rochester NY Local Telephone Market ([e-mail])
    Gain Hits (Steven Hoga)
    Looking For ADPCM Test Vector Set (Mark Indovina)
    How to Keep Track of Calls on Busy (Caller ID on Busy)? (Pete Kruckenberg)
    Recent Movie with Telecom Theme (Benjamin L. Combee)
    Optus Cision in Australia (Iaen Cordell)
    Re: Cell Phone PINs (Steve Seydell)
    Re: Cell Phone PINs (Carl Oppedahl)
    Re: Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd ([e-mail])
    Re: GSM in Canada? (John Scourias)
    Re: MANs in the US (Edward W. Bennett)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Tony Harminc)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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, 10 Jan 1995 11:25:47 PST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: AT&T Enters Rochester NY Local Telephone Market


Several recent messages to the Digest have discussed the recent
changes to the local telephone service regulations that allow for
competition in the Rochester, Ny telephone market.  The January 10,
1995 edition of the {Rochester Democrat & Chronicle} contains a full
page ad from AT&T advertising that they are entering this market.  For
fun, I called the toll free number contained in the ad (1 800 716-4ATT)
to learn more about what AT&T is offering.

According to the AT&T rep that I spoke to, AT&T is reselling service
provided by Rochester Telephone (or is it Frontier Communications?
I`m confused).  With AT&T service customers keep their same telephone
numbers, but are billed by AT&T.  AT&T`s current rates are essentially
the same as Rochester Telephone`s, minus a 10% new customer discount
that is garanteed to be good for at least three months.  The AT&T rep
didn`t know what the rates would be after the three month period, but
suggested thay they would remain competitive.

AT&T is offering most of the advanced services that Rochester Telephone
offers, with voice mail being the most asked for missing service (again
all of this is implemented by Rochester Tel and resold by AT&T).  I
also learned that there is no sign up fee through March 31.

Other items of interest:

When I dialed the toll free number the greeting identified that it was
intended for Rochester AT&T customer service (so it may not work
elsewhere).  ANI displayed my calling number to the rep (I asked), but
their database contained the wrong name/address (probably because I
was assigned this number about a month ago, though it`s interesting
that the number was not listed as "unassigned").  The rep was
physically located in Missouri (I asked).

It will be interest to see what other companies enter this market.  I
have heard rumors that NYNEX, other baby bells, etc. are watching
things closely, but I have not heard of any other companies that have
definite plans to join in the fun.


Don Wegeng   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (STEVEN HIGA/HNL DQ)
Subject: Gain Hits
Date: 10 Jan 95 11:31:16 -1000
Organization: VeriFone Inc., Honolulu HI


I've been having a terrible time with a modem due to gain hits.  I've
used both a Consultronics TCS-500 and TAS101/Gemini Modem testers and
discovered that this particulary modem can't seem to handle 1 dB gain
hits.  This has plagued me for awhile and unfortunately I don't know
how to test for it.  Both the new EIA/TIA TSB-37A and TSB-38 only
define gain hits but does not specify rate, level, duration, or Bit
Error Rate.

Anybody know of a spec that covers gain hits, maybe IEEE, ANSI, others?

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

From: [e-mail] (MARK INDOVINA)
Subject: Looking For ADPCM Test Vector Set
Organization: MOTOROLA, Strategic Semiconductor Operation, IC Tech Lab
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 01:21:02 GMT


I'm looking for a copy of the test vectors for G.721, 32kbps Adaptive
Differential Pulse Code Modulation (ADPCM). Was there a set available
from Committee T1?  Pointers, FTP sites?


Thanks in advance,

Mark A. Indovina, Principal Staff Engineer   [e-mail]
MOTOROLA   Strategic Semiconductor Operation, IC Technology Laboratory
Mail Stop 63, 1500 Gateway Boulevard, Boynton Beach, FL 33436-8292 USA
phone: [phone], fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Kruckenberg)
Subject: How to Keep Track of Calls on Busy (Caller ID on Busy)?
Date: 10 Jan 1995 21:38:17 -0700
Organization: DahlinSmithWhite, Inc.


I'm running a dial-up computer service, and I'd like to be able to
keep track of how many people are getting busy signals when they dial,
so I can respond by adding more lines. I've thought of a couple of
ways of doing this, and wanted to know if any of them are do-able.

The first one is easy, but might not be feasible. If I could get
caller ID's on a busy line, I'd just add caller ID to the last line in
the hunt group, then feed the caller ID via serial into the computer.
Is caller ID on busy even feasible, and if so, does/will US West offer
it? What do I need to get to make it work?

Second option, if caller ID on busy is not available: get another line
(again, last in hunt group), which would always be busy (I don't want
it to ring and confuse the users), but would have call waiting and
caller ID on call waiting, then just pipe the caller ID into the
computer via serial. Again, does US West offer caller ID on call
waiting, and what do I need to make it work?

Final option: get a line (last in hunt group) which would never
answer, put caller ID and a caller ID -> serial box on it. It'll ring,
which might confuse the users, but at least it'll keep track of who's
calling and how often, when the other lines are busy.

If there are other, better ways of doing this, I'd appreciate your
input.


Thanks for your help.

Pete Kruckenberg   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way we did it for several years was
to have telco send the count of busies. We had meters on each line which
advanced each time a call was recieved on that line. We had a meter which
advanced each time all incoming lines were busy. Having all lines busy
of course is not the same as turning away additional calls; maybe there
were none in the interim, maybe there were. For this we had a dedicated
pair from the central office. Whenever the CO had to bounce a call due
to all our lines busy (I think we had 100-125 incoming lines, most of
which were 800 numbers in a hunt group, but maybe a dozen were local
Chicago lines, and another dozen or so were 'ring-down' or 'tie-lines'
which were terminated in the Automatic Call Distributor along with the
800 numbers) then the CO sent a pulse over that dedicated pair to a
meter which kept track of those calls the CO bounced. We also kept track
of 'lost calls'; those were the calls received in the queue in the ACD
which were answered with a recording 'all positions are busy, please
hold for an available position ...' and the calling party chose to
hang up or disconnect prior to getting a live answer.

The 'meter clerk' was a person on each shift whose job it was to read
all the meters hourly, jot down the figures and prepare a report for
management. There were also meters showing how many calls were taken
by each position each hour. We generally averaged 600-800 calls per
hour during the day and evening hours, and about 200-300 calls per
hour during the overnight period, or about 13,000-14,000 calls per
day. As I recall, we had fifteen positions, but only kept about ten
of them staffed at any given time during the day, and just two or
three staffed during the overnight hours.

Everyone could see the backlog of calls waiting. If one or two calls
were in the ACD queue waiting for a clerk position, then a small lamp
on each console marked 'CW' would illuminate steadily. If three or
four calls were in the queue, the same lamp would blink slowly. If
there were five or six calls waiting, the same lamp would blink rapidly.
If there were seven calls waiting, a large 100 watt red lightbulb
mounted on the wall at the front of the room would illuminate. Eight
or more calls waiting caused the red light to blink off and on. It did
not happen too often, but when that red light started blinking and
blinked for more than about a minute at a time, the shift supervisor
would get up and go to a section of the room where some typists and
filing clerks were working. With just a motion of his fingers, everyone
knew what was needed; everyone would stop what they were doing and
go into the other area and sit down at an idle position and start taking
calls. They would stay there doing so until they were told to go back
to their regular assignments. Every month or so the management would
carefully scrutinize all the numbers produced by those meters, and use
the information for staffing purposes, and to order additional lines
installed by telco as needed.

A simple solution for you might be to have a meter on the final line
in the hunt group. Note the number of times every day that line is
selected. If the number of times that line is selected is more than
say, two or three times each day, then you probably have some callers
getting busy signals.  The other thing you can do is install a timer at
the end of the line. It has to be wired in series through all the phones
(you can use the A/A1 supervision pair in your modems for this purpose)
so the timer will not start unless it has a connection all the way down
the line; ie all phones have to be off hook. When all are off hook the
timer starts; when any single line is available, the timer stops. At the
end of the day you see how many minutes in total (god forbid hours in
total!) all lines were engaged. Again, if it is more than some acceptable
value, you need to add additional lines. PAT]

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

Subject: Recent Movie With Telecom Theme
From: [e-mail] (Benjamin L. Combee)
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 13:32:37 -0500
Organization: ROASF Atlanta
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Hello, TELECOM Digest.  I recently saw the French film _Three Colors:
Red_, and was reminded of it by a recent thread here on cordless phone
snooping.  This is an excellent movie, and it has several scenes of
interest to the telecom fan.  First, the opening credits to the movie
are overlayed over a breathtaking first-person flythrough the
telephone connection between two friends, and later in the film, a
retired judge confesses to spying on his neighbors cordless phone
conversations, even complaining about one guy with a Japanese phone he
couldn't pick up.


Ben Combee  E-MAIL [e-mail]
http://www.gatech.edu/acm/combee.html

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

From: [e-mail] (Iaen Cordell)
Subject: Optus Vision in Australia
Date: 11 Jan 1995 14:43:40 +1100
Organization: DIALix Services, Sydney, Australia.


Following, for the information of all Optus staff, is a media release
distributed this afternoon confirming Optus Vision's plans to compete in Pay
TV and local calls.


OPTUS VISION CONFIRMS PLAN TO DELIVER COMPETITION IN PAY TV AND LOCAL CALLS

Optus Vision - the joint venture between Optus Communications,
Continental Cablevision and Publishing and Broadcasting Limited -
today confirmed its plan for delivering increased choice in telephony,
pay television and interactive services over the most advanced
broadband network of its kind in the world.

The project will position Australia at the forefront of the world in
delivering combined telephony and home entertainment services. The
undoubted winners will be Australian customers as true competition in
the local loop becomes a reality.

Optus Vision also announced it will offer a powerful programming
package of over 20 channels, including two movie channels, two sports
channels and a wide variety of other channels from local and
international sources.

The movie channels are supported by a supply of movies from Warner
Bros., Disney, MGM, Village Roadshow and New Regency.

The sports channels will include major Australian sporting events as
well as significant international sports sourced through ESPN
International.  Nine Network will provide programming expertise to
these channels.

The Optus Vision rollout plan will see the network passing
approximately three (3) million households throughout Australia in the
first four years starting with Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane.

Capital expenditure associated with the project is estimated to be
approximately $3 billion and the required funding for the venture is
expected to be around $2 billion which will be provided by a
combination of equity and debt.  The joint venture will employ some
3,000 people.

The network will showcase leading-edge technology and infrastructure
which the communications industry elsewhere in the world is looking at
introducing at the turn of the century.

Technical and engineering planning has been under way for the last six
months and construction will commence this month.  A hybrid
fibre-coaxial cable network will be deployed using both underground
and overhead distribution systems.

The network will be bi-directional and the first of its kind in the
world to deliver phone calls to the home exclusively over a single
fibre-coaxial system.

Announcements are expected to be made soon on supply contracts for
locally-manufactured fibre and coaxial cable.

An Optus Vision spokesperson said major considerations in the decision
to proceed with the joint venture included:

- Finalisation of programming elements essential to driving market
penetration;  and

- Clarification of the November 24 statement by Communications Minister,
Michael Lee, on rules governing broadband networks, particularly in
relation to Optus Vision's ability to manage access to its network on
a commercial tariff basis, rather than incremental cost-based interconnect.

This clarification was received via the draft Ministerial statement
released on December 23 which followed extensive discussions with the
Department of Communications and the Arts.  The timeliness and scope
of the statement were major factors in enabling Optus Vision to
maintain momentum of its business activities through the Christmas-New
Year period, a spokesperson for the joint venture said.

One of the major public benefits of the Optus Vision joint venture
will be the very real prospect of cheaper local phone calls being
delivered on its fibre-coaxial network.

The Optus Vision spokesperson said price reductions in local phone
calls were long overdue for most Australians.  According to figures
compiled by AUSTEL and the Bureau of Transport and Communications
Economics, compound annual growth of local phone call charges for the
period 1981-1993 were in the vicinity of nine (9) per cent.

"This is a direct result of there not being competition in the local
loop.  The real benefits of competition can be seen by the fact that
in the same period the prices of international and national long
distance calls fell by three (3) per cent and four (4) per cent
respectively and fell by much more after Optus started operations in
1992.

"Consumers directly connected to the Optus Vision network will see
considerable reductions in their overall phone bills as we drive local
call prices down, similar to what we have done with long distance
prices over the last two years.

"We have set aside capacity on the network for the development of
educational and community based multimedia services and will be
looking forward to working closely with government and community
bodies to fully exploit the potential of our state of the art
broadband network.  This capacity alone is equivalent to capital
investment in the vicinity of $100 million."

The Optus Vision shareholding will be:

- Optus Communications (47.5 per cent);
- Continental Cablevision (47.5 per cent);  and
- Publishing and Broadcasting Limited (5 per cent).

(Publishing and Broadcasting Limited has an option to increase its
shareholding to 20 per cent.  This option is exercisable at any time
in the period up to July 1, 1997.  If the option is exercised after
March 1, 1995, the exercise price is the market value at the time.)

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Seydell)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone PINs
Date: 11 Jan 1995 00:46:04 GMT
Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola


[e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

> Mark Smith    Mercerville, NJ writes:

>> The new effort combines a Personal Identification Number (PIN) code
>> system recently pioneered by NYNEX Mobile Communications in New York
>> City with a new Fraud Protection Zone technique developed by Bell
>> Atlantic Mobile.

> Sorry but I seem to be missing something here. If the PIN is sent in
> the clear then anyone grabbing the cell phone number off the air will
> also get the PIN.

The PIN is sent as DTMF across the voice channel.  The ESN and mobile
ID are currently stolen by listening to the reverse signalling
channel.  It is technically possible to steal the PIN, but it will
take some time for thiefs to catch up.  The money saved by the telcos
will easily cover the cost of purchasing and operating this feature.


Motorola, Inc.                           Steven Seydell
Cellular Infrastructure Group       [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Oppedahl)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone PINs
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 02:38:05 GMT
Organization: Oppedahl & Larson


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

> Mark Smith    Mercerville, NJ writes:

>> BEDMINSTER, NJ, AND ORANGEBURG, NY -- Two of the nation's largest
>> wireless carriers are teaming up in a unique program to prevent their
>> customers from being victimized by criminals who steal cellular
>> service.

>> The new effort combines a Personal Identification Number (PIN) code
>> system recently pioneered by NYNEX Mobile Communications in New York
>> City with a new Fraud Protection Zone technique developed by Bell
>> Atlantic Mobile.

> Sorry but I seem to be missing something here. If the PIN is sent in
> the clear then anyone grabbing the cell phone number off the air will
> also get the PIN.

>> In the rare instance that they are cloned, customers only need to call
>> their home carrier and receive a new PIN to restore service.

> Oh, I see, once a phone is compromised, and the customer gets the
> bill, they can change the PIN and start all over again. True the
> customer could deactivate/change the PIN daily (hourly?) but how many
> will?  How fast can the cloners react?

> There are several means already available but since most involve some
> form of encryption they seem to be too dangerous for the public to
> have. With the PIN, the carriers can say they have done *something*.

There was a rather exhaustive thread about this a couple of months ago
in alt.dcom.telecom, as I recall.

The ESN and phone number are transmitted unencrypted on the control
channel.  The cell site returns several items including instructions
on which audio channel is to be used.  The PIN code is conveyed
unencrypted on the audio channe.

Apparently the reason PIN codes help the cell carriers is that most of
the phone-cloners are so dull and stupid that they can monitor the
control channel but not also monitor the particular audio channel to
which the call gets passed.

I assume this will simply escalate the conflict.  The cloners will
either (1) pick an audio channel to monitor along with the control
channel, and note down the pin number and esn that go together, or (2)
wire up the receiver that is receiving the control data stream, to
control the audio scanner channel changer.

I was reading a book about the cellular system that was published
eight years ago ... it identified the problem that if people copy down
the ESN and phone number they could get free calls ... despite this
the cellular industry moved ahead with the present system.


Carl Oppedahl   Oppedahl & Larson, patent law firm
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd
Date: 10 Jan 1995 20:12:46 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas


> Why don't they start spending the money they spent on ECPA lobbying to
> invent a more secure system?!?!?!?

The reason they dont invent a more secure system is that the bulk of
the problem with the present system is designed in.  The new system
would have the same defective design feayures and would not help.

Originally the electronic serial number was meant to be built in to
the cell phones.  It was not to be programmable even with a soldering
iron.

Sellers did not like this because the cell carriers charged a lot to
make accounting changes so that it cost them to sell an upgrade or to
issue a loaner.  Sellers demanded and carriers aquiesed in
programmable esn phones.  Individual sellers have little clout but
collectively they are a force to be reckoned with.  Programmable esn
are what makes cell fraud a cottage industry.  Without them cloning a
phone would be a fairly technical task and it would require some
outboard parts.  There would be many fewer people technically capable
of cloning and most of them would have real jobs.

In the absence a significant change in the relationship between
sellers and carriers, any encryption based system would have fully
programmable parameters.  The new system would retain the problem
feature, which is clonability.  It would not give us releif it would
only give a half time till cloners adjust the game plan.

A new system should be non-clonable.  It would also be helpful if
carriers could program whatever needs programming with a secure link
so that at least one puzzle piece is known only to the carrier.

A puzzle piece known only to the consumer would be good too.  That
would stop guys who reprogram switches and steal numbers wholesale.

As a side note: anti-theft systems for cars brought us little relief
from car thefts.  Thieves quit doing their work quietly in the middle
of the night and went to car jacking.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Scourias)
Subject: Re: GSM in Canada?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 15:16:52 -0500


[e-mail] (D. Matte) writes:

> I have been doing some initial research on the development of the PCS
> market in Canada.  Recently some of the players that have received
> licenses to test 1.9GHz systems have been touting GSM as the way to go
> (Telezone & Microcell 1-2-1).  If GSM is implemented would it mean
> that users would not be able to make use of their terminals in the
> U.S. as GSM is not likely to be adopted by the U.S. on a large scale?
> It would seem to me that having a system that is compatible with our
> largest trading partner would make for a more attractive service
> offering.

Hi Dan,

The PCS systems that operate at 1.9GHz are a derivative of GSM.  The
actual GSM standard operates at the 900MHz range, and its 'brother'
DCS-1800 operates at 1.8GHz.  At least one of the proposals currently
under consideration in the U.S. for a PCS involves a 1.9GHz derivative
of GSM, so it is still too early to know whether GSM will or will not
be implemented on a large scale in the U.S.

Also, the GSM-900 and DCS-1800 systems have been standardized in
Europe by ETSI.  The 1.9GHz system, however, as far as I know, has NOT
been standardized.  Theoretically, it should be just like DCS-1800,
but you never know what tweaks the Americans might put in.  So, if the
U.S. implements a 1.9GHz system, and Canada copies the same system, (I
don't think vice-versa would apply here ...) then you _should_ be able
to use a mobile phone across the border.  Of course you are right in
saying that mobility should extend beyond our borders.  The principles
of PCS of 'communication anywhere, anytime' would be violated if each
country implements its own system.  In this regard, I believe the
Europeans are on the right track in coordinating their telecommunications
research and development, as well as implementation, on a Europe-wide
basis.


Best regards,

John Scourias   Department of Computer Science
University of Waterloo   Waterloo, Ontario, Canada  N2L 3G1
[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:23:15 -0800
From: EDWARD W BENNETT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MANs in the US


The company I work for, ATU Telecommunications (the LEC for Anchorage)
just received regulatory approval for a MAN service. It's based on
FDDI, but is time-division-multiplexed so that multiple customers can
occupy the system. Bandwidth is available in 5 Mpbs segments; a 10
Mbps Ethernet LAN would thus need two of those channels. Total system
payload is 100 Mbps and runs over dual survivable fiber optic rings;
if demand warrants, a second 100 Mbps system can be added using lasers
operating at a different frequency (color). One of the advantages of
the system is that it can easily be carried by SONET/ATM in the
future. We call the system ATLAS, for Anchorage Transparent LAN
Service; it is based on a similar offering from U.S. West called TLS
(Transparent LAN Service).


Ed Bennett     Sr. Communications Specialist
ATU Telecommunications, Anchorage, Alaska
Voice [phone]  [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 19:17:49 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas


 From: Mr Robert Hall <[e-mail]>

> The call appears to have been processed by the Hong Kong switch, but I
> get a recording in a very American voice telling me:

> "access to the 800 number you have dialed is not free when dialed from
> outside the United States.  If you proceed with this call, you will be
> billed international direct dial rates for this call.  If you do not
> wish to proceed with this call, hang up now".

> So, I wonder if the assumption that it's up to my local IDD provider
> to just turn on access to U.S. toll-free numbers is, in fact correct,
> or whether the U.S. 800 service provider has a say in the deal as
> well.  Are there all of the usual tariff negotiations between the
> carriers?

I've been wondering about overseas access to non-US NANP 800 numbers.
What happens if you dial a Canadian 800 number this way?  Is the
overseas carrier actually doing an SS7 lookup to determine the carrier
or are they just assuming that country code 1 = USA ?  Sigh -- I can
guess the answer.  Could someone with a few pence to burn try a
Canadian number that isn't reachable from the US, such as Bell
Canada's Ontario business office line 800 668-2355 (or 800 NOT-BELL as
I prefer to think of it)?

I won't be surprised to hear that you get to pay for a call that says
"the number you have dialed cannot be reached from your calling area".


Tony Harminc

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #24
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05901;
          11 Jan 95 5:35 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20645; Wed, 11 Jan 95 01:18:35 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20638; Wed, 11 Jan 95 01:18:32 CST
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 01:18:32 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #25

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 11 Jan 95 01:18:30 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 25

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Canada Direct Access Numbers (Dave Leibold)
    Ancient Party Lines (Scott Falke)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (A Laurence)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (Paul Beker)
    Re: ISDN Over Wireless (John Leske)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: Computer Caller-ID (Pete Kruckenberg)
    Re: GSM SIM Implementation (John Leske)
    Re: Need Profile of Teleport Communications Group (Dave Levenson)
    Re: ETSI Standards - Where? (Boris Naydichev)
    Re: Calling 500 Numbers From Overseas (Eric Paulak)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 00:28 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Canada Direct Access Numbers


(dleibold note: Canada Direct operates similarly to many other "home
direct" services in that special numbers in other countries allow
access to operators in a home country. The arrangement is generally
reciprocal in that there are also Canadian facilities (usually 800
service numbers) for reaching operators of other countries.

Information is an unofficial transcript and is courtesy of Teleglobe,
the Canadian-based international carrier, whose information is subject
to correction or change.)


Canada Direct

The international access numbers to Canadian operators, as of November
1994:

Canada Direct information within Canada - 1 800 561 8868

Legend:

w   - wait for 2nd dial tone
%   - country-to-country calling, where calls may also be placed
      to points within that country, and to most other countries
      (via the Canadian operator, charged according to two "legs":
      country-to-Canada, then Canada-to-other-country)
[D] - service on dedicated phones displaying Canada Direct symbol
[P] - only available at public payphones
[K] - public phones require coin deposit or use of card

Country                        Access Number
=======                        ====== ======
Andorra % [K]                  19 w 0016
Anguilla [P]                   1 800 744 2580
Antigua [P]                    1 800 744 2580
Australia %                    1 800 881 150  -or-  1 800 551 177
Austria [K]                    022 903 013
Bahamas                        1 800 463 0501
Bahrain                        80 01 00
Barbados [P]                   1 800 744 2580
Belgium % [K]                  0800 1 0019
Belize                         558 (Hotels)  -or-  *6 (payphones)
Bermuda [P]                    1 800 744 2580
Bolivia % [K]                  0 800 0101
Brazil %                       000 8014
Cayman Islands [P]             1 800 744 2580
Chile %                        123 00 318  (replaces 00 w 0318)
China (major cities) %         108 186
Colombia                       980 19 0057
Costa Rica [K]                 161
Croatia %                      99 380 001
Cyprus [K]                     080 900 12
Czech Republic %               00 42 000151
Denmark % [K]                  80 01 00 11
Dominica [P]                   1 800 744 2580
Dominican Republic             1 800 333 0111
Ecuador                        173
Egypt %                        365 3643
Fiji                           004 890 1005
Finland % [K]                  9800 1 0011
France % [K]                   19 w 0016
Germany % [K]                  01 3000 14
Greece % [K]                   00 800 1611
Grenada [P]                    1 800 744 2580
Guadeloupe                     19 w 0016
Guam %                         950 1604
Guatemala [K]                  198
Guyana                         0161 (in Georgetown, 161)
Haiti                          001 800 522 1055
Hong Kong %                    800 1100
Hungary % [K]                  00 800 01211
Iceland % [K]                  999 010
India                          000167
Indonesia [K]                  00 801 16
Iran                           [D]
Ireland %                      1 800 555001
Israel %                       177 105 2727
Italy % [K]                    172 1001
Jamaica                        800 222 0016
Japan [K]                      0039 w 161
Jordan                         18 800 962
Korea (south) [K]              009 0015
Liechtenstein % [K]            155 8330
Luxembourg %                   0 800 0119
Macau %                        0800 100
Malaysia % [K]                 800 0017
Malta                          0 800 890 150
Martinique                     19 w 0016
Mauritius                      73110
Mexico                         95 800 010 1990
Monaco % [K]                   19 w 0016
Montserrat [P]                 1 800 744 2580
Morocco                        00 211 0010
Netherlands % [K]              06 0229116
New Zealand                    000919
Nicaragua %                    168
Norway % [K]                   800 19 111
Paraguay                       008 13 800
Peru                           199
Philippines % [K]              105 10
Poland %                       00 104 800 118
Portugal %                     05 017 1 226
Puerto Rico %                  1 800 496 7123
Qatar %                        [D]
Romania %                      01 800 5000
Russia (Moscow only)           8 10 800 497 7233
Saint Kitts & Nevis [P]        1 800 744 2580
Saint Lucia [P]                1 800 744 2580
Saint Vincent [P]              1 800 744 2580
Saint-Barthelemy               19 w 0016
Saint-Martin                   19 w 0016
San Marino % [K]               172 1001
Singapore                      8000 100 100
Slovakia %                     00 42 000151
South Africa %                 0 800 99 0014
Spain % [K]                    900 99 00 15
Sri Lanka                      01 430077 (in Metro Colombo, 430077)
Sweden % [K]                   020 799015
Switzerland % [K]              155 8330
Taiwan % [K]                   00 801 20012
Thailand %                     001 999 15 1000
Trinidad & Tobago              [D]
Turkey %                       00 800 16677
Turks & Caicos [P]             01 800 744 2580
Ukraine %                      8 10 0 17
United Kingdom %               0800 89 0016 (British Telecom)
Uruguay                        000 419
Vatican City [K]               172 1001
Venezuela [K]                  800 11100
Virgin Islands (British) [P]   1 800 744 2580
Virgin Islands (US) %          1 800 496 0008
Zambia %                       00883
Zimbabwe                       (was 110897 - now deleted?)

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 21:14:36 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Scott Falke)
Subject: Ancient Party Lines


In re your story about party-line entertainment:
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 15, Issue 11, Message 2 of 14

> When I was twelve years old, I had a friend who was the same age. We
> had a private line but his parents had a four-party line.         ^^
  ^^^ ^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^

Should I even ask?

My party-line story at age ~13 was --

At the time out community of ~1000 had its own little system (the
'switch' was a mechanical equivalent of a SLC96, I guess (a couple of
bigger than b-box-sized aluminum cases at the North end of town hung
on some poles and crossarms) and shared a PacBell office about 8 miles
away in a town of ~10,000.  There was one old repair/install guy who
handled an area of probably 300 square miles, called 'Farmers Union
Telephone' and I don't think you could get less than a 4-party line at
any price.  You'd have to wait a while for dial tone sometimes.

I have a distinct vision of what seemed like 200 pairs of steel on a
coupla-dozen crossarms per pole in front of Klint's market.  Eight-
and ten- party lines were the norm, and we shared an 8 with the school
superindent's home.  We rigged up a 600-ohm transformer with a
bathtubp capcitor for DC blocking, (via military surplus from the town
ham operator; I learned a lot from some ancient ARRL handbooks) and
fed it into an old (5-watt?) PA amplifier with speaker in a home-made
wood box.  The superintendent (this was farming in Nor Calif) would
spend hours interviewing new teachers for their first job away from
Montana.  Of course, once we figured out what was going on, we'd have
the skinny on what was to come in the fall.

My point in all this is that the party-line ringing was different from
what you descibed as a multi-frequency mode.  To the best of my
memory, each set (WE 302s, maybe?) had a gas-filled tube and polarized
pulsed-DC ring voltage.  Then half the ringers were connected tip-gnd
and ring-gnd.  On 8- party your heard one ring or two; so:

  2-polarties X 2-tip-ring X 2-ring-combos = 8.

The ten-party groups had all kinds of odd long-long, long-short and
short-short ring combinations.

Thanks for sparking some childhood memories!


Scott Falke    Turlock CA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way you describe it was one way
of doing the ringing; there were various methods.  What happened on
your system if you wanted to call someone on your party line?  In
the manual service era, if you inadvertently (or as a child, deliberatly
sometimes, for the fun of it) asked the operator for your own number
her answer would be without looking at where the call was coming from,
'the line is busy'. If you asked for someone on your party line, the
response would be the same unless you told the operator in advance and
tipped her off (the operators did not know who belonged to what party
line, only that the line tested busy when they went to insert the plug).
If you told her it was your party line, she would tell you to hang up
so she could ring the line, and after one or two rings to pick up the
phone again. She'd stay on the line and when the party answered tell
them to hold on a few seconds until you lifted your receiver again.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 04:17:25 GMT


[e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:

> Today, I was in the airport that serves Atlanta, GA.  I tried to place a
> few 1-800 toll free calls, and had a lot of trouble.  Numbers I know
> to be good got responses of "invalid number".  I'd reach for another pay
> phone, and got thru to the number. I tried the same numbers later that
> day (while getting hung up with the dead Newark airport mess) in the
> Atlanta airport and got more "invalid number"; another attempt got me
> thru, then I got cut off.  Pay phones were labeled "PTC" (or something
> like that) and also said that the local exchange didn't "own" these
> phones.  Some phones didnt work at all (bad keypads, or just dead).  I
> don't know who "PTC" is, but they really SUCK!

Could it be that the numbers you were calling were not reachable from
that area? Some 800 numbers specifically include or exclude certain
states or regions.

But then, you probably already thought of that. :-)


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] (Paul Beker)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 06:45:33 GMT


[e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:

> [ . . . ] Pay phones were labeled "PTC" (or something
> like that) and also said that the local exchange didn't "own" these
> phones.  Some phones didnt work at all (bad keypads, or just dead).  I
> don't know who "PTC" is, but they really SUCK!

Yep ... several years ago every single pay phone in that airport was a
*real* Southern Bell phone.  Since then, the politicians and others
(ever heard of the Atlanta Airport scandals / fiascos?) have gotten
involved and now you will find a wide variety of worthless COCOTs
scattered throughout the airport.

One interesting trend I've noticed lately: While only a couple of
months ago, all the COCOTs were pre-subscribed to some ripoff,
switchless, IXC, it looks like most of them have suddenly been
switched to AT&T.

This is definately a good thing, for the many people that would be
getting ripped off dialing 0+ otherwise ... I don't know why this
happened;  perhaps someone in Atlanta government actually decided
to "clean things up". Also, I wonder what AT&T did to get this.

And in a related note, all of the pay phones in the new (International)
Concourse "E" are AT&T COCOTs!  (In other words, the phones themselves
are manufactured by AT&T and have "AT&T" stamped on them.  They seem
to be much better quality than your typical COCOT.)  All of them are
pre-subscribed to AT&T, of course ...


Paul Beker - Atlanta, GA    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You wonder what AT&T had to do to get the
account?  Well I can tell you what Illinois Bell had to do to get the
O'Hare Airport account a few years ago: when the newspapers exposed the
city council members and Aviation Department employees who got the bribes
and the IBT employees who paid the bribes, there was quite a stink for
a short while, then everyone sort of forgot about it.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Leske)
Subject: Re: ISDN Over Wireless
Date: 11 Jan 1995 03:40:28 GMT
Organization: Centre for Telecommunications Information Networking
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Jared Enzler) writes:

> I live in an area where the telephone co. shows no interest in
> offering ISDN.  But the area is well covered by cellular phone
> systems.

> Questions: There appear to be several varieties of digital cellular on
> the way.  Do any of these have the potential to offer ISDN?  Which
> ones?  What sort of technical or other barriers are there to wireless
> ISDN?

The aim of digital cellular phones is to efficiently use the bandwidth
available. Thus they have compression schemes to minimise the the data
rate required to still reproduce acceptable quality voice at the other
end.  Next generation speech codecs are aiming for ~5kbit/s data rates
 -- a lot slower than ISDN.

If your question relates to ISDN-like protocols, then yes it will be
possible. For example the GSM design philosophy was based on ISDN.
However the first data modems available present themselves as
Hayes-compatible modems, because that is what all the software wants
to see.


John

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 04:04:14 GMT


[e-mail] (Mjsutter) writes:

> Jim Conran writes:

>> In addition, the FCC should require all cellular phones to be
>> equipped to access the strongest cellular base station signal when 911
>> is called.  Finally, the FCC should make the 911 provision an issue as
>> it currently reconsiders cellular license renewal applications.

> This is a good idea. However, it could be at odds with another good
> idea which is that the cell ID that the caller is using be passed
> through the cell switch to the tandem so tha the 911 database can use
> the cell ID as an approximate location of the caller. In metro areas
> the size of the cell would be very small indeed. Less that a year ago
> a life would have most likely been saved in Rochester N.Y. if this
> capability had been available.

Recently I saw someone who appeared to be trying to steal a car, so,
being a good citizen, I ducked around the corner out of sight and
dialed 911 on my handheld cellular phone. Though I was standing on a
street three blocks from San Francisco City Hall, I was connected to
the California Highway Patrol. I waited several minutes for an operator
to come on the line, and finally gave up.

Good thing no one's life or safety was in danger.


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] (Pete Kruckenberg)
Subject: Re: Computer Caller-ID
Date: 10 Jan 1995 21:12:10 -0700
Organization: DahlinSmithWhite, Inc.


Seymour Dupa ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Thomas Fitzurka ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> Does anyone know of a software program that enables you to have your
>> computer identify caller's phone numbers? I saw a movie called
>> Brainscan that had a computer, using caller id, identify the caller
>> and tell the person in an "igor" voice, which I perticularly liked,
>> that "Bobby is calling master". The idea was really interesting to me
>> and I would like to get something like it.

>   Rochell Communications has caller ID unit with a serial port that
> feeds the caller id info to a serial port on a computer.  They also
> have a program that reads the computer's serial port, look if the
> number has called before, and if so, diaplays the info.  They are at
> 800-542-8808 or 512-794-0088.

I'd like to use something like this to detect calls when my phone is
busy. Does anyone know if US West offers that service (Caller ID on
attempts when the line is busy), and if so, what I'd need to get the
number and put it into a serial port?


Pete Kruckenberg   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Coincidentally! ... I just remembered
this:  a few days ago I got a call from someone in San Fransisco and
guess what?  His *entire number* showed up on my Caller-ID display.
It looks like they are now starting to give it out, at least on an
interstate basis. I initially missed his call, but when I came in a
few minutes later and saw it on the display screen I called back right
away. He was quite surprised that I got his number, and come to think
of it now, so am I.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Leske)
Subject: Re: GSM SIM Implementation
Date: 11 Jan 1995 03:28:51 GMT
Organization: Centre for Telecommunications Information Networking
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail], Robohn Scott <[e-mail]> writes:

> Does anyone know how the SIM is implemented (i.e., PCMCIA card, SIMM, some
> other standards-based approach, or proprietary?)  How much information is
> actually stored on it?  Have there been any problems with it in practice?

> How long has the SIM been available commercially?

A very short reply to your questions:

It is a Smartcard (ISO-7816). That is, a single chip micro with its
own ROM, RAM and non-volatial storage. The specific implementation for
GSM is defined in the GSM specs. There are multiple manufacturers of
this card. The specific characterisitics vary from manufacturer to
manufacturer. I believe some companies are looking at up to 16k or
32kbit on the chip. The GSM-related data lies in a sub-directory on
the chip.

There is an interesting article in the Telecom Archives
ftp.funet.fi/pub/doc/telecom/phonecard/chips/How_chips_work (though
this does mainly deal with Phonecards, it gives an intro)

I have not read of any practical problems with the SIM cards in GSM.

They have been in service since GSM began (1991 exhibition systems, 1992
commercial networks)

My colleague who is working on new applications for GSM SIM cards is
currently away on business, and has much of the information with him.
If you are interested in more details I can chase him up when he
returns later this week.

John Leske   Research Engineer
Centre for Telecommunications Information Networking
University of Adelaide


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I don't know *whose* 'Telecom
Archives' that would be; its not the one I maintain which is located
at lcs.mit.edu; and I don't have the file mentioned.     PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: Need Profile of Teleport Communications Group
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 22:20:32 GMT


Linli Zhao #8277 ([e-mail]) writes:

> I need any information known about Teleport Communications Group (TCG).

TCG is a local exchange carrier who competes with the regional Bell
operating companies in certain metropolitan markets.  You'll find
their coin-operated public telephones in NYC subway stations, bus
terminals, and airports.  Unlike traditional COCOT units, these coin
sets charge the same rate as the Bell-provided units, look just like
the Bell-provided units, and, apparently, operate exactly the same
way.

They also offer local access services to businesses and large
residential customers (entire appartment buildings) in New York.


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

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 11:57:39 +0800
From: [e-mail] (Boris Naydichev)
Subject: Re: ETSI Standards - Where?


[e-mail] (Gabor Lajos) wrote:

> I am looking for ANY information about how to get ETSI (also pre-ETSI)
> standards in any form (eg. hardcopy, CD-Rom, postcript file).

> It can be an office from where I have to order, or an 'FTP site' or
> anything.

> I wrote 'FTP site' since I can't do real FTP to the outside world, only
> that E-mail operated fake FTP is available for me. Thanks in advance.

You can order ETSI documents from ETSI Publication:

tel: [phone]
fax: [phone]

If you do not know ETS numbers, you should be able to order by names,
they also have a catalog of ETSI publications available for distribution
and their prices.

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 15:23:14 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Eric Paulak)
Subject: Re: Calling 500 Numbers From Overseas


> Who pays for the call?  Is it the caller or the owner of the number?
> If it is the caller, would I be charged for an international call if I
> call someone who happens to be overseas at the time?

It depends. If you haven't given a caller a pin number so that you
will pay for it, the call will foot the bill.  To prevent them from
getting hit without knowing it, however, an AT&T message tells them
that they are being connected to an international location and that
international rates will apply.


Eric Paulak
The Center for Communications Management Information
[phone], ext. 327
11300 Rockville Pike, Suite 1100, Rockville, MD 20852

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #25
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23631;
          12 Jan 95 14:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22559; Thu, 12 Jan 95 07:20:31 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22551; Thu, 12 Jan 95 07:20:28 CST
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 07:20:28 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #26

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 Jan 95 07:20:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 26

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    About the GIF Incident and Substitutes (Paul Robinson)
    GIF Unisys Response (Stephen Goodman)
    Changes in Hong Kong Dial Plan (Paul A. Lee)
    Problems Calling Zaire (Jonathan V. Bland)
    Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary? (James Baker)
    Northern TeleCom Norstar Key System (Daniel Aharonoff)
    Voice Response Unit Question (Jim McCormack)
    Network Access Wanted in Kenosha, WI - 414 (Erick Bergquist)
    Sonet SDH DCC Information Wanted (Tom Engbersen)
    Digital Exchange Location Problem (Roni Levkovitz)
    Bellcore Standards Question (Craig Harris)
    10-XXX Codes (Eric Paulak)
    "Jitter" as a Quantity (Joe Habermann)
    Wanted: NEC SMDR Software (Daniel Land)
    FCC BBS Invites Calls (Shaun Maher)
    Seeking Canadian Telco WWW Addresses (Helen Vanderheide)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Peter Campbell Smith)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Phil Ritter)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Mitch Greer)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Marko Ruokonen)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Robert Hall)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Clive Feather)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Colum Mylod)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Julian Thornhill)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:21:03 EST
Subject: About the GIF Incident and Substitutes
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>


With the recent problems over the use of Unisys patented LZW
compression in GIF files, there has been suggested people switch to
JPEG format.  Then someone else pointed out that IBM has a patent on
the compression format that uses.

Aparently both are the same algorithm.  David Winfrey <[e-mail]>
points out that the information on this is in rtfm.mit.edu:/pub/usenet/
news.answers/compression-faq/part[1-3].

(Rtfm was busy so I used the site "pit-manager" which is the old name
for BLOOM-PICAYUNE.MIT.EDU.  (Did you know any time you put any
message on a big-7 Usenet group that has the phrase 'pit-manager' in
it, RTFM sends you a nastygram telling you the name is now 'rtfm'?
Even if you were to write, "I was a pit-manager in a casino," in a
message.)

Under current patent laws, if both patents do cover the same invention,
if someone can figure out which one was invented later, the patent on
that one can be overturned.  Also, it may be possible to play one off
against the other, e.g. if they want to fight over this, the other one
can be used to argue the invalidity of theirs.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 12:04 EST
From: Stephen Goodman <[e-mail]>
Subject: GIF Unisys Response


FYI -- this came in my e-mail today.  Thought I would pass it along.


Excerpt from ... EDUPAGE.

Edupage, a summary of news items on information technology, is provided
three times each week as a service by Educom -- a Washington, D.C.-based
consortium of leading colleges and universities seeking to transform
education through the use of information technology.

UNISYS RELENTS ON PATENT INFRINGEMENT

Unisys has backed down on its intention to extract license fees from
software companies that use its patented approach to displaying
graphics online. The Graphics Interchange Format, or GIF, is so
popular, many software companies apparently thought the algorithm was
in the public domain. Unisys now says it will seek fees only for newly
created products that come out in 1995 or thereafter, and only from
major for-profit software developers. (Chronicle of Higher Education
1/13/95 A20)

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:28:34 -0500
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation
Subject: Changes in Hong Kong Dial Plan


I've been getting inquiries from some of our international divisions
about a change that's supposed to be coming soon in Hong Kong's dial
plan and/or number plan -- something about adding a '2' at the beginning
of the number.

Can anyone provide me with details about the change? Does it affect
only calls within Hong Kong, or will the dial string used to reach
Hong Kong from other "countries" change, too?


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]
Subject: Problems Calling Zaire
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 16:41:08 +1000
Organization: Viatel


We are having trouble calling certain numbers in Zaire through Mercury.
They will only recognize numbers going to city codes 12 and 222 (i.e.
24312 ... and 243222 ...). An example of the numbers we are dialing
starts with 243884.

We know that these numbers are valid as we can reach them when dialing
through MCI.

Mercury has said that they have the French Telco carry this traffic
and that neither of them block any numbers going to Zaire. The
progression of the responses that we have received from Mercury is
that these numbers are invalid (untrue) and that these destination
number can't exist (also untrue). I have proven these numbers to be
valid with Mercury by conferencing them in on calls to the one of the
destination numbers over MCI. After this was done, the technicians
working on the fault said that the only way they could continue to
work on this was by having the name and address of the destination
number. We are unable to provide this information. I have spoken to a
supervisor at Mercury who feels that this is an unreasonable request.

We have been trying to resolve this problem since Dec 16th. Any input
regarding this will be greatly appreciated. Feel free to respond to us
directly or via the newsgroup.


Jonathan V. Bland   Viatel Operations

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

From: [e-mail] (James Baker)
Subject: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary?
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:59:03 -0800
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


Is there still a technical reason for the two second delay at the
beginning of a phone call?

I understand that some old analog switches could be fooled into
billing the call incorrectly or not at all if certain tones were
present within the first two seconds of ringing. Thus the FCC
requirements for auto answer stuff is to wait two seconds after
ringing before answering the phone (or at leaset before sending any
signals into the phone wires).

I doubt any such switches are still in use so perhaps it is time to
petition the FCC to remove this requirement from Part 68.

BTW ... here is a rough calculation based on figures out of my head of the
national cost of this old regulation still being on the books. Suppose 250
million people make an average of five calls a day to answering machines,
auto-attendants etc. If you value the average person's time at $10 / hour
the annual cost is about $7 million. I suspect the real figure is higher.


James Baker    Seattle, WA   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Aharonoff)
Subject: Northern TeleCom Norstar Key System
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 23:19:11 GMT


Would like to get some feedback on reliability, expandability, stability
on a Norstar switch by Northern Telecom. We are also looking to get a
voice-mail that would compliment that system.

This is for a small company of about 30 employees with a high degree
of voice-mail usage and support calls.

Any suggestions or feedback is very much appreciated.


Thanks,

Daniel Aharonoff
Please post to newsgroup and my personal account @ [e-mail]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Home Page: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/il/ilink/infolink.html
infoLink Communications

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim McCormack)
Subject: Voice Response Unit Question
Date: 11 Jan 1995 13:27:06 GMT
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jim McCormack)


I presently operate a voice/fax response unit using a 486 pc with
analog phone lines directly connected to a Rhetorex voice board.

The software and hardware I have is capable of being used with a PBX
to do call transfers.  I don't have a PBX but I was wondering if I
could purchase a desktop phone which could be configured so that if a
caller asks for my extension the voice response unit would transfer
the call to the phone just like a PBX.

Anybody have any ideas?

Thanks in advance for your help.


Jim McCormack

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 00:30:50 CST
From: [e-mail] (Erick Bergquist)
Subject: Network Access Wanted in Kenosha, WI - 414


Hello,

  I am looking for a way to get network access in Kenosha, WI, even if
it means getting my own direct 57.6k, T1 connection.

  There are no local net providers (besides the university and a BBS
that offers email). I am looking into starting my own service, but
lack the funds, and can't find enough people that are willing to do it
right, and keep it going.

If anyone knows of any service/provider that has local access, please
let me know, or how much a T1, 57.6, would cost directly.

I called many services/providers, and none offers decent local access,
at high speed rates. Netcom is moving into the Madison/Milwaukee area,
and I don't know if they will cover Kenosha locally.

Kenosha is on the border of WI, and IL, on Lake Michigan. Right
inbetween Chicago and Milwaukee. It seems to me that this area is
being left out, as there are plenty of ways I can get access if I were
located south or north of here.

If you know of anything, contact me. Network access is kind of
important to me, and I am seeking a stable connection. If you are in
this area, and are also looking for access, then contact me, and maybe
we can work on this problem together.

Thanks for the Help!!!


Erick Bergquist ([e-mail])
Computer Programmer/Analyst, Microcomputer Specialist, and such.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Sonet SDH DCC Information Wanted
Date: 11 Jan 1995 08:38:28 GMT
Organization: IBM Research Zurich
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In Sonet/SDH multiplexer and section overhead, there are the D1..D12
bytes, reserved for "network management and supervision". Can anyone
shed some light on the data transmission protocol which governs these
DCC channels?  Is this (already?) standardized? If so which standard?


Kind regards,

Ton Engbersen

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

From: [e-mail] (Levkovitz Roni)
Subject: Digital Exchange Location Problem
Organization: Technion, Israel Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 14:29:44 GMT


I am working on a project of finding the optimal location of digital
exchanges that are connected by optical links.  The problem is to
minimize the cost of connecting new lines and maintaining the existing
once. I have tried , in vain, to find references to other works on
similar problems.  It will be of great help if anybody can tell me
where to look for such references.


Thanks in advance,

Ron Levkovitz    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Craig Harris)
Subject: Bellcore Standards Question
Date: 11 Jan 1995 16:19:36 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I am looking for any Bellcore specification on an idle T-1 channel.
That is, if the channel is idle, would the T1 equipment send 01111111
or 10000000?


Craig Harris                 email:  [e-mail]
Motorola Inc.  Suite 1450    pager:  [phone] pin 87119
777 108th Ave. NE            office: [phone]
Belluevue, WA 98004          mobile: [phone]

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 00:05:55 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Eric Paulak)
Subject: 10-XXX Codes


FYI

If you're a hospital, university or hotel that is classified as an
aggregator/reseller, and you just upgraged your PBX to deal with the
new North American Numbering Plan, you may have just set yourself up
for a legal nightmare. Here's why:

According to a law that was passed in 1990, all aggregators must
unblock their switches so that a caller can reach their long distance
carrier of choice. What this required so that you wouldn't get stuck
paying for the cost of the calls was that your switch had to pass
through and differentiate calls that started with either 10-XXX-1 or
calls that started with 10-XXX-0.

If you could do this at the time the law was passed, you had to do it
right then. If you could upgrade your switch for less than $15/station,
you had to do this by Jan. 10, 1994. If it cost you more than $15/station,
you have until April 17, 1997. And, if you upgraded your switch anytime
prior to April 17, 1997, you had to offer access at that time.

So, if you just went through an upgrade to be able to accomodate the new
interchangeable area codes and the new expanded carrier identification codes
(101-XXXX), you are now capable of allowing access to any long distance
carrier, and you must do so or be subject to FCC fines.

Another bit of information dealing with 10-XXX codes. The number of
available carrier information codes with the 10-XXX format is down to
around 20. At the present rate that format should expire sometime in
February. At that time, the new format will be 101-XXXX.


Eric Paulak
The Center for Communications Management Information
[phone], ext. 327
11300 Rockville Pike, Suite 1100, Rockville, MD 20852

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Habermann)
Subject: "Jitter" as a Quantity
Organization: University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 17:13:16 GMT


I need a solid reference for "delay jitter" as quantity w.r.t.  frames
arrivals.  Much of the material that I've read defines jitter as the
variation interarrival times, but what I really want is a quantitative
definition that's effectively "the jitter for two event arrivals is
difference between the expected and observed interarrival times."

I found an example of the use of "jitter" as a quantity recently in a
paper that I was reading: ".. The conference origination application
delivers frames to the network adapter at an aggregrate rate of 1
frame every 33 seconds (with a measured jitter of +- 2 ms)."

But the paper does not define jitter.  It's obvious what is
meant, but I really need a solid definition from a solid source.


Thanks,

Joe Habermann / [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Land)
Subject: Wanted  NEC SMDR Software
Date: 11 Jan 1995 10:39:04 -0800


Wanted: PC Software for capturing SMDR output from a NEC NEAX2400 IMS
PBX rs232 port --

Software Needed  -  Free or Low Cost

Does anyone have some PC (maybe even Windows) based software to
capture the SMDR output from this model of NEC PBX.

Please respond by e-mail if possible.


Thank you,


Daniel H. Land*              Seattle Public Schools
voice [phone]                mailstop AF-334
fax [phone]         4141 Fourth Avenue South
net [e-mail]  Seattle, WA 98134-2309

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

From: [e-mail] (Smithwick-Belendiuk)
Subject: FCC BBS Invites Calls
Date: 11 Jan 1995 20:52:32 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470


Smithwick & Belendiuk, P.C., a Washington area communications law
firm, offers a free Bulletin Board System - "FCC WORLD."  FCC WORLD
maintains FCC libraries of files, updated daily, Forums on FCC issues
and Classifieds Ads for the communications industries.  The service is
free and has no time limit with two lines in service.  Try FCC WORLD
at 202-887-5718 today!


Shaun Maher   Sysop - FCC WORLD    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Helen Vanderheide)
Subject: Seeking Canadian Telco WWW Addresses
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:22:37 MST
Organization: ED TEL


Does anyone know where I can get WWW addresses of companies like:

- Bell Canada
- BCE
- Northern Telecom
- Mobility Canada
- CANTEL

Thanks in advance to anyone that can help.


Helen Vanderheide
ED TEL, Information Services
Email:  [e-mail]
Voice:  403-441-7877
Fax:    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Campbell Smith)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas
Organization: Logica, London
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 11:35:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Tony Harminc <EL406045@BROWNVM.
brown.edu> writes:

> What happens if you dial a Canadian 800 number this way?  Is the
> overseas carrier actually doing an SS7 lookup to determine the carrier
> or are they just assuming that country code 1 = USA ?  Sigh -- I can
> guess the answer.  Could someone with a few pence to burn try a
> Canadian number that isn't reachable from the US, such as Bell
> Canada's Ontario business office line 800 668-2355 (or 800 NOT-BELL as
> I prefer to think of it)?

> I won't be surprised to hear that you get to pay for a call that says
> "the number you have dialed cannot be reached from your calling area"

 From the UK you first get the recording saying that if the call is
answered you will have to pay for it, then a few rings, then a
recording saying that the 800 number you have called is not available
where you are calling from, ending with the words '702 7'.  I have no
way of telling whether I was actually charged for the call, though a
non-800 call that gets to North America but ends with an American
recording (such as the number you have dialed is not in service) is not
billed.

One might think that 702 was where my call 'landed' in North America,
but according to my (possibly out of date) list it is Nevada, which
seems somewhat unlikely.  I know international calling used to be a
bit of a gamble ...


Peter Campbell Smith, Logica, London, UK
mailto: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I have called 800 numbers which were
not in service and wound up getting intercept messages from the geographical
area code where the 800 service had been located, such as 'the number you
dialed is not in service, 312, etcetera ..'

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Ritter)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas
Organization: AirTouch Cellular, Los Angeles
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:46:09 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Mr Robert Hall <[e-mail].
NET> writes:

> Judith Oppenheimer and Ari Wuolle have both discussed the fact that it
> is now possible to access U.S. 800 numbers from international locations.
> Following Judith's dialing suggestions, I attempted to call a number
> of 800 numbers from Hong Kong.  For example, I dialed:

> 011                 International Access Code
>    1                Country Code for U.S.
>      800-555-1212   800 Directory Assistance

> The call appears to have been processed by the Hong Kong switch, but I
> get a recording in a very American voice telling me:

> "access to the 800 number you have dialed is not free when dialed from
> outside the United States.  If you proceed with this call, you will be
> billed international direct dial rates for this call.  If you do not
> wish to proceed with this call, hang up now".

I also wonder how the billing is handled on the US side.  Since the
carrier is receiving revenue for this call on the originating side, do
they still bill the 800 number owner (the terminating party) for the
calls?  If they don't, how do they differentiate these calls.  If they
do, it sounds like the IXC has their hands in both parties pockets.
Not a bad deal (for the carrier, that is).  Sure explains the
incentive to open up 800 for IDDD!


Phil Ritter   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think the caller is billed for the
portion of the call from his country to the gateway in the USA where
the carrier's switch is located, and the USA recipeient of the call is
billed for the USA portion only, same as before. When we first discussed
this a couple years ago, when AT&T was handling international calls to
800 numbers via their USA Direct program, didn't we discover that the
international caller was billed for a call to Pittsburgh, PA at an AT&T
office there, and the USA party got billed for an 800 call from Pittsburgh
to wherever they were?   PAT]

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

From: Mitch [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas
Date: 11 Jan 1995 20:51:27 GMT
Organization: DCLU - City of Seattle


> I've been wondering about overseas access to non-US NANP 800 numbers.
> What happens if you dial a Canadian 800 number this way?

> Could someone with a few pence to burn try a
> Canadian number that isn't reachable from the US, such as Bell
> Canada's Ontario business office line 800 668-2355 (or 800 NOT-BELL as
> I prefer to think of it)?

> I won't be surprised to hear that you get to pay for a call that says
> "the number you have dialed cannot be reached from your calling area".

I tried and was turned back from the local switch with:

"You have reached a number that is disconnected or no longer in
service.  If you feel that you've reached this recording in error..."

I'm in range of Canadian TV from Vancouver and just for giggles I
occasionally try a Canadian 800 and I always get turned back with that
recording.  The last time I was in Vancouver I tried calling a
friend's 800 number in Los Angeles from a coin phone and was turned
back with a recording from the 206 area code.


Mitch

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

Date: 11 Jan 95 15:22:16 EST
From: Marko Ruokonen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas


Here's what I have found out about dialing US 800 numbers from Germany
by ISDN and by GSM (D1-Telekom):

First, I tried 001-800-555-1212 (00 international access code, 1 CC for US):

ISDN: tri-tone, "Keine Verbindung unter dieser Vorwahl".
(Translation: "No connection by this area code")

GSM: German ringing tone, then the anouncement "Leider ist uns diese
Rufnummer nicht bekannt. Am besten fragen Sie bei der Auskunft nach.-
We are afraid we have no record of this number. Please call the information
service". (Note: there is NO tri-tone with the announcement).

Then, I tried just 001-800:

ISDN: same as above.

GSM: (after a looong delay, 20 sec.): "Die von Ihnen gewahlte Rufnummer ist
unvollstandig. Bitte rufen Sie die Auskunft an.", translation (not in the
announcement): "The number you have dialed is incomplete. Please call directory
assistance".

Note: Dialing just 001 on the GSM results in the "incomplete" message,
but only after five seconds. Makes me wonder what is going on in the
switch when someone dials 001-800. I do not think this is a timeout
situation, since on the GSM phone I have to enter the number and press
"SEND" to place the call and it is not possible to append numbers
after SEND has been pressed.


Marko Ruokonen   [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 09:55:05 HKT
From: Mr Robert Hall <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas


Tony Harminc <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I've been wondering about overseas access to non-US NANP 800 numbers.
> What happens if you dial a Canadian 800 number this way?  Is the
> overseas carrier actually doing an SS7 lookup to determine the carrier
> or are they just assuming that country code 1 = USA ?  Sigh -- I can
> guess the answer.  Could someone with a few pence to burn try a
> Canadian number that isn't reachable from the US, such as Bell
> Canada's Ontario business office line 800 668-2355 (or 800 NOT-BELL as
> I prefer to think of it)?

> I won't be surprised to hear that you get to pay for a call that says
> "the number you have dialed cannot be reached from your calling area".

Tony:

I tried dialing the NOT BELL number.  Received my same message ("you'll have
to pay for this call").  Waited on the line after the message, but the
line was cut.  Something somewhere isn't working, even if I stay on
the line indicating that I will pay IDD charges!


Regards,

Rob Hall

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

From: Judith Oppenheimer <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 21:57:35 -0500
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas


The call being completed with the message "this is not a free
call" are being done by Sprint.


Judith Oppenheimer

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

Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 09:41:05 GMT
From: Clive D.W. Feather <[e-mail]>


Quoth Tony Harminc:

> I've been wondering about overseas access to non-US NANP 800 numbers.
> What happens if you dial a Canadian 800 number this way?

> Could someone with a few pence to burn try a
> Canadian number that isn't reachable from the US, such as Bell
> Canada's Ontario business office line 800 668-2355

I got the above message (though with slightly different wording)
referring to the United States, followed by ringing. I then hung up.


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] (Colum Mylod)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas
Date: 12 Jan 1995 10:32:26 GMT
Organization: Oracle Corporation. Redwood Shores, CA


Tony Harminc ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I've been wondering about overseas access to non-US NANP 800 numbers.
> What happens if you dial a Canadian 800 number this way? [...]
> Canada's Ontario business office line 800 668-2355 (or 800 NOT-BELL as

Caling from +44 land: "access to the 800 number you have dialed is
not free from outside the United States..." etc, i.e. the (now) usual
disclaimer before the number rings. I hung up on the first subsequent
ring.

Sorry Canada, you've been annexed.

PS: Access to +1 800 is still blocked from other European countries.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 11:16:32 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Julian Thornhill)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas


> I've been wondering about overseas access to non-US NANP 800 numbers.
> What happens if you dial a Canadian 800 number this way?

> I won't be surprised to hear that you get to pay for a call that says
> "the number you have dialed cannot be reached from your calling area".

Well I just tried it from the UK via British Telecom and got the usual
message "800 numbers from outside the **US** are not free ..." and
then I got the ringing tone, so I guess it works. Didn't stay on the
line to see who answered though!


Regards,

Julian Thornhill        Email to [e-mail]
Physics Department      Tel [phone]    FAX [phone]
Leicester University    [phone] (international)
University Road         Leicester LE1 7RH

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #26
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25955;
          12 Jan 95 19:26 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02021; Thu, 12 Jan 95 13:12:13 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA02014; Thu, 12 Jan 95 13:12:10 CST
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 13:12:10 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #27

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 Jan 95 13:12:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 27

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cell Phone PINs (Jeffrey Mattox)
    Re: Cell Phone PINs (Matthew P. Downs)
    Re: Cell Phone PINs (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (K Gooding)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (G Hlavenka)
    Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs? (James M. Roden)
    Re: Need an EBCDIC Spec (Paul Robinson)
    Re: SNA Over Token Ring (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Some Questions About the LDDS Calling Card ([e-mail])
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Bob Keller)
    Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code (Daniel Fandrich)
    Re: Urgent Help Needed With European Phone System (Wolf Paul)
    Re: Is TeleScript Already Available? (Michael Libes)
    Last Laugh: Speaking About Who is Boss (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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Jeffrey Mattox)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone PINs
Date: 11 Jan 1995 16:42:08 GMT
Organization: Heurikon Corporation


In article <[e-mail]>, Carl Oppedahl <oppedahl@patents.
com> wrote:

> I was reading a book about the cellular system that was published
> eight years ago ... it identified the problem that if people copy down
> the ESN and phone number they could get free calls ... despite this
> the cellular industry moved ahead with the present system.

Somewhere, the person(s) that made the design/political decisions to
implement the system this horrible way are watching.  They probalby
even have cellular phones themselves.  I wonder what they are
thinking.  "Gosh, I was a dumb so-an-so for ..."  I wonder if it's the
same guy who invented the VCR programming scheme -- in which case he's
probably more of the mind to be laughing at the mess he's created.


Jeffrey Mattox -- [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone PINs
Date: 11 Jan 1995 16:47:50 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


[e-mail] (Steve Seydell) writes:

> [e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson) writes:

>> Sorry but I seem to be missing something here. If the PIN is sent in
>> the clear then anyone grabbing the cell phone number off the air will
>> also get the PIN.

> The PIN is sent as DTMF across the voice channel.  The ESN and mobile
> ID are currently stolen by listening to the reverse signalling
> channel.  It is technically possible to steal the PIN, but it will
> take some time for thiefs to catch up.  The money saved by the telcos
> will easily cover the cost of purchasing and operating this feature.

Determining DTMF tones is very easy.  It seems like they could come up
with a better method which would be as cheap.


Matt

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

Subject: Re: Cell Phone PINs
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 21:35:20 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (Steve Seydell) writes:

>> Sorry but I seem to be missing something here. If the PIN is sent in
>> the clear then anyone grabbing the cell phone number off the air will
>> also get the PIN.

> The PIN is sent as DTMF across the voice channel.  The ESN and mobile
> ID are currently stolen by listening to the reverse signalling
> channel.  It is technically possible to steal the PIN, but it will
> take some time for thiefs to catch up.  The money saved by the telcos
> will easily cover the cost of purchasing and operating this feature.

CellularOne, in the New York City area, seems to have no concern about
this issue.  Their "pin" numbers aren't required if you roam outside
your home area (even for NYC area customers roaming in southern New
Jersey).  It would seem that while exposing their NYC roamer customers
to potential fraud, they have not implemented their fraud-protection
system in such a way to protect their home customers from fraud while
roaming.

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

From: impact <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly
Date: 11 Jan 1995 19:27:03 GMT
Organization: CompuTech


>> Today, I was in the airport that serves Atlanta, GA.  I tried to place a
>> few 1-800 toll free calls, and had a lot of trouble.  Numbers I know
>> to be good got responses of "invalid number".  I'd reach for another pay
>> phone, and got thru to the number. I tried the same numbers later that
>> day (while getting hung up with the dead Newark airport mess) in the
>> Atlanta airport and got more "invalid number"; another attempt got me
>> thru, then I got cut off.  Pay phones were labeled "PTC" (or something
>> like that) and also said that the local exchange didn't "own" these
>> phones.  Some phones didnt work at all (bad keypads, or just dead).  I
>> don't know who "PTC" is, but they really SUCK!

When I worked as an operator for an AOS, we had many many reports of
payphones that would not complete toll-free calls, as well as those
that would actually CHARGE the end-user for a toll-free call. My
understanding is that the COCOT owner has the ability to program that
phone any way that s/he sees fit, be it legal or not. Let's face it,
if you're using that phone for a toll-free call, the phone owner is
making no money from coin or card paid calls...


Katherine Gooding
ITC Teleservices - LDDSMetromedia - What? Now WilTel too?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes you are correct that the person with
the admin passcode can program the COCOT however s/he sees fit ... as
you put it, legal or not ... and I will add, usually not. Now, we are
expected to have sympathy for the poor person who owns the phone and is
making no money during the time we are making our toll-free call. Well,
that's just another example of how intricately the phone network is
locked together. The way we *used* to do it was to have all pay phones
owned by the telco. The telco in turn was part of a process at AT&T
called 'separations and settlements' ... where telcos were paid for
their share of traffic over internetwork facilities where they did not
actually collect the money from the user. In turn, a portion of what
they actually collected went into the pot to pay the other telcos
involved. Gee, that method worked great for several decades ... then
Judge Greene decided things needed to be fixed and changed. Now instead
of separations and settlements done in a uniform way, every COCOT
owner does his own thing with the public phone user being damned.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (gordon hlavenka)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly
Organization: Vpnet - Your FREE link to the Internet [phone]
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 04:46:39 GMT


[e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:

> Today, I was in the airport that serves Atlanta, GA.  I tried to place a
> few 1-800 toll free calls, and had a lot of trouble.  Numbers I know
> to be good got responses of "invalid number".

Andrew Laurence <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Could it be that the numbers you were calling were not reachable from
> that area? Some 800 numbers specifically include or exclude certain
> states or regions.

Recently I ran across a payphone in Oakbrook Terrace, IL which wanted
fifty cents to reach an 800 number!  Made me wish I had a tow rope in
the truck :-)

Payphone owners receive no revenues from 800 calls.  Hence I'd imagine
that they don't rate 800-access problems very high on their list of
priorities.


Gordon S. Hlavenka   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (James M. Roden)
Subject: Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs?
Date: 11 Jan 1995 21:47:49 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access    [phone]  [Login: guest]


Linc Madison ([e-mail]) wrote:

> In some of the recent discussions of the swarm of new area codes
> coming this year, I've seen notations that the wireless companies are
> challenging plans to move wireless services (cellular, beepers, etc.)
> into an overlay area code.  The challenges are being made to the state
> regulators and/or to the FCC.

> My question is, on what grounds are they challenging the overlays?  It
> seems to me that the tariffs have always been pretty clear that the
> telco does not in any way guarantee that you will be able to keep a
> given number or area code.

The real reason wireless (read cellular) carriers do not want to
switch their entire customer base to another NPA is (think about this)
_EVERY_ customer phone would have to be reprogrammed with the new NPA
number.  Going forward is one thing. Changing the base is quite
another.


Mike Roden / N5FL / [e-mail] / San Antonio, Texas

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 14:08:00 EST
Subject: Re: Need an EBCDIC Spec
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>


The specifications for EBCDIC are available in many IBM 370 Mainframe
publications, as IBM is the inventor and primary user for the EBCDIC
specification.

If you have a college near you that has an IBM or equivalent mainframe
and still teaches assembly language, their book store should have the
Gold Card, which is a small pamphlet listing various assembly instructions
and a list of the EBCDIC character set and the translation of the
equivalent to ASCII.  Most programming manuals for IBM Mainframe
languages will include it, and if your local university or college has
books on IBM mainframe themes, one of them will probably include a
listing of the translation table, which is in the public domain.

You may also want to take a look at:

ds.internic.net:/rfc/rfc1345.txt

Which contains a list of many character sets, and will probably
include the listing for EBCDIC.

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 14:16:36 EST
Subject: Re: SNA Over Token Ring
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>


Timothy S. Chaffee <[e-mail]>, writes:

> I am looking into moving our print traffic from a SDLC/SNA
> connection to run over our Token Ring network. Can this be done? Any
> pointers in the right direction would be greatly appreciated!

There is a company -- the name escapes me -- selling a product called
the "Hydra" which connnects in place of a terminal controller, and
allows RS232 connections to look like 3270 terminals, allowing a
person on a PC or a modem to call into an SNA terminal network as if
their terminal WAS a 3270 terminal. If they can do this, they probably
have something that will do what you want.

Also, Black Box (someone here will have their number) has a statement
in their catalog that if you can describe to them a box to do a
protocol conversion they will see if they can find one if they have
it, or will quote you a price to create it if they don't have it and
their engineers can figure out how to make one.

Considering the number of nice printers including postscript and laser
that are out, I wouldn't be surprised if a device like this isn't
already out there for sale, probably around $2-3000, or roughly
whatever an internetwork device to connect SNA networks would cost,
which I'm not really familiar with.

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

From: [e-mail] (SM Communications And Marketing)
Subject: Re: Some Questions About the LDDS Calling Card
Date: 11 Jan 1995 19:15:27 -0500
Organization: InfiNet - Internet Access (614/224-3410)


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

> Well, I got the fabled LDDS calling card in the mail.  You know, the
> one its salesmen annoy people in every newsgroup with ads about?  It
> _is_ supposed to have much better rates than my AT&T or Sprint cards,
> and I guess I'll find out as soon as I need to use it.

Yes it does and you'll see it when you use it and receive your bill.
It is only 17.5 cents per minute and no surcharges.

> Anyway, a few questions:

> a) All I got in my envelope was the card (in a paper carrier).  No
> brochure w/rates or anything.  I sorta know the rates but would have
> liked a paper reference.  Was there something missing?

You could ask the sales person who sent you the application to send
you a printed brochure. They have a nice brochure/order from that
describes everything about the calling card.

> b) My card has the logo of "American Travel Network" on the
> upper-right-hand side.  I also hear "Metromedia" associated with the
> LDDS name, but it doesn't appear on the card.  Who's ATN, are there
> different versions of the card, and if so are there different rates?

ATN is American Travel Network. They are the resellers of LDDS/Metromedia
service. They are marketing the calling card and discount residential
and business services. However, the billing is done by LDDS/Metromedia.

LDDS and Metromedia were two different companies before, they merged
(I think) September 1993 and formed the new company called LDDS/Metromedia.
However sometimes you can see just LDDS or just Metromedia being used.
(I am not sure about this but they may have some old stock supplies to
finish!) :-)

There are no versions of the card. It is one calling card with 17.5
cents rate. The rate would the same no matter which representative you
get it from of directly from ATN.  However, note that you cannot get
the card directly from LDDS/Metromedia! since ATN is created this
program and they have special conract with LDDS/Metromedia to market
at this rate.  LDDS/Metromedia does not market at that rate!


Metin         e-mail: [e-mail]
Europe Frm $0.35     | FREE calling card, 17.5 cents, no surcharge.
India      $0.99     | Flat rate LD: As low as 10 cents per minute!
Asia   Frm $0.45     |***Free*800*service*as low as 12.5 cents flat rate***
Middle East Frm $0.89| Credit Card Merchant          | Save 50-90% off your
S.America Frm $0.75  | Accounts. As low as 1.65%     | International Calls.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sometimes I delete .signatures and
obvious advertisements; sometimes not ... usually I do, but I saw this
fellow's thing above and it reminded me of when I used to do Orange
Card here ... as you who signed up through me will recall, Orange is
still another of the resellers of LDDS. I hope *he* makes some money
at it ... :) I still get my Orange Card residual checks every month, as
pitiful as they are, now a couple years after getting involved.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 12:50:46 EST
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges


Hi Pat,

> Most readers have been following this thread in the Digest in recent
> days. Bill Sohl has written a final response on the topic, in which
> he summarizes FCC regulations and responds to comments made by myself
> in recent issues.

I have _not_ been following the thread closely due to press of other
business, but I could not resist agreeing with you and disagreeing
with Mr. Sohl on one point ...

> You (PAT) said:

>> Aside from what the Electronic Communications Privacy Act says, the
>> Federal Communications Commission addresses the question of radios
>> which have been modified.  Illegal modification (i.e. modification
>> by an unlicensed person) voids your FCC authority to operate the
>> radio.

> Sorry, that is absolutely false.  The FCC part 15 rules are the
> specifc requirements for which RF devices must be tested against by
> the FCC to CERTIFY them for initial sale to the public.  That is all
> that the rules govern ... initial certification.  The rules do not grant
> any "authority to operate" the device, nor do the forbid operation of
> any certified device that has been modified after the initial sale nor
> do they forbid operation of any uncertified device that may have been
> built from scratch.  Bottom line...Part 15 rules impose absolutely NO
> duty on the consumer.

I don't agree.  Rule 15.1(b) provides:

    "The operation of an intentional or unintentional radiator
     that is not in accordance with the regulations in this part
     must be licensed pursuant to the provisions of Section 301
     of the Communications Act, as amended, unless otherwise
     exempted from the licensing requirements elsewhere in this
     chapter."

Note that this rule addresses _operation_ of the device.  In most, if
not all, radio services, the modified device would not be properly
type accepted in the applicable service which would, in turn, preclude
licensing of its use pursuant to Section 301 except in special cases
(e.g., an experimental or developmental authorization, or possibly
certain amateur radio uses within ham bands and subject to ham rules).

> Anyone can buy any commercial receiver (or scanner, or TV, or
> computer, etc.) and modify it in any way they want and not be in
> violation (as you claim) of any law.  Additionally, hobbyists have
> been building their own receivers and/or modifying commercial (as well
> as military surplus) receivers for years.  Doing so is not a crime,
> nor does it render the use of any such home built or modified RECEIVER
> illegal.  Furthermore, there is NO license required to build, modify,
> repair or otherwise tinker with any radio receiving equipment used by
> the general population.

I am not sure that this statement can be squared with Section 15.21 of
the FCC Rules which provides:

    "The users manual or instruction manual for an intentional
     or unintentional radiator shall caution the user that
     changes or modifications not expressly approved by the
     party responsible for compliance could void the user's
     authority to operate the equipment."

While I would not necessarily go so far as to label scanner and other
receiver adjustments and/or modifications as necessarily or even
likely "criminal," it is nonetheless important to keep in mind two
important factors:

    (1) A device or a circuit within a device that is
        "receive-only" may still be (and in the case of
        radio receivers usually is) either an intentional
        or unintentional radiator within the meaning of
        Part 15 of the Rules; and

    (2) Without even getting into the debate over the special
        statutory and regulatory provisions applicable to
        cellular-capable scanners, there is a _big_
        difference between opening up a device to repair, allign,
        or adjust it and modifying the manufacturer's design
        features of the device.


Bob Keller (KY3R)   Robert J. Keller, P.C.   Tel: [phone]
[e-mail]   Telecommunications Law   Fax: [phone]
<ftp://ftp.clark.net/pub/rjk/>      <finger [e-mail]>


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you, Bob. Section 15.21 is all
I was trying to get across to readers here. No, one does not have to
have a 'license', ie. written document or whatever to operate a
receiving only radio; authority is automatically given when you buy
it from a licensed source. But as soon as you tamper with the innards
and make changes in how or what the radio receives, and how it processes
what it receives *and you are an unlicensed person* -- that is, you lack a
tech ticket -- then according the FCC and 15.21 you lose your authority
(albiet granted originally by default) to 'operate' the radio, which may
amount to nothing more than twisting the off/on switch and the tuning dial.
May I suggest to readers the next time you decide to purchase some sort of
radio, or television perhaps, *look at the user manual*. Let's leave Radio
Shack out of this since some people around here seem to think I am in
cahoots with Tandy or somehow playing tricks using their name. Buy your
radio from whoever. Read the manual. Note the legal verbiage in there
somewhere about *losing your 'authority' to operate the darn thing if you
make unlicensed repairs or modifications*. Why do you think General
Electric, Best Buy, K-Mart, Wal-Mart, etc and oh yeah!  Radio Shack put
that admonition in there?  The FCC *requires* them to do so.

Radio Shack was putting in the FCC admonition, then their clerks were
making mock of it. In essence, the FCC said, "We'll show who is boss ...'
and they did.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 19:57:40 -0800
From: Daniel Fandrich <[e-mail]>
Organization: Fandrich Cone Harvesters Ltd.
Subject: Re: Procedure for Obtaining a 10XXX Code


> And while we're at it, are there any 10XXX[X] codes assigned in
> Canada?

There are at least two "casual dialing" codes in BC: BC Tel (and
probably all Stentor members) has 10323, and Unitel has 10869.  Other
companies I've talked to either claimed not to have a code (e.g.
Sprint Canada) or simply refused to divulge theirs.  I haven't gotten
around to asking the CRTC if the complete list is public information.

Using the 10323 code worked as expected -- the calls were billed as
regular long distance calls on BC Tel's bill.  Using 10869 on a line
with BC Tel as the primary carrier resulted in charges showing up in a
section titled "Other carriers' long distance" on BC Tel's bill.

The number 1-700-555-4141 works the same here as in the U.S., giving
the long distance carrier's name.  Unitel's message is a bit
misleading when it's dialed as 10869-1-700-555-4141, however, as it
states, "Effective immediately, long distance calls made from the
telephone number you are calling from will be on Unitel's long
distance network."  It seems they'd rather not acknowledge the
existence of 10XXX codes in favour of signing you up for automatic
dial-1 carrier access.


Dan

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 11:16:15 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Wolf Paul)
Subject: Re: Urgent Help Needed With European Phone System


In article [e-mail],  [e-mail] (Petar Nikic) writes:

>> What should I do to make a cordless phone work in Europe? I bought it
>> in Canada. There are two problems with the plugs: the phone plug and
>> the plug for the recharger. Both of them are different than those
>> which Europeans use.

This is not an easy question to answer since different phone plugs and
power plugs are used in the different European countries.

Additionally, the use of non-approved (i.e. foreign-bought) phones is
illegal in many European countries, and is considered especially serious
in the case of cordless phones, whose frequencies may interfere with
local frequency assignments.

However, if you are determined to take that phone with you, feel free
to call me once you are in Europe, and I will try to help you find the
necessary adapters.


Regards,

Wolf

  *** PLEASE NOTE MY NEW LOCATION, E-MAIL ADDRESS AND PHONE/FAX NUMBERS ***

Wolf N. Paul, UNIX Support/KSR          [e-mail]
Alcatel Austria AG                   [phone] (w)
Scheydgasse 41/E26                  [phone] (fax)
A-1210 Vienna, Austria (Europe)         [phone] (h)

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

From: [e-mail] (Sharpened Software)
Subject: Re: Is TeleScript Already Available?
Date: 11 Jan 1995 11:19:50 GMT
Organization: Sharpened Software Inc.


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

> Would there be anybody who can tell me if TeleScript is allready
> available.  I heard and read a lot about it and I would love to get
> hands-on experience.

Yes and no.  AT&T's new PersonaLink system runs the (currently) only
Telescript service.  There are a few developers working on more
Telescript services, but the development environment is not yet
available to anyone who want it.  The SDK, and the shrink-wrapped
Telescript engine are not yet stable and polished enough for general
use.


Michael Libes         Sharpened Software Inc
[e-mail]   Seattle, WA

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

From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Last Laugh: Speaking About Who is Boss
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 13:00:00 CST


On the topic of "we'll show who is boss" I am reminded of this delightful
little story first told to me about thirty years ago ...

One day the various parts of a man's body were having an argument among
themselves over which of them was the most important part. The arms claimed
to be the most important since they did whatever work was needed for the
man. No, no, not so, claimed the legs. We are the most important because
we convey the rest of the man's body, including his arms, to wherever he
wants to go. Without us, how could the arms get to where they need to be
to do their work?

The man's eyes claimed they were much more important, since without them,
the legs would not know where to walk and the arms would not know what
to touch or work with. The brain kept insisting that it was the body part
which coordinated all the rest; none of the others could function at all
without it it kept arguing.

All this time, the man's asshole had been sitting there listening
quietly to the discussion. Finally it spoke up with disdain and said
"I'll show who's boss!" Having said that, it went on strike; plugged
itself up, and refused to allow anything to pass by. It went on for a
couple weeks that way, and before long the man's legs and arms were
sluggish; his stomach hurt; his eyes had a burning sensation, and his
thinking process had slowed down quite a bit. He found himself sitting
in one place for long periods of time each day getting nothing accomplished.

Finally the asshole relented, and went back to work with the other body
parts. The moral of this story?

  *To succeed as a boss you don't need to be a brain, just an asshole.*


PAT

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #27
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa26452;
          12 Jan 95 20:15 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05174; Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:09:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05160; Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:09:00 CST
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:09:00 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #28

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:09:00 PST    Volume 15 : Issue 28

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary? (Steve Forrette)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (T Kennedy)
    Re: MANs in USA (David Goessling)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Jonathan Mosen)
    Re: Phone Rates From Israel (SM Communications And Marketing)
    Re: How to Keep Track of Calls on Busy (Caller ID on Busy)? (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (David Moon)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (P.B. Emerton)
    Re: Sprint and Calls Within Your Service Area (Javier Henderson)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Taavi Talvik)
    Re: First NNX Area Code Officially in Service is 630? (John Mayson)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Joe J. Harrison)
    Re: New Area Codes and PBX (Paul A. Lee)
    U.K. Cellular Band? (Jabulani Dhliwayo)
    GSM Mobile Telefone ERICSSON GH337 (Joachim Oschek)
    Arthur C. Clarke Gets Degree by Satellite (Matt Healy)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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 Forrette)
Subject: Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary?
Date: 12 Jan 1995 19:06:11 GMT
Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (James
Baker) says:

> Is there still a technical reason for the two second delay at the
> beginning of a phone call?

> ...  the FCC requirements for auto answer stuff is to wait two seconds after
> ringing before answering the phone (or at leaset before sending any
> signals into the phone wires).

I believe the actual requirement is that there be two seconds of
silence *after answering*.  The FCC doesn't care when you answer.  One
of the reasons for this is requirement is to prevent a device which
purposely answers the call, exchanges data for 1/2 second or so, then
hangs up right away, which would avoid toll charges in some situations.
A device could be designed to do this repeatedly to transmit an
unlimited amount of data (albiet slowly) without charge.  I think that
any modern switch would be immune from this type of fraud.


Steve Forrette, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Kennedy)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly
Date: 12 Jan 95 14:04:46
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University


Concerning some problems associated with pay phones at Atlanta's
Hartsfield airport, Paul Beker <[e-mail]> noted that:

> One interesting trend I've noticed lately: While only a couple of
> months ago, all the COCOTs were pre-subscribed to some ripoff,
> switchless, IXC, it looks like most of them have suddenly been
> switched to AT&T.

> This is definately a good thing, for the many people that would be
> getting ripped off dialing 0+ otherwise ...

I have found several times that I cannot use a 950-xxxx or 10xxx
access number for MCI from AT&T phones at Atlanta Hartsfield airport,
despite the fact that this number worked from all the other phones I
used in the airport. The only way I could use MCI was to ask the AT&T
operator to connect me, which they did with much ill-grace.

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: Strategic Services of KPMG Peat Marwick
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 12:13:34 EST
Subject: Re: MANs in USA


You might want to contact Faulkner Information Services, Pennsauken, NJ
(609-662-2070/800-843-0460 Fax: [phone]).

They have a report on Alternative Access Carriers (like MFS
Communications AKA Metropolitan Fiber Systems, etc.) that gives a
technical profile of each company's MAN, often including a map of the
system. Could be a bit expensive though ...

Some of these companies (e.g. MFS) are public, so you should be able
to get shareholder/financing info from their SEC-filed documents
(AR/10K/10Q). MFS is a subsidiary of Kiewit Diversified Group, which
owned 84.5% of the stock issued in April 1993. The underwriters of
this public offering were Salomon Bros and Bear Stearns.

As far as bank's usage, I think you need to do a literature search in
the telecom and banking press for examples.

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

From: [e-mail]@actrix.gen.nz (Jonathan Mosen)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Actrix Networks -- NZ Internet Service Providers.
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 01:24:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Robert Lindh) wrote:

> Luxemburg    Telekom
> Norway       Tele-Mobil
>              Netcom
> Portugal     TMN

New Zealand also has a GSM network, run by Bell South.

Jonathan Mosen, Manager Government Relations,
Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind,
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (SM Communications And Marketing)
Subject: Re: Phone Rates From Israel
Date: 11 Jan 1995 19:17:29 -0500
Organization: InfiNet - Internet Access (614/224-3410)


In article <[e-mail]>, JayK372 <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I believe that you can call from Israel for about 80 cents per minute
> from midnight Israel time to 8 a.m.  My recollection is that the
> highest rate, during the day, is about $1.50 per minute.  This is via
> Bezeq, the PTT.

Or you can use a callback service and pay only $0.99 per minute, billed
in six second increments with no service fees. (Flat rate, all the
time).



Metin         e-mail: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And when you use a callback service, you can
also learn to tolerate a huge amount of wrong number calls by dumbos in the
USA who dial your stateside callback number; let it ring a couple of times
and hang up after deciding maybe they dialed a wrong number. Of course the
equipment does not know that, so it proceeds to 'call you back' at your
number in Europe or wherever and wake you up at four in the morning local
time. I sold Telepassport for a few months, and they were absolutely
plagued with telemarketers dialing their DID callback numbers and/or just
plain wrong numbers. Here and there a phreak would appear also, trying to
mouse around with the Telepassport switch. Several of the people I signed
up for the service complained about getting 'callbacks' they did not make
at all hours of the night because someone stateside dialed their number.

Another concern would be if averaging out the cost was truly a benefit
or not. You have to decide if most of your calls are during the primetime
hours at the highest cost (in which case, having them averaged out to
99 cents per minute is a good deal) or if you can actually get them a lot
lower than that. It used to be the telcos charged a great deal for an
international call; then came the callback services and all of a sudden
AT&T, Sprint and MCI suddenly lowered their rates to match in many cases.
My experience with arbitrage was that there was too much work for the
agent (me!) with too little profit in return.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: How to Keep Track of Calls on Busy (Caller ID on Busy)?
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 20:02:51 -0800 (PST)


Pete Kruckenberg said:

> The first one is easy, but might not be feasible. If I could get
> caller ID's on a busy line, I'd just add caller ID to the last line in

Can't be done (unless you have ISDN). You could have Caller ID on Call
waiting though, BUT the caller ID transmission would interrupt the
carriers, and callers would lose theior connection. I don't believe
that ANY phone company in the US currently offers Caller ID on Call
Waiting.

> (again, last in hunt group), which would always be busy (I don't want
> it to ring and confuse the users), but would have call waiting and
> caller ID on call waiting, then just pipe the caller ID into the

But how would you keep it busy? You would have to get ANOTHER line to
hold that line busy (in other words have line A call line B which
holds it busy).  Otherwise, the phone company will think that the
phone is off the hook, and wouldn't transmit Caller ID on Call Waiting
(off-hook phones always report busy).

> If there are other, better ways of doing this, I'd appreciate your
> input.

Ask your phone company for an analysis.  They will do it, but maybe
not for for a residential customer, and it may not be free. The report
generally has the number of calls placed, answered, and returned busy
for each 30 minute period.  We had one for a month, but I think a week
would suffice for your needs.


Steve   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Moon)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 12 Jan 1995 16:41:58 GMT
Organization: General DataComm, Inc.


Bill Sohl contributed a FAQ about scanners, and part of Pat's response
was:

> Illegal modification (i.e. modification by an unlicensed person) voids
> your FCC authority to operate the radio. Furthermore, no *licensed*
> person is going to make illegal modifications to a radio and risk having
> such handiwork be traced back to his bench, at the possible risk of his
> loss of his license.

I'm sure this is true for radio transmitters, but for receivers? Are
you saying I need FCC authority to operate a receiver?

What kind of license are you talking about?


David Moon              [e-mail]
General Datacomm, Inc.  ATTMail:  !dmoon
Middlebury, CT 06762


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You don't need a printed license. Your
'authority' is granted by the FCC by default. The FCC claims absolute
control over all radio devices and the airwaves, etc.  As discussed
in an earlier message today, they claim in section 15.21 of their
code that they can revoke your (default) authority.  Transmitter,
receiver, cordless phone, baby monitor, whatever.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (PB Emerton)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Organization: University of the West of England, Bristol
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 12:55:43 GMT


Tony Pelliccio ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Actually the AOR-2500 comes through with the cell band intact. Or at
> least it did until the FCC attempted to clamp down on it. The nice
> thing is the AOR-2500 is considered a communications receiver and not
> a scanner and last I heard the whole thing was still tied up in
> hearings.

> Of course if you really want to follow a cell call just get a DDI and
> hook it up to your PC. The interesting thing is that the company that
> sells the DDI will only release software with ESN capability to law
> enforcement people. Makes you wonder doesn't it?

What company is it?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please see the referenced remarks of Tony
Pelliccio above: 'FCC tried to clamp down ... still tied up in court'.
A word to the wise: you don't want to mess with those people *too much*.
A little maybe, but not too much.

Like some people here who have disagreed with me over the past couple
days on this, I seriously doubt the FCC is going to stage any massive
actions to get cellular phone equipped scanners out of circulation, etc.
But what I can tell you is they can be a nasty bunch of buggers when
they want to be. In the past they have gone into pirate radio stations
and started pulling wires and fuses out of the control board while the
station was on the air ... kicked the door down and walked in. They
have spent hours driving around in a van through some neighborhood to
triangulate or get a fix on some signal when they wanted the guy. Like
all government agencies, they have loads of money and an infinite amount
of time and resources to spend when they decide they will get their way. As
Tony points out, they are still fighting in court over the AOR-2500.
When the FCC gets a vendetta of some kind started, for whatever reason,
they will do a number on all concerned.  Bureaucrats will be bureaucrats,
and there is nothing worse than a bureaucrat scorned.  :)

Selective enforcement of their own code (the Communications Act) at times?
Sure ... all government agencies selectively enforce the law ... so sue
them.  But if a time comes for whatever reason that you are a big target
the FCC would like to get under control and instead of just raiding your
premises with a United States Marshall in tow costing you all kinds of
grief and money -- the way another government agency did to Steve Jackson;
remember him? -- if instead they contact your attorney and tell him to get
you on the straight and narrow 'so we do not have to take this further' then
you know what you do?  First you Praise Jesus ... then you think over very
carefully how far you want to push it.      PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Sprint and Calls Within Your Service Area
From: [e-mail] (Javier Henderson)
Date: 11 Jan 95 10:36:20 PST
Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Al Cohan) writes:

> In a previous article, [e-mail] (Javier Henderson) says:

>> I just got off the phone with Sprint's customer service. Their special
>> offer of one cent per minute for calls within your service area applies
>> to all of Sprint customers, regarldess of what calling plan you're on.

>> You need to dial 10333, but considering the savings, I don't mind. The
>> charge is the same regardless of mileage.

>> The offer will expire on Feb 28, 1995.

>> I'm not associated with Sprint, other than as a mostly satisfied customer.
>> The above applies to residential lines in Southern California. Other areas
>> within California may have the same deal, you'd better check.

> Most of what you say is *not* true. In response to several of my telecom
> clients, I called Sprint (800 877-4040) on several occasions.  I was
> misinformed 8 out of 10 calls.

What, exactly, is not true?

Read the first paragraph of my posting, please: "to all of Sprint customers".

> I suggest you call Sprint three times and see if you get three
> telemarkets are *not* located in California.

I did, and I got the same answer the five times I called.


Javier Henderson (JH21)    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Taavi Talvik)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Date: 12 Jan 1995 11:50:52 GMT
Organization: Department of Communications


Robert Lindh ([e-mail]) writes:

> Estonia      EMT

Yesterday, 10.01 was formal opening of second GSM network in Estonia.
Network is operated by Radiolinja Estonia, a subsidiary of Radiolinja
Finland.


Taavi Talvik         Department of Communications
tel. [phone]     State Chancellery
fax  [phone]    dala 4D, Tallinn EE0006, Estonia
Internet:        [e-mail]
X.400:            G=taavi;S=talvik;P=itu;A=arcom;C=ch

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

From: [e-mail] (John Mayson)
Subject: Re: First NNX Area Code Officially in Service is 630?
Date: 11 Jan 1995 14:41:49 -0500
Organization: West Melbourne, Florida, USA


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

> Mail to the digest indicates that area 630 (an overlay on 312 and 708,
> at least for now) is the first NNX area code to go into service.  334
> in Alabama and 360 in Washington state are to kick in Jan. 15.

I was able to call a friend in Montgomery, AL using 334-288-xxxx on Jan 1.


John Mayson | West Melbourne, Florida | [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 11:56:41 +0000
From: [e-mail]
Subject:  Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas


I too had noticed that I can call US 800 numbers from the UK via BT
(but not via Mercury, the other major carrier). The BT international
operator has been the best source of information so far, according to
her this is now week two of a six-month trial to see how it goes down
with their customers, which explains the lack of publicity about it.

I suppose that from BT's point of view they are expecting potential
problems with billing -- like people who "didn't hear" the warning
that their call would not be free and complaining about all these
international call charges on their bill ;-)

Unlike the other people posting here I got a US-originated recording
when I tried 1-800-MY-ANI-IS telling me that the number was not
available. When I tried calling my credit-card access tollfree number
I was told that "sorry, this subscriber has asked for no international
access to this 800 number" or some such message, so it looks like when
you order 800 service you may in future have to check the box to say
if you want overseas callers to get into it, or not.


Joe Harrison
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

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 16:05:06 -0500
Subject: Re: New Area Codes and PBX
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


In a recent {TELECOM Digest}, Jan Mandel <[e-mail]>
wrote (in part):

> Why cannot they get new area codes from whoever creates the codes and
> add them as they come into being?

> Is there one single place somewhere that assigns the area codes?

Bellcore (Bell Communications Research in Livingston, NJ) is the North
American Numbering Plan Administrator (NANPA), although they have been
seeking to turn the responsibility over to some other organization.

Bellcore receives information and requests from LECs (local exchange
companies) that serve as regional numbering plan coordinators
concerning need for additional numbers in the respective regions.
Bellcore works with the regional coordinators to define NPAs
(Numbering Plan Areas), which are geographic divisions that are
assigned area codes.

Bellcore, as the NANPA, then promulgates the area code information to the
various carriers and other interested parties in the form of Information
Letters (ILs).

Here are some ways to get this information delivered to you:

   - Try calling Bellcore at 201 740-4661 or 201 740-4592 and asking
     to be put on their mailing list for North American Numbering Plan
     information.

   - If you are an AT&T Mail or EasyLink user, subscribe to the shared
     folder "!eichelk:npasplits", which is maintained by David Eichelkraut
     of AT&T. David passes along the Bellcore ILs and other information
     concerning the NANP.

   - Ask your PBX vendor or interexchange carrier (IXC) to provide you
     with NPA updates through a program they may offer.



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]
Subject: U.K. Cellular Band?
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 09:58:27 GMT
Organization: University of Kent at Canterbury, UK.


I recently bought a PRO-46 scanner from Tandy hoping to listen to the
air band. I have always assumed that in the U.K. the cellular band is
also about 870 - 890 Mhz, because this is what I always see where ever
I read about scanners. As I expected, this band was not available on
the scanner. To my surprise, when I searched the entire range of
available frequencies, I found that there were mobile phones scattered
between about 806-9XX Mhz.  What I fail to understand is why on earth
should scanners sold in the UK have a restriction on the US cellular
band when their own band exceeds far beyond these bounds. I have since
returned the scanner because besides two police frequencies and a few
hams, the frequencies I could get were mostly mobile.


Cheers,

Jabulani Dhliwayo      Applied Optics Group
Physics Lab.       U. of Kent at Canterbury


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'll answer your question by asking a
couple of my own. Why does the loaf of bread in my refrigerator have
a notation on the wrapper that it is registered with the Pennsylvania
Department of Agriculture?  What do I care what the people in
Pennsylvania eat?  Why does my modem limit me to ten redial attempts
and document this by saying it is due to some regulations in Canada?
What do I care who the people in Canada talk to on the phone?  Why do
all the school textbooks used all over the USA have to meet the approval
of a bunch of people who live in Texas?  What do I care what they choose
to teach their children (or not teach them)?

The answer in all three of the above is the factory specs are designed
by where the money is.  Pennsylvania says to sell food there it must be
approved by the Department of Agriculture and plainly noted as such on
the container. The baker does not want to spend the money having two
sets of containers printed.  Whatever factory in the far east makes
all the modems (probably the same factory which makes all the scanners)
makes circuit boards to suit the clear majority of its customers: big shots
like Motorola, Tandy and such. Tandy sells 90 percent of its scanners
in the USA and 10 percent in the rest of the world; whose specs will
the factory follow?  Don't say 'both, in two separate runs' because
that would cost money. Ditto the publishers of school textbooks in the
USA -- one opinion will suit all, and since the State of Texas is the
single largest buyer of school textbooks (and there are a couple other
large states whose specifications are quite similar to that of Texas
school book buyers) then their opinion is as good as any say the
publishers. :)

Now oddly enough, in Australia there is a bunch of retail electronic
stores called 'Tandy', owned by a parent company 'Radio Shack' -- just
the opposite of the USA -- and I think they do get things built the
way they want them; someone correct me if I am wrong. But they have
absolutely no connection with the Tandy in the USA other than the one
here owns quite a bit of the one in Australia.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joachim Oschek)
Subject: GSM Mobile Telefone ERICSSON GH337
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 13:09:31 GMT
Organization: EE Students Computer Pool, University of Erlangen, Germany


Hello out there!

I am looking for hidden software-modes of the MOBILE GSM TELEFONE
ERICSSON GH337 (like the IMEI-number with the code *#06#)

Does anyone know how I can see which channel or which cluster I am
using?

I would also need desperatly the signal strength in dB!

Is there a possibility to gain access to these functions or do I need
a special software of Ericsson? If so, where can i get it ?

Does anyone know email-addresses or WWW-pages of Ericsson (Sweden)?
I already sent a fax to them but I got no reply!

It would be great if you could help me with the GH337. (If you know
someone who could help me please ask!)

Please send your mail to [e-mail]


Greetings from Germany,

Joachim
(http://cip2.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de:8080/hyplan/oschek.html)

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

From: [e-mail] (Matt Healy)
Subject: Arthur C. Clarke to Get Degree by Satellite
Date: 12 Jan 1995 18:04:20 GMT
Organization: Yale School of Medicine


According to a story I found on the "Nando Times" web site
(URL:http://www.nando.net/newsroom/nt/nando.html), run by the {Raleigh
News and Observer}, Arthur C. Clarke will accept an honorary degree
from Liverpool University via satellite link to Sri Lanka, where he
now lives, on January 26th.  A spokesperson for the university said
they believe this will be the first degree to be conferred via
satellite by a UK institution.

TELECOM Digest readers will recognize how appropriate it is for
Clarke, the inventor of the communications satellite, to get the first
degree to be conferred via satellite!


Matthew D. Healy               [e-mail]
Postdoc,Yale School of Medicine, Genetics & Medical Informatics,
SHM I-148, 333 Cedar St, New Haven, CT 06510

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #28
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa27055;
          12 Jan 95 21:39 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08975; Thu, 12 Jan 95 16:56:10 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08964; Thu, 12 Jan 95 16:56:06 CST
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 16:56:06 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #29

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 12 Jan 95 16:56:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 29

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (John R. Covert)
    GIF Tax Rumors - Threat or Menace (Brad Hicks)
    Re: "Jitter" as a Quantity (Moritz Farbstein)
    Looking For Used Phones (Steve Harris)
    Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System (Steve Samler)
    Re: Seeking Canadian Telco WWW Addresses (David Devereaux-Weber)
    Re: Cell Phone PINs (John R. Covert)
    Help Locating Telephone/PC Interface Board (Tony Kwong)
    Re: ETSI Standards - Where? (John Combs)
    CTI on NEC 2000 Switch (Chaz Holmes)
    Address Wanted For French Telecom (Stephen Warner)
    More on Teleport (Steve Samler)
    Re: ISDN Over Wireless (Jeff Hersh)
    ISDN BRI Lines (John Combs)
    LD ISDN Service (John Schmerold)
    Re: Israel Rate Information (Steve Samler)
    Address Wanted For KPN (Stephen Warner)
    Where is PicturePhone II Now? (David Gingold)
    Inter-LATA Rates in California (Linc Madison)
    B8ZS, AMI, Bipolar Line Coding? (Phillip Schuman)
    Where to Get Text of the ECPA? (Wilson Mohr)
    Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs? (Bob Goudreau)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 16:12:03 EST
From: John R. Covert  <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas


[e-mail] (Phil Ritter) wrote:

> I also wonder how the billing is handled on the US side.  Since the
> carrier is receiving revenue for this call on the originating side, do
> they still bill the 800 number owner (the terminating party) for the
> calls?

I am speculating, but I think what is going on here is that one
particular carrier (with an office in Nevada) has told the countries
from which this is working to hand them all 800 traffic and to pay
them their portion of the international call revenue.

They then drop it on the local exchange carrier, who routes it to the
called customer via the appropriate LD carrier.

[e-mail] (Julian Thornhill) wrote:

> Well I just tried [a Canadian 800 number] from the UK via British Telecom
> and got the usual message "800 numbers from outside the **US** are not free
> ..." and then I got the ringing tone, so I guess it works. Didn't stay on the
> line to see who answered though!

You guys have message rate calling and would have risked only a single
message unit, but you weren't willing to wait ...

The ringing you heard was the ringing tone for the recording that
would have told you that the 800 number you are calling cannot be
reached from your calling area.

Can someone who has a meter on their phone please verify that the
carrier handling these calls is only returning answer supervision at
the point the 800 number actually answers, and not at the point of
providing the recording.


/john

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 14:12:31 -0600
From: Brad Hicks <mc![e-mail]>
Subject: GIF Tax Rumors - Threat or Menace?


For those of you who haven't been reading your email lately, or who
have managed to escape the net's Crisis of the Month Club, on December
28th CompuServe issued an unnecessarily tangled, poorly worded press
release that contained the words "patent," "GIF," "royalty," and
"CompuServe."  Pat Clawson, the President and CEO of TeleGraphix
Communications Inc., spread the word to the world, along with his own
interpretation.

For the next two weeks, all "the usual places" on the net (CompuServe's
GRAPHSUPPORT forum, TELECOM Digest, Computer Underground Digest, and
various UseNet newsgroups) exploded with scads of non-lawyers'
interpretations of a document that was clearly written (or at least
approved) by lawyers.

Serveral days ago, CompuServe issued another statement, clarifying the
whole mess.  If I may abstract it:

  1) The GIF image format, which CompuServe invented and promoted, uses
     LZW compression to bring down the image size.
  2) At the time, CompuServe was under the impression that LZW was public
     domain.  In fact, it was (being?) patented by Unisys.
  3) Unisys wants its dough.  Any package which uses LZW compression or
     decompression, including anything that can make or display a GIF
     image, infringes on their patent.
  4) CompuServe negotiated a pass-through agreement: for a nominal sum per
     copy sold, you can sublicense the LZW/GIF code from CompuServe.
  5) However, the terms of CompuServe's agreement with Unisys require that
     they only sub-license software that was written specifically to
     communicate with CompuServe.
  6) If that =isn't= what your software is for, then you need to negotiate
     your =own= agreement with Unisys for the offending LZW routines, or
     stop selling software that uses them.

In his January 2nd screed, Pat Clawson of TeleGraphix misinterprets
points four through six above.  His interpretation, which is now
ricocheting around the net, argues that GIF is now legally restricted
to CompuServe only.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Of course, Pat Clawson is not without fiscal interest in this
controversy, either.  Within a day or so of his first call to arms,
his company had offered a competing spec, called GEF.  Of course, at
first his would be the only software that could read it, which is
always good for the ol' market share, eh Pat?  Oh, except now he's
promoting yet another graphics standard, RIPScript ... as evidenced by
the fact that his Internet email address has changed from PATCLAWSON@
telegraphix.com to [e-mail].

On top of that, four days later Unisys' Public Relations department
made an announcement in CompuServe's GRAPHSUPPORT forum that is even
better news.

  7) Unisys only wants to charge royalties from communications software
     vendors who are charging a fee for software intended to connect to a
     commercial online service.
  8) Unisys explicitly says that they will not charge a royalty for "non-
     commercial, non-profit GIF-based applications, including those for
     use on the on-line services" or for "non-commercial, non-profit
     offerings on the Internet, including +Freeware+."
  9) They also made it pretty clear that they won't charge for selling
     images, whether via World Wide Web pages, CompuServe fora, or local
     bulletin boards.  It's the software vendors whose software =makes=
     the images who'll have to pay.

In other words, unless you =sell= =communications software= specifically
for connecting to =commercial online services= such as CompuServe or
America Online, and your software displays GIFs, you'll not have to pay a
royalty.  CompuServe estimates that the royalty will work out to around 11
cents per copy of the software sold.  If you want to explore alternatives
to sub-licensing from CompuServe, or you want to make sure that you are
covered, email [e-mail] and =ask them=.

Everybody else can relax, sit back down, and let this month's Panic of
the Month ebb away.  There is no FCC modem tax, there is no FCC proposed
rule to outlaw religious broadcasting, Craig Shergold doesn't want
more postcards, and there is no conspiracy to tax, license, restrict,
or outlaw GIF files.

P.S. Thank all holy Gods that everyone involved is including a date
and an email address in their messages on the subject. Hopefully, we
won't be hearing about this "new threat" in five years.

P.P.S. Come to think of it, the FCC Modem Tax memetic infection started
with a CompuServe public announcement, too. "CompuServe Public Relations:
Threat or Menace?"  Nah, it's probably just a coincidence.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Moritz Farbstein)
Subject: Re: "Jitter" as a Quantity
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Swiss Bank Corporation
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 20:45:34 GMT


In comp.dcom.telecom article <[e-mail]> you
wrote:

> I need a solid reference for "delay jitter" as quantity w.r.t.
> frames arrivals.  Much of the material that I've read defines jitter
> as the variation interarrival times, but what I really want is a
> quantitative definition that's effectively "the jitter for two event
> arrivals is difference between the expected and observed interarrival
> times."

> I found an example of the use of "jitter" as a quantity recently in
> a paper that I was reading: ".. The conference origination application
> delivers frames to the network adapter at an aggregrate rate of 1
> frame every 33 seconds (with a measured jitter of +- 2 ms)."

> But the paper does not define jitter.  It's obvious what is
> meant, but I really need a solid definition from a solid
> source.

As with many words, this one has more than one meaning. I have
collected a number of definitions from different sources, although I
don't always keep track of where I got the definitions. There are a
number of good telecom dictionaries.  Your best source would be the
reference librarian at your local library if you absolutely have to
have the source citation.

[from Digital Webster]
1jit ter \'jit-er\ n
[origin unknown]
(1929)
1: the state of mind or the movement of one that jitters
2 pl: a sense of panic or extreme nervousness  had a bad case of
the jitters before his performance
3: irregular random movement (as of a pointer or an image on a
television screen);
also: vibratory motion

2jitter vi
(1931)
1: to be nervous or act in a nervous way
2: to make continuous fast repetitive movements

[from multimedia tech documentation, source unknown]
1) The breakup of a digital video stream caused by underrunning
buffers.
2) Variation in the average delays between sending and receiving
data.

[from ftp://lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives]
1) Short term instability of the amplitude and/or phase of a
signal. Also called phase jitter.

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

Moritz Farbstein <NeXTMail: [e-mail]>
Swiss Bank Corporation, 4225 Naperville Road, Lisle IL 60532
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Harris)
Subject: Looking For Used Phones
Organization: MCI Telecommunications
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 21:51:36 GMT


Is there any source out there for very old phones, speaker phones or
telemarketer headsets?

My wife has Multiple Chemical Sensitivities (MCS) and is highly
allergic to the outgassing of plastics. Talking on the phone makes her
ill. This outgassing diminishes over time so older equipment is not
such a problem.  Speaker phones or headsets are good since they don't
put a big piece of plastic in your face but they still outgas when
new.

If there is a source for these, please let me know and I will post the
info to Internet groups that discuss this.


Thanks in advance,

Steve Harris   Colorado Springs

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 10:48:33 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System


The point you should explore most heavily is the message waiting light
function.  In my experience this is the most problematic area for any
voice mail package.  Here is what you want to know:

    - assuming that the MWI signalling is in-band, what happens
      when the signal is sent and the phone is off-hook? (ask both
      the vmail vendor and your switch vendor).  Is it legal to
      send the signal then?  If it isn't, does the voice mail
      system know this and will it try to send the signal again
      later?

    - What happens if the phone is in the middle of a flashhook when
      the signal is sent?

We had many problems with Compass vmail and the NEC 1400 switch.  My
experience is that the voice mail people do not often write the serial
interface to the switch themselves.  Therefore the PBX interface in
the Compass system could be the same as that in other systems.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:07:19 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Seeking Canadian Telco WWW Addresses


On Wed, 11 Jan 1995 15:22:37 MST [e-mail] (Helen
Vanderheide) asked about WWW addresses of Canadian companies.  One
place to find WWW addresses of communications companies is the Telecom
Information Resources page at the Institute of Public Policy Studies
at the University of Michigan:

http://www.ipps.lsa.umich.edu/telecom-info.html

Unfortunately, there were no references for the companies Helen
requested.


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

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:51:05 EST
From: John R. Covert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cell Phone PINs


[e-mail] (A. Padgett Peterson) wrote:

> Sorry but I seem to be missing something here. If the PIN is sent in
> the clear then anyone grabbing the cell phone number off the air will
> also get the PIN.

You are correct, however:

The current scheme only requires a single receiver sitting listening
to the transmission of MIN+ESN on the mobile-to-land setup channel.
Set your receiver to one channel and pick up all the phones as they go
by.

To get the PIN, your receiver would have to listen to the mobile-to-land
setup channel, simultaneously listen to the land-to-mobile setup
channel for the command to go to a voice channel, then listen to that
particular voice channel and get the PIN.

> Don't understand the last part, the ESN is what needs to change, not
> the phone number, guess someone does not understand the difference.

The FCC has ordered phones to be built such that it is "very difficult"
to change the ESN (obviously this is not the case with those being
used as clones, but it is the case with most good equipment on the
market).  Thus changing the ESN without an entire new phone is impossible,
and the MIN must be changed.

My gripe about this PIN business is that most laptop terminal emulator
programs and many modems don't support waiting for tone, flashing and
dialing.  (Note that when you have an RJ11 adapter plugged in to a
cellphone, you reverse the order of dialing and flashing from what
you usually do on the cellular phone.  You flash, the RJ11 generates
local dialtone, you dial the digits, the RJ11 adapter recognizes the
Touch-Tone, times out (or accepts a #), and then pushes SND for you.)

[e-mail] (Steve Seydell) wrote:

> The PIN is sent as DTMF across the voice channel.

Not necessarily.  Although many phones will send the DTMF across the
voice channel as you dial the PIN, the PIN feature works even if DTMF
dialing is turned off.  The cellular switch has no DTMF receivers,
thus you dial the PIN and press SEND.  The digits you just entered are
sent as a data burst on the voice channel.


/john

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Kwong)
Subject: Help Locating Telephone/PC Interface Board
Date: 12 Jan 1995 01:44:14 GMT
Organization: Bell Communications Research


Hi,

    I need to locate an "IBM" PC peripherial board that will let me
answer the phone, play audio prompts and accept touch tone input from
the caller.  Multiple lines per card and multiple cards per box will
be better.  Any leads will be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks in advance.


tony kwong [phone] [e-mail]
FAX [phone] Bellcore 4C-742 444 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ, 08824

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 15:06 EST
From: Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ETSI Standards - Where?


Compliance Engineering, in Boxboro MA, carries many ETSI standards in print
as well as many other standards, US and international.

Voice number: 508-264-4208, ask for Patty LeBlanc


John Combs, Project Engineer, TestMark Laboratories, [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 10:59:08 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: CTI on NEC 2000 Switch


I work for a NEC distributor in Oregon and Washington and often find
more product ideas from customers and other switch technicians than
from the PBX maker.

I would like to know if anybody out there has designed or installed a
working interface using the NEC 2000 ethernet card to provide switch
to LAN conection and if so, what is the application?

Please post response or email to [e-mail] (Chaz Holmes).

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Warner)
Subject: Address Wanted For French Telecom?
Date: 11 Jan 1995 18:53:24 GMT
Organization: Kingston University, Kingston-upon-Thames.


Hi,

Can someone tell me the address of French Telecom in France.


Thanks,

Steve

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

Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 11:17:12 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: More on Teleport


They operate not only in NYC but also Boston, CT (Hartford?), New
Jersey, Florida, TX (Dallas I think), Mich, Wisconsin, Illinois,
Missouri (St.  Louis?), Nebraska, Arizona California and Washington.

160 communties in 19 metropolitan areas.

There is a good five page summary in Phillips Business Information's
Telephone Directory on page 515ff.

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

From: Hersh Jeff <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 16:06:00 PST
Subject: Re: ISDN Over Wireless
Organization: Booz, Allen & Hamilton


John Lundgren ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Find out if the phone company has a newer 5ESS switch.

To be fair to other companies, it should be noted that Northern
Telecom, Siemens, and other switch vendors also offer ISDN switches
that can act as central offices.


Jeff Hersh

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 12:37:00 EST
From: Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]>
Subject: ISDN BRI Lines


GTE South has offered ISDN service here in Lexington, KY for the last
two years.  However, when I enquire about a BRI line, they tell me I
must PREDETERMINE what I want to do with the two B-channels.  For
example, B1 will always be used for voice calls, and B2 will always be
used for switched 56 data.  I don't consider this true ISDN.  Has
anyone else run across anything like this?


[e-mail]
John Combs, Project Engineer, TestMark Laboratories

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

From: [e-mail] (Default Account)
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 08:36:32 -0600
Subject: LD ISDN Service
Organization: Katy Computer Systems, Inc.


At long last, Southwestern Bell is offering ISDN service in St. Louis.
We need to select a LD company, our current carrier LDDS says they
don't offer it.  Any recommendations from the crowd?


TIA,

John Schmerold   Katy Computer Systems, Inc.
86 Meramec Valley Plaza Drive   St. Louis, Missouri 63088
Internet Address: [e-mail]
Telephone Number: 314/230-8200   Facsimile Number: 314/861-2222

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 15:45:41 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Israel Rate Information


Can't help on the rates.  However, I do know that it was recently
announced that Bezeq will have two competitors for long distance
business.  Tenders will be offered prior to May.

Sprint has indicated that they'd be interested in participating in the
bid for one of these.

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Warner)
Subject: Address Wanted For KPN
Date: 12 Jan 1995 18:54:29 GMT
Organization: Kingston University, Kingston-upon-Thames.


Can someone tell me the smail address of KPN, a Dutch Telecoms Company?


Thanks,

Steve

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 18:53:12 -0500
From: David Gingold <[e-mail]>
Subject: Where is PicturePhone II Now?


Can anyone tell me what ever happened to the PicturePhone II phones
manufactured by AT&T in the '70's?  I have heard a rumor that these
phones might have been given to Ameritech as part of the breakup, but
I have know idea where to start looking.


dg

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

From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Inter-LATA Rates in California
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 22:02:32 GMT


I've been watching the fray as "local toll(SM)" calls in California
have been opened to competition.  For the first time in decades, it is
actually cheaper to call from San Francisco to Santa Cruz than to
Boston.

However, I haven't heard so much as a peep out of AT&T, MCI, Sprint,
or any of the others, about any reduction in the inter-LATA long
distance rates within California.  As of December 31st, a call from
San Francisco to Los Angeles was only slightly less exorbitantly
over-priced than the "local toll" calls within a given LATA.

Have the IXC's reduced their rates on calls between LATAs in
California to be more in line with both the new intra-LATA and
interstate rates?


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

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

From: Phillip Schuman <[e-mail]>
Subject: B8ZS, AMI, Bipolar Line Coding?
Date: 12 Jan 1995 22:15:27 GMT
Organization: via CompuServe Information Service


I've been wrestling with the line coding issue ... B8ZS, AMI, Bipolar,
etc. for getting a full 64k DS0, and trying to find a simple explanation
for these areas.

 ... and -- if the 8k is stolen from the 64k to yield 56k -- is that 8k
considered the same as 'bit robbing' as performed for voice?

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 16:20:44 -0600
From: Wilson Mohr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Where to Get Text of the ECPA?


I have been poking around the FCC's FTP server to no avail so I will
ask: Does anyone know where/how I can get a full text of the ECPA?

Thanks!


Wilson Mohr      [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 17:23:30 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs?


[e-mail] (James M. Roden) writes:

> The real reason wireless (read cellular) carriers do not want to
> switch their entire customer base to another NPA is (think about this)
> _EVERY_ customer phone would have to be reprogrammed with the new NPA
> number.  Going forward is one thing. Changing the base is quite
> another.

But didn't the first overlay area code (917 in New York City) manage
to get away with switching existing cellular customers?  If NY can do
it, why can't Chicago?


Bob Goudreau            Data General Corporation
[e-mail]        62 Alexander Drive
[phone]            Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #29
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00592;
          13 Jan 95 6:20 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18341; Fri, 13 Jan 95 01:41:36 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18328; Fri, 13 Jan 95 01:41:32 CST
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 95 01:41:32 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #30

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 13 Jan 95 01:41:30 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 30

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die! (John Leong)
    COCOTS in Jail (Wm. Randolph U. Franklin)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Scot E. Wilcoxon)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Stephen O. Pace)
    Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary? (John R. Covert)
    Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary? (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: Microwave-Data Problem (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: Where is PicturePhone II Now? (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: 800 Numbers and Caller ID (Jonathan Bradshaw)
    Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (Jan Mandel)
    Re: Cellular NAM and ESN (John R. Covert)
    Re: Multiple ESN's per NAM (John R. Covert)
    Re: Changes in Hong Kong Telephone Numbers (Robert Hall)
    Re: Changes in Hong Kong Telephone Numbers (Jeffrey Bhavnanie)
    Need Recommendation For Long Range Cordless Phone (John Akapo)
    Data Over CB? (Michael Libes)
    Computers and VCR's (Anthony Hologounis)
    Biographies on Line (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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: John Leong <[e-mail]>
Subject: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die!
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 17:54:21 -0500
Organization: Comp Svcs Directors, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


If there are any Canadian readers out there, particularly in B.C., I
would really appreciate some help ....

Recently, I bought a little piece of land in Francois Lake (nearest
town: Burns Lake in Northern B.C.  Nice place.  Contemplating of may
be spending some times out there.  When I inquired about hooking up
telephone service, it was suggested that I should look at putting in 3
lines - one for phone, one for fax and one for other services.

Hmmm ...?  "Gee, what about ISDN?"  "Son, this is the land for real
man.  Real man don't believe in those whimpy digital stuff ... and by
the way, you will also be privileged to join a rare group of Canadians
that still enjoy the pleasure of a party line shared with 4 very nice
neighbours ... all with teen age kids that simply love telephones!"
O.K. ... I lied ... they never said any of the above except for the
strange suggestion of three lines.  But the bottom line is that the only
service I can get is an ancient shared party.

Most of the people out there, including my brother-in-law, are
loggers.  However, some of these lumberjacks are amazingly well in
touched with the computing world and quite a number of them have
serious home machines.  My brother-in-law has a 486 Toshiba lap top
and he has also recently got himself a P90 desktop too.  Yup, he know
all about PCI bus, high performance graphic accelerators, OS/2, NT ...
and even "Bob".  Learned all that in between cutting down tress and
digging ditched.  They certainly has also heard about the Internetnet
and are real eager to get on it ... but on a party line?

This really raises the issue of universal access for the Internet,
Information Superhighway or what have you ... if there is not even
universal service for decent basic phone services to run your boring
modems.

In the U.S., I would try to beat up on the phone company and also
gripe to the PUC who takes care of consumer interest.  Is there an
equivalent to PUC in Canada (particularly in B.C.) other than the
CRTC?  Any information and suggestions would be most appreciated.


Regards,

John leong
Technical Director,  Computing Services
Carnegie Mellon University


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way I always heard it back in my CB
radio days was that real men knew how to peak their radios ... and now
they tell me real men (where PC's are concerned) know how to read and
write direct in machine language ... no need for compilers, etc.  :)

I don't know what the law is about this in Canada, but if you were here
in the USA you would be in a bit of a bind since our telecom laws forbid
hooking *any kind* of peripheral equipment -- even an answering machine
or an extension phone *you own* -- to a party line. The thinking is if
your device goes out of order, the other parties may be inconvenienced
by the interuption in service. In fact I think instances of party line
service in the USA, where it still remains, is one of the few exceptions
to the rule of telco not owning any customer premises equipment any longer.
In the case of party lines, telco still owns the instruments and the
wiring, and repairs it without charge as needed. This is because telco
could get hassled if one of the other parties goes without service as
a result of your problem. There are not too many instances where telco
kept control of premises equipment; I think party lines are one instance
and apartment/office building front door entry service (the kind that
is a sort of hybrid centrex, with the subscriber's common equipment in
the central office, and some of telco's stuff on the customer premises)
is the other exception. I know existing front door entry service was
grandfathered. Even though telco can't sell it any longer they have to
maintain the subscribers who have it. I don't think telcos in the USA
can take on new party line customers either; they just have to sit and
wait patiently to get rid of the ones they have had all along.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)
Subject: COCOTS in Jail
Date: 12 Jan 1995 22:52:51 GMT
Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)


(Continuing to report telecom-related numbers from the newspapers) ...

Some long time ago there was a discussion about how prisoners in jails
were often ripped off by being forced to use COCOTS.  Our local paper
recently had some interesting numbers on this for a local jail.

The COCOTS are run by AT&T.  There are 800 jail cells, and the county
received $180K in commissions last year, or over $200 per cell.
That's just the kickback to the county, not the total profit.  Also,
since this is AT&T, things might be better for the prisoners than if,
say, *nt*gr*t*l had been running the phones, tho maybe not if AT&T had
to bid for this.


Wm. Randolph Franklin,  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Interesting that AT&T has their COCOTS
in jails because as a rule they are not interested in the corrections
industry business where regular long distance is concerned. They were
more than happy to pass off the fraud and the grief to Integratel and
others like it who don't have much to complain about since they get
so much per call (which in turn they blame on high fraud rates they are
stuck with, etc).  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scot E. Wilcoxon)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Date: 12 Jan 1995 18:08:25 -0600
Organization: FieldDay


In article <[e-mail]>, Gerald Serviss <serviss@tazdevil.
cig.mot.com> wrote:

>> the cell ID as an approximate location of the caller. In metro areas

> Let's consider a metro area as the previous poster suggests. In our
> most dense operations that I am familiar with the smallest cell radius
> is 500 meters. This gives an area of 785,000 meters-square or about
> .25 miles-square.  If you consider that in a metro area where this
> cell would be located is built up and that the average number of
> floors covering this area is just say four (source ... PFA) you have
> one square mile of area that this caller could be located in. Even if

 .25 miles square is about 2 to 4 square blocks (depending on the size
of your city blocks).  That's a better location than "unknown", and it
does not take long for a car to check streets for trouble.  The built
up area is only a problem for finding the caller, and does not complicate
call routing much as most dispatch and patrol areas are not sensitive to
altitude.

> In a suburban setting where there are lots of jurisdictions and cell
> placement and thus coverage is dictated by traffic patterns there are
> just as many problems. The use of the strongest signal is no guarantee
> of routing the call correctly, especially if you are in a building.

No guarantee is necessary.  In an emergency, "close" is better than
"none".  And neighboring jurisdictions often do have radio links, and
should have telephone links (if a central site is going to direct 911
calls, they'll at least all be connected to the central site, so it's
just too bad if that's not a switching center which can interconnect
the region).

> I think that the FCC exemption is based on good engineering and the
> realization that today we do not have the capability to locate the
> caller easily, if at all.

Yes, the FCC does properly recognize the engineering problems.  I
recognize the problems in a 911 operator trying to help someone when
all they hear is the sounds of a fight or shooting.  I recognize the
problems in having to ask the State Patrol operator to connect me to
the city police (which they do routinely and quickly) while four large
enforcers for the drug house across the street are getting out of
their car five hundred feet down the sidewalk from me. [ Just then the
squad car responding to my unrelated call came around the corner :-]


Scot E. Wilcoxon  [e-mail]    [phone]

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 19:54:19 +0600
From: [e-mail] (Stephen O. Pace)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Organization: Shell Oil Company


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Gerald
Serviss) writes:

> In theory, 911 access for cell phones is a good idea. The problem is
> reducing that theory to practice.

I was watching the news last night, and apparently Houston just turned
on cellular 911.  At one point, the camera was pointed behind the
operator's screen, and you could see that she received quite a bit of
information about the caller, including cell-phone number, name and
address of phone owner, carrier (GTE or Houston Cellular), general
location (on a detailed map of Houston), and possibly other things (I
didn't record it, otherwise I would have gone back and provided a
little more detail).

I don't know how accurate the location it returns for you is, but I
could probably dig that information out of the {Houston Chronicle} or
my cellular carrier if anyone is interested.

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 16:07:31 EST
From: John R. Covert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary?


[e-mail] (James Baker) wrote:

> Is there still a technical reason for the two second delay at the
> beginning of a phone call?

> I understand that some old analog switches could be fooled into
> billing the call incorrectly or not at all if certain tones were
> present within the first two seconds of ringing.

No.  There was a deliberate grace period built in to AT&T's toll
billing so that you would have enough time to move the receiver from
your ear to the set to hang up and not be charged if the call answered
during this time.

It had nothing to do with "certain tones" and everything to do with
not allowing modems to quickly transmit data during the grace period
and then disconnect.


/john

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is Two Second Delay Still Necessary?
Date: 13 Jan 1995 04:37:50 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (James
> Baker) says:

>> Is there still a technical reason for the two second delay at the
>> beginning of a phone call?

>> ...  the FCC requirements for auto answer stuff is to wait two seconds after
>> ringing before answering the phone (or at leaset before sending any
>> signals into the phone wires).

> I believe the actual requirement is that there be two seconds of
> silence *after answering*.  The FCC doesn't care when you answer.  One
> of the reasons for this is requirement is to prevent a device which
> purposely answers the call, exchanges data for 1/2 second or so, then
> hangs up right away, which would avoid toll charges in some situations.
> A device could be designed to do this repeatedly to transmit an
> unlimited amount of data (albiet slowly) without charge.  I think that
> any modern switch would be immune from this type of fraud.

Silence is NOT a requirement of Part 68. The exchange of user data is
the issue.

Modems are free to transmit immediately upon answering for the purpose
of indicating modes, training adapter equalizers, etc. With modern
modems like V.32 and V.34 this process takes more than the two second
billing protection delay so this is a non-issue.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Microwave-Data Problem
Date: 13 Jan 1995 05:00:07 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, Doug H. Kerr <[e-mail]>
writes:

> I'm having a problem here at our college with a remote site which I
> connect via microwave. We have two NEC 2400 connected and also use a
> data channel off the T-1 for our router which connects our lans. I
> have not had any problems with my telephones but the lan has had
> severe problems. Here lies the problem: the data people say it's the
> microwave or T-1. I run a data channel also that is used for a CCIS link
> between switches and have no problems with this so I assume it is not
> in the micro or T-1. How can you prove the origin of the problem, or
> monitor the system without the high cost test equipment?

You have two ways to fix things. Open Loop and Closed Loop. With Open
loop you try a bunch of things until the problem is fixed. You may not
know why but it gets fixed. (BELL calls this FM for (F*&54king Magic).

In Closed Loop you measure things with test equipment to find out
whats wrong and then you fix it.

Proper closed loop solution is to test the bit-error rate on the T1
link and prove that it is low. You cannot imply that because the
switch uses the data link with success that all is ok. First the data
traffic is likely to be very low on this link and second the error
recovery procedures are very robust so you won't know of the problem
unless you can see the actual error counts on this link. LAN protocols,
particularly IP, assume very low error rates with recovery at the
relatively high level of TCP. Speech is very tolerant of relatively
high bit errors rates so this also proves nothing about the quality of
the link.

Open loop solution is assume that the Microwave is OK on blind faith.

Most likely you have a timing problem, quite possibly frame slips
between the two PBX's. How is the data channel delivered to the data
users? How is each PBX timed? What other T1 connections to other
Networks are involved?  Reliable transmission requires that both
PBX's derive their timing from the same source. The data equipment
should be clocked from the common timing.


Wally Ritchie   Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Where is PicturePhone II Now?
Date: 13 Jan 1995 05:23:10 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, David Gingold <[e-mail]> writes:

> Can anyone tell me what ever happened to the PicturePhone II phones
> manufactured by AT&T in the '70's?  I have heard a rumor that these
> phones might have been given to Ameritech as part of the breakup, but
> I have know idea where to start looking.

Remember the warehouse in "Raiders of the Lost Ark" which was supposed
to be where the Government stored useful things for safe keeping. Well
that was actually AT&T's White Elephant Warehouse where they keep 7300
PC's, PicturePhones, and other such things :)

One of the nice things about being a Monopoly with rate of return
regulation is that the more money you waste the higher your rate base
and the more money you make.

AT&T's success was due less to the invention of the telephone as to
the the invention of the Triad of BellLabs, Western Electric, and
Operating Companies. The purpose of BellLabs was to burn money. This
money was reflected in the price of WE equipment sold to Operating
Companies. The greater the cost of the equipment, the greater allowed
return on investment.

AT&T, of course, is now much closer to a real company. Bellcore,
however, serves a function for the RBOC's similar to the old scheme.
Instead of just burning money, however, Bellcore concentrates on
positioning the operating companies for doing things that they are
legally barred from doing today.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Bradshaw)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers and Caller ID
Organization: IQuest Network Services
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 01:02:12 GMT


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

> Can someone explain IF, not why, full telephone numbers of people
> calling 800 numbers are shown (either on the bill, or as part of the
> call) to those who OWN the 800 numbers?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The answer is yes. People who have 800
> numbers receive the ANI -- not the Caller-ID,

I get Caller ID NOT ANI through my 800 number depending on the
origination. From Indianapolis, I know I get full Caller ID from South
Bend and Bloomington, IN where I have tested it. This shows up as the
NAME and Number (so its NOT ANI) but if the caller dials me directly,
I see "OUT OF AREA". I don't know how far this extends but it does
seem to be quite extensive in Indiana.

Somehow One Call is picking up and transferring the CID data along
with the call.


Jonathan Bradshaw | Packet mail: N9OXE@N0ARY | Internet: [e-mail]
PGP KEY AVAILABLE | ESD Administrator, Boehringer Mannheim, Indianapolis, IN


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think however we can correctly answer
the original query by stating that yes indeed, the persons who own 800
numbers do get identifying data on all or almost all calls they receive.
If there is some reason they want to make an issue out of it, they nearly
always can backtrack to the source of the call. I think that is what our
original writer was asking about.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California
Date: 13 Jan 1995 02:33:58 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


(Re rate analomies in California on intrastate/interstate calls).

That could change since the FCC is considering allowing LEC to get
back into the LD business.


Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS
Home of GBBS/LLUCE support
[phone] 12/24/14.4 V32/V42bis

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Mandel)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly
Date: 12 Jan 1995 19:51:13 -0700
Organization: University of Colorado at Denver


Paul Beker ([e-mail]) wrote:

> [e-mail] (Robert Casey) writes:

> Yep ... several years ago every single pay phone in that airport was a
> *real* Southern Bell phone.  Since then, the politicians and others
> (ever heard of the Atlanta Airport scandals / fiascos?) have gotten
> involved and now you will find a wide variety of worthless COCOTs
> scattered throughout the airport.

Funny thing ... in the slang of numerous East-European languages COCOT
is slang vulgar term for the male sex organ. How fitting.


Jan Mandel, Center for Computational Math, University of Colorado at Denver
[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:26:18 EST
From: John R. Covert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular NAM and ESN


Alan Shen <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Call your cellular carrier about this. Some will allow you to have one
> NAM for two different phones (with different ESN numbers) for an extra
> charge usually from about $5-$8 a month.

Absolutely not!  This is a violation of the cellular standard and
forbidden by the FCC.  No carrier may permit it.  It will not work
correctly; if both phones are on at the same time it may interfere
with calls to other subscribers.


/john

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

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 95 15:36:46 EST
From: John R. Covert <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Multiple ESN's per NAM


[e-mail] (Chris J. Cartwright - ELF) wrote:

> - Two ESN's on one NAM    $17.95/mo + reg. service price;
> - Three ESN's on one NAM   29.95/mo + reg. service price;

I don't believe it.  They must mean multiple MIN's on each NAM.


/john

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

Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 13:57:22 HKT
From: Mr Robert Hall <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Changes in Hong Kong Telephone Numbers


In response to Paul A. Lee's message requesting information about the
numbering change in Hong Kong, here is an extract from a document
published by Hongkong Telecom:

What is '2' Day?

The growth of the telecommuncations services in Hong Kong has led to
an increase in the demand for numbers.  To meet Hong Kong's needs into
the 21st century, the telecommunications regulatory authority, OFTA,
hasannounced a new numbering plan that will make more numbers available.

 From January 1, 1995, all seven-digit business and residential phone
and fax numbers will undergo a very simple change: they will be
prefixed with the digit '2' - hence the name '2' Day.

How '2' Day Affects you:

Residential and business seven-digit phone and fax numbers will be
changed by adding a '2' to the existing number.  Apart from this, the
original number will remain unchanged.  Our number, for example, which
is 888-2888 will become 2888 2888.

Pager customers: There are plans to change pager numbers at a later
date.  OFTA has not yet finalised its plans in this area and customers
will be informed of the exact date in advance.

Mobile customers: Mobile numbers will remain unchanged.

Citiwide Citinet numbers that currently begin with 922X XXXX will become
292X XXXX and those dataline numbers beginning with 938X XXXX will become
293X XXXX.

Emergency services and enquiry hoteline numbers such as 999, 1081, 1083
and 109 will remain unchanged.

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

Typist note: there is a three month grace period during which anyone
not adding the '2' prefix will be connected.  After that time, there
will be a recorded message played to the caller.

Also, all Value Added Network (VAN) operators have had their numbers
changed from the traditional seven-digit numbers to eight digit
numbers beginning with 3XXX XXXX.  This applies to numbers such as the
CompuServe access number, my Internet service provider and BBSes.

Let me know if you have any questions.


Rob Hall   Hong Kong

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

Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 13:06:29 HKT
From: Jeffrey Bhavnanie <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Changes in Hong Kong Telephone Numbers


 From the 1st of January 1995, All phone numbers in Hong Kong,
Kowloon, New Territories and the outlying areas will be changed from
the current seven digits to eight digits with the number '2' added in
front.

(eg) Old Number : 555-5555
     New Number : 2555-5555


->Jeff

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

From: [e-mail] (John Akapo)
Subject: Need Recommendation For Long Range Cordless Phone
Date: 12 Jan 1995 15:09:52 -0800
Organization: CCnet Communications (510-988-7140 guest)


I'm looking for a cordless phone with a range of up to two miles or
more.  Could someone please recommend some. I seem to remember that
Uniden used to sell one of these; do they still?


JoHn Akapo    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sharpened Software)
Subject: Data Over CB?
Date: 13 Jan 1995 02:58:49 GMT
Organization: Sharpened Software Inc.


Are there any FCC regs concerning the type of information broadcast
over the "Citizen's Band?"  In short, can I send data over CB?


Michael Libes           Sharpened Software Inc
[e-mail]     Seattle, WA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First off, you may not 'broadcast' over
CB. The Crazy Band is intended, by FCC regulations for *two-way*
personal communications. 'Broadcast' by definition is a one-way
transmission intended specifically in a non-personal way for a large
number of listeners. Is another site going to be responding to you in
kind, with data back to you?

Anyway, I think all this is very academic. Good luck if you want to try
it. I presume the place you are broadcasting -- ooops!, communicating
with is not more than 75-100 yards away. More than that and some Good
Buddy will walk all over you. Its bad enough when two persons in actual
voice communication have to ask each other to repeat themselves over
and over because some local yokels are running way over the legal power
limit. (So then you run extra power in order to get past the interference
and he cranks his up a little more, etc.) Here in the Chicago area there
are times and places the CB/eleven meter airwaves are solid heterodyne
as the guys try to shove each other off the air. In the Crazy Band, no
matter how loud your radio is; no matter how much power you put out or
how well you are modulated, there is always someone out there whose
radio is louder and has more power. They'll be glad to demonstrate it,
you don't have to take their word for it. Just ask; they'll turn on
their linear amplifiers and their reverberation units wired in series
with their power microphones and Break rake rake rake rake for a
Radio Check heck heck heck heck heck heck, and tell two old ladies with
little handheld units seventy five miles away to 'back it down out there
and give someone else a crack at it ..."  :)  I'd love to see the data
before you send it, and after the other end gets it ... if it gets there
at all.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Anthony Hologounis)
Subject: Computers and VCRs
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 20:13:25 MST
Organization: Primenet


Looking for information:

I install media retrieval systems in schools.  There is a centrally
located rack with vcr's and laser disks,the teachers are able to
access these from the phone. Up till now this has been pretty slick.

Well now, what with each classroom having at least one computer which
is part of the campus network I was wondering what equipment is
available to tie my media system into the network.

This way the teacher can access the vcr, laser from his/her pc.  Now
that would be slick.

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

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Biographies on Line
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 01:35:00 CST


Don't forget that the Telecom Archives now has a special section for
the biographical data supplied by participating readers. This section
is not open to the general net public, and requires access via the
Telecom Archives Email Information Service and a password which is
provided to each person who supplies information about themselves.

You decide what to say; what you want to tell others about your
work, your plans, your goals and your life. Once you supply the
data and it is installed in the Archives, you get a password and
instructions on how to access the bigoraphies of other participants
here. You can remove it or modify it as desired.

It is strictly non-commercial and deliberatly restricted to give list
compilers and junk-mailers a hard time, yet allow folks in the
telecom industry to become aqauinted with one another. Send your
biography to '[e-mail]'. I am installing them as fast
as they come in (already about a dozen on line since this was
announced a couple days ago).

PAT

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #30
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa12812;
          14 Jan 95 12:18 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14253; Sat, 14 Jan 95 08:11:21 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14245; Sat, 14 Jan 95 08:11:17 CST
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 95 08:11:17 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #31

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 14 Jan 95 08:10:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 31

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    CFP: Feature Interactions in Communications Systems (Nancy Griffeth)
    Satellite / DECNet Problems (Edward B. Toupin)
    Acronym for "Information Superhighway" (Humor Listserv via Bill Edwards)
    Modem-Voice Incoming Call Switching (Jan Mandel)
    Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (David A. Webb)
    Old Rotary Service Question (Bill Parrish)
    Call Overflow Question (Mark Kelly)
    360 Degrees of Jumping the Gun (Paul Robinson)
    FAQs on Campus Connectivity ([e-mail])
    Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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 Feature Interactions in Communications Systems
Organization: Morristown Research and Engineering
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 19:55:00 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] (Edward B. Toupin)
Subject: Satellite / DECNet Problems
Date: 13 Jan 1995 15:53:26 GMT
Organization: Edward B. Toupin
Reply-To: sn=morrison%g=tom%i=p%dda=tel=[e-mail],


The message is sent for an associate.

TOM MORRISON writes:

We currently have an application in which DEC VAXStations communicate
through DECRouter 2000s.  The local area network uses DECNet and the
routers that connect disparate local area networks communicate via 56k
leased data circuits.  The required throughput on these circuits does
not exceed 20k.

It is our desire to provide a diverse route for data using an X.25
based double hop satellite system.  This circuit configuration has
approximately 1.5 seconds of processing and propogation delay.

In testing the proposed configuration, 56kb modems were connected back
to back to conduct 1 megabyte file transfers using X.25.  In this
configuraton, circuit throughput averaged 45kbps.  The modems were
then replaced with a satellite circuit which caused the throughput to
drop off to 1100 bps!  Incidently the satellite system provides local
acknowledgements at the X.25 level and no flow control messages were
seen.

In evaluating the satellite throughput, we have been told that DECNet
has a required acknowledgement for either one of four packets
generated at the NSP level.  This acknowledgement is hard coded into
DECNet and can't be changed.  These required acknowledgements, coupled
with the long propogation time of the satellite system combine to
limit throughput.

Please provide any insight you may have to the following questions:

1.    Are NSP acknowledgements required after each or
    every fourth packet?

2.    We thought that adjusting the buffer sizes in the
    routers would change packet sizes, however, in
    monitoring data communication with Trace we
    didn't see any change in packet size.  Can packet
    sizes be changed (increased)?

3.    Has anyone had similar experiences with similar results?

4.    Any ideas about how we may increase throughput in
    the double hop satellite system?


Regards,

Tom Morrison

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

Date: Fri, 13 Jan 95 12:53:13 EST
From: Bill <[e-mail]>
Subject: Acronym for "Information Superhighway"


For the benefit of the readers...

Bill Edwards, HUMOR listowner, [e-mail] (uga.cc.uga.edu)
=====================================================================
To leave HUMOR send [e-mail] the command SIGNOFF HUMOR
To subscribe send [e-mail] the command SUB HUMOR Call-
name FamilyName. A command goes in the 1st line of the message field.

            -------------Original message--------------
Date:         Thu, 12 Jan 1995 19:03:12 -0500
Sender:       UGA Humor List <[e-mail]>
From:         "Greg V." <[e-mail]>
Subject:      Acronym

INFORMATION SUPERHIGHWAY:

Interactive Network For Organizing, Retrieving, Manipulating, Accessing,
and Transferring Information On National Systems, Unleashing Practically
Every Rebellious Human Intelligence, Gratifying Hackers, Wiseasses,
And Yahoos.

Thanks to Kevin Kwaku, who obvoiusly has way too much time on his hands.

   - Greg V.
     [e-mail]
     "Roadkill on the Information Superhighway"

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

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Gee, it sounds just like the CB Radio
era back in the late 1970's when CB was at its height of popularity.
The crazy people ruined CB ... I guess now they will make things so
miserable on the Internet large numbers of people will drop out.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jan Mandel)
Subject: Modem-Voice Incoming Call Switching
Date: 13 Jan 1995 11:31:39 -0700
Organization: University of Colorado at Denver


A while ago I have posted a question how to switch incoming calls to
an answering machine or a modem. Many have pointed out that incoming
modem call is just silence and it is the answering modem that makes
the shreeking noise. Thank you all.

Consequently to decide if the incoming call is modem or not one would
have to subject all callers to the unpleasant shreek.

Here is another possible solution: let an answering machine take all
calls.  If there is silence on the line after the beep (all answering
machines can detect this condition), let it time out and switch to the
answering modem. Since I need this for my office where after office
hours I would dial in or others may call in to leave a message, that
would work for my needs. I'll set the timeout for my calling modem
large so that it waits longer for the carrier. I was also looking for
a modem setup parameter like "answer only after 60 seconds" for the
asnwering side but could find none.

Anyone knows what hardware I may need for this? I need to buy an
answering machine for the office anyway so I may just as well buy the
right one. I already have a pair of Hayes Accura 288 V.FC modems a
year old.

No, I canot use alternate ring because this is a PBX line. This whole
exercise is because of our phone bozos who will not let me have
another PBX (=cheap) line in the office once they heard we have
modems, for fear I actually might use it. A separate telco line would
be too expensive.

TIA for any suggestions.


Jan Mandel, Center for Computational Math,
University of Colorado at Denver   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David A. Webb)
Subject: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio
Date: 13 Jan 1995 17:55:40 -0600
Organization: Educational Computing Network


Dear Moderator,

I was rather impressed with your knowledge of FCC regulations.

I read that you are an attorney, and I know time is money, but I
thought you would be interested in my situation.

University police searched my dorm room in November, 1992 after I
consented to the search.   (Mistake #1)

An officer found my 2 meter amateur transceiver, turned it on, and
discovered it could transmit on frequencies licensed to the local
county police.  I was not in my room during the time of the search,
so I had no control over its operation.

The radio was confiscated, and I had to defend myself in front of
the school board.  The school did not find me in violation of any
rules because I had a statement from a county officer who is also
a Ham.  The officer wrote he knew my radio was legal for me to
possess.

I was never accused of using the radio.  I was never charged in a
court of law concerning the radio.

I petitioned the court for the return of personal property.  This was
December 20, 1994.

I didn't take any evidence to support my side (Mistake #2).

The States attorney had three witnesses.

Witness #1 was the university officer who stated under oath that he
used the radio to transmit on county frequencies to verify the
modifications.  He also stated in his professional capacity that my
radio is illegally modified, and therefor illegal to possess.  He
further stated that he called the FCC and was told my radio is illegal
to possess.

Witness #2 was the county sheriff.  He indicated in his professional
capacity that my radio was illegal to own.  He also voiced
understandable concern for my capability to interfere with his
frequencies.

Witness #3 was a person who services amateur equipment.  He stated
that my radio is type accepted, and therefor it is illegal to modify.
Illegal modification therefor makes my radio illegal to possess.

The University officer must have called the field office in Chicago,
because when I called there, I was also told my radio is illegal to
possess.  I called the Washington office, and the Director of the
Private Radio Division is sending me a statement which will say that
my radio is legal for anyone to possess, and its use is regulated by
the FCC.  (unless local laws prohibit a radio which will transmit on
police channels)

Witness #2 was simply giving an opinion.

Witness #3 was wrong about the type acceptance.  Amateur equipment
transmitters are not type accepted.  Its internal receiver it accepted
to receive everything it was modified to receive.

I tried to submit the county officer/ham's statement, and the states
attorney objected because the officer was not present for cross
examination.

Am I going to run into the same trouble when I try to submit the
statement from the Private Radio Division of the FCC?  If so, how can
I get around this obstacle?

I reported the discrepancy of the field office to the FCC's General
Councils Office, and they will be investigating the person who gave me
the faulty information.

Although the university police violated FCC rules, it occurred over a
year ago, and therefor time limits on me reporting them has expired.

Neither the States Attorney, nor any of his witnesses, presented the
judge with any law I *supposedly* violated.

The judge ruled to NOT allow me to have my radio back UNLESS I paid
to have it unmodified.

I filed a motion for the Judge to reconsider his ruling, which is
scheduled for February 9.

The reason I have opted to do this on my own is that the radio isn't
worth more than a few hundred bucks.  I am pursuing this on the
principal.  My radio is legal for me to own, and I am tired of the
harassment from university police.

Please send your comments to me at [e-mail].


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First, and most important, I am not an
attorney, and you are not my client. I will suggest that depending on
how strongly you feel about the principles involved here and getting
your equipment returned, you *should* consult an attorney who specializes
in communications law, preferably in your community if possible, although
quite a few (most?) of those people are in practice in Washington, DC
and environs. We do have attornies whose practice is specialized in the
area of federal communications law on the Digest mailing list, and
perhaps one or more of them will respond to you directly at least once
on a pro-bono basis offering some suggestions or help. My feeling is
the cost involved for *good* legal representation in this area will
be far in excess of the value of the equipment involved. This will have
to be your decision in connection with any discussions you have with
an attorney who is competent to assist you. I cannot do so. Good luck
with this. Perhaps other Digest readers will have suggestions also.  PAT]

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

From: Bill Parrish <[e-mail]>
Subject: Old Rotary Service Question
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 95 7:58:32 PST


Pat's reply to the thread about scanners and cordless phones dealing
with party lines reminded me of something I had always wondered
about.

In the early 70s, I went to UCSB, and we were serviced by GTE in the
dorms.  Occasionaly folks would decide to "share" a phone connection
by making their own patches into terminal cabinets ... resulting in an
illegal but effective party line arrangement.  I recall that if the
phone had the wrong type of filter in it that you would sometimes get
the "pinging" sound rather than a vigorous "ring" when an incoming
call came in.

But there was a second funny thing about these "extensions" that was
rather odd ... you sometimes could not make long distance calls  on
them ... and that always seemed odd to me.  If I recall right, there
was some sort of a movable pin on the back of the dial that could
be put into one of several (three?) positions, and if you moved
the pin, it would enable the long-distance capability.  Could someone
explain how that worked?  (I could be remembering wrong ... it's been
a long time, but I always wondered how that worked).



Bill Parrish    [phone]
M6KV      Hewlett Packard
Systems Technology Division
8000 Foothills Blvd.
Roseville, CA 95747-5596
HPDesk: [e-mail]
Unix to Unix: [e-mail]
Fax:  (916) (or TELNET) - 785-3096

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Kelly)
Subject: Call Overflow Question
Date: 13 Jan 1995 22:38:58 GMT
Organization: Resudox Online Services


I have question for the telephony wizards out there.

A single number DN #1 has been assigned to a trunk group (say a T1, 24
channels). When all 24 channels are busy, its desirable to route all
incoming calls to the DN #1 to another number (DN #2).

Can anyone think of a way to do this that doesn't involve adding a
extra trunk group at the switch and pointing it to the second number.

Any suggestions or hints would be welcome.


Mark Kelly
Advanced Multi-Point Conferencing
320 March Road, Suite 102
Kanata, Ontario  K2L 1Z8
1-800-900-4249 (Reservations)
1-613-592-5752

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

Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 19:33:42 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: 360 Degrees of Jumping the Gun


I decided to check Pat Towson's comments about the 630 area code in
Chicago.  I first tried 1-700-555-1212 and it told me I have AT&T.

I dialed 1-630-555-1212 and when asked what city, I asked the operator
if it was the Chicago operator, and she said yes.  I realized I really
didn't have a reason to call anyone there.

So, next I decided to see if the new area codes are in place here, and
dialed 1-360-555-1

Oops, the phone times out on me!

Now, for the fun part.  I dial 611 and explain that I *can* call 1-630
but *can't* call 1-360 and the agent says "It must be in your phone."

Yeah, right.  I explained that I have dialed the number by going through
1-800-CALL-ATT and using a calling card.

I explained that the same thing happens from other phones, on different
lines.

She put me on hold and when she came back she said that there is a
routing problem, and she'll write up a trouble ticket.   We'll see what
happens.

It must have been difficult (knowing my trouble with Bell Atlantic)
because I got a return call a few minutes ago, about an hour after I
placed the call to 611.

According to the person calling me, the "official" date that area code
360 goes into effect isn't until tomorrow, which is why Bell Atlantic is
not accepting calls placed to that area code yet.

So, if the statment is correct, those places that are accepting calls
to the 360 area code are actually "jumping the gun".

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: FAQs on Campus Connectivity
Date: 13 Jan 1995 12:14:06 GMT
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


        NEW ANSWERS FOR FAQs ON CAMPUS NETWORKS AND CONNECTIVITY

This posting may be freely distributed to Internet and commercial
online sites.

Date:     January 12, 1994

Keywords: UTP distance standards, campus networks connectivity,
          ethernet, wireless, LAN, microwave, repeaters, video


1.  QUESTION:   What is the maximum bandwidth that 4-wire copper
                UTP can handle in campus environments?
    ANSWER:     ---E-1 up to 2.5 miles (4 km)

2.  QUESTION:   What is the longest distance that 4-wire copper
                UTP can transmit at T-1 band width?
    ANSWER:     ---5 miles (8 km), up to 7 miles (11.2 km) with
                   a repeater

3.  QUESTION:   Can you transmit data, voice, and video across
                4-wire UTP at the same time without cross-talk?
    ANSWER:     ---Yes

4.  QUESTION:   What is the maximum distance that ethernet at
                10 Mbps can be extended?
    ANSWER:     ---1500 ft (495 m), up to 3000 ft (990 m) with
                   repeater

5.  QUESTION:   Is there a wireless solution that would allow a
                campus to connect all buildings together, and
                allow any PC or laptop computer on campus to
                communicate, even if they move about the campus?
    ANSWER:     ---Yes.  One solution allows building -to-
                   building connections up to 6 miles (9.6 km),
                   and allows any PC or laptop to be on
                   line.  It operates at 2 Mbps, has SNMP, and
                   requires no FCC licence.

6.  QUESTION:   Are there any wireless solutions at 10 Mbps for
                LAN-to-LAN connections?
    ANSWER:     ---Yes.  A microwave solution allows LANs to
                   connect up to 5 miles (8 km).  This same
                   system has options that will allow voice,
                   data, and video at the same time, in either
                   4 -T1 slots, or 8 -T1 slots.  The 8 -T1
                   version can handle 192 voice-grade circuits.


For further information and product data sheets, please contact
Router Solutions ([e-mail]), or check our FTP site:
        ftp.halcyon.com   /pub/local/routers

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

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 08:00:00 CST


Listening to WNIB on the radio this Saturday morning as I work on
this issue ... the eight o'clock news says 'up to six more inches
of rain due in California throughout the weekend ... more evacuations
probably will be required ...'

Well, good luck and my best regards, folks. It seems like the people
in California spend all summer burning the place down, then spend
all winter enduring mud slides and flooding. We are getting a lot
of rain here today also, but the only effect has been to melt all
the snow which had accumulated and leave some *huge* puddles of water
to navigate at curbs where the street sewers are plugged, etc.

Have the floods in California affected telephone service to any extent?


PAT

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #31
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00456;
          16 Jan 95 15:01 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20808; Mon, 16 Jan 95 09:19:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20797; Mon, 16 Jan 95 09:19:04 CST
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 09:19:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #32

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 16 Jan 95 09:19:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 32

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Stephen P. Sorkin)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Aryeh M. Friedman)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Olcay Cirit)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Mark Nichols)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Clarence Dold)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Benjamin P. Carter)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Rich Greenberg)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Peter Laws)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Bill Sohl)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Bruce Roberts)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Bill Mayhew)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: mars![e-mail] (Stephen P. Sorkin)
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?
Date: 16 Jan 1995 07:10:05 GMT
Organization: Cal State University, Los Angeles


> Have the floods in California affected telephone service to any extent?

A sink hole tore through an interoffice cable in Long Beach or Torrance
(I can't remember which).  That cut off several thousand calls.

We had a problem with our old lead shielded drop cable (water shorted it out).


Stephen  [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 00:18:44 +0800
From: [e-mail] (Aryeh M. Friedman)
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?
Organization: UCSC Dept of Econ


    We have had spotty outages in Pac Bell and GTE land soem of
West LA was out earl last week and my calls to up north are getting
all circuit busy very often.


Aryeh

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

Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 02:33:50 PST
From: [e-mail] (olcay cirit)
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?


> Have the floods in California affected telephone service to any extent?

Not to my knowledge, although Libtech has experienced a four-day power
outage to the high winds and rain. But then again, we weren't flooded.
Sometimes I wish PG&E was as dependable as AT&T. ;)


olcay

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

From: Mark Nichols <[e-mail]>
Organization:  Belmont Information Services
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 03:26:02 PST
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Digest Editor <telecom@
eecs.nwu.edu> writes:

> Have the floods in California affected telephone service to any extent?

I tried several times yesterday to place a service call to "611" and
after several no-answers of 20 rings or more, I called the operator.
She said they're taking names manually of people they need to call
back to log a problem report.  In other words, I can expect to wait
"several days" just to get the opportunity to log a service call,
which itself might take some time to address.  Yes, the service has
been affected.  I'm in Pac-Bell land, although on Tuesday I had
similar problems in Ventura County, GTE land.

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

From: Clarence Dold <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 05:05:48 PST
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?
Organization: a2i network


WHAT!!!  I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!  MY LINES ARE WET AND THERE'S A LOT OF
STATIC!!!  I TRIED 611 AND GET A SIT, all circuits are busy.

Actually, the static is _so_ bad, that I often can't draw dialtone,
although I can receive calls.  If I do get dialtone, I can't break
dialtone with DTMF, although I can dial.  On some incoming calls, I
would suddenly get stutter dialtone, as if i had hit flash-hook.
Incoming calls answer themselves midway through the first ring, as the
CO detects line current, due to the ring voltage conducting through
the swamp I call a pasture, even though we have overhead lines.

Wonderful thing, these error-correcting modems... ;-)

More in line with what I think you were asking:

Except for a lot of individual lines being out due to insulation/moisture
problems, I don't know of any trouble.  There don't appear to be any
COs down in the Napa area.  I work for an IXC, and other than static
on lines, service has been good in the flood area.


Clarence A Dold - [e-mail]
                - Pope Valley & Napa CA.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This reminds me of the tunnel flood here
in Chicago a couple years ago. For a few days after the flood had been
brought under control but before all the water had dissapated and the
underground cables dried out, the amount of cross-talk on the lines was
incredible. Dial tone of course was very slow as people made up for a
few days of being unable to use the phone at all, and in the typical
ten to twenty second wait for dial tone, you'd hear six different conver-
sations in the background all at one time; none of them very clearly,
just like a bunch of people in a room at a party everyone talking to
someone else. Once dial tone was delivered to your line, all the cross-
talk would go away, but during your connection itself, if you and your
party were silent for a few seconds and you listened closely, you would
hear a couple other people talking, way off in the background, not
loud enough or well enough to understand what they were saying most of
the time.

The City Hall public information phone lines served as the center for
information during the flood week, and those lines themselves went out
of order on the first day when the water filled the basement of City
Hall and doused the phone cables there. But amazingly, when so much of
the downtown area was without phone service crews managed to keep the
City Hall information lines up and running all but for about three or
four hours. I remember calling to get an update early that afternoon
and the lady telling me the rest of City Hall had been evacuated 'except
for the information phone lines and the centrex operators, we will stay
as long as our lines are up ...'. About 45 minutes later their lines
went under also but in about three hours they were answering again from
another location, across the street in the Chicago Temple Building, giving
updates on the flood conditions to thousands of callers.

The cross-talk was not just confined to outgoing calls from the downtown
area, although that is where it was worst. When someone from outside the
area called downtown, mainly into the Wabash or Franklin COs, as soon
as your call left your CO and hit one of those, you'd get a click on the
line, static and cross-talk in the background as the phone rang at the
place you were calling. Once they answered -- if they did -- the cross-talk
mostly went away.

The rain on Saturday here was the cause of a lot of very wet demarcs and
such, because of strong winds blowing the rain sideways at you and getting
it into literally everything; cracks in the window of your house, etc.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin P. Carter)
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 01:00:21 GMT


TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]> writes:

> Well, good luck and my best regards, folks. It seems like the people
> in California spend all summer burning the place down,

Actually, we have more fires in late autumn, when the vegetation is
dryest and most flammable.

> then spend all winter enduring mud slides and flooding.

Did you forget about our earthquakes?  And worst of all is our state
legislature in Sacramento.  It makes the U.S. Congress look responsible by
comparison.

> We are getting a lot of rain here today also, but the only effect
> has been to melt all the snow which had accumulated and leave some
> *huge* puddles of water to navigate at curbs where the street sewers
> are plugged, etc.

> Have the floods in California affected telephone service to any extent?

Well, the prices just went up, but that is probably unrelated to the
floods.  (Pac Bell and GTE can expect a flood of complaints about the
bills they are sending out this month.)


Ben Carter                  internet address: [e-mail]


[TELEOCM Digest Editor's Note: No, I did not forget about the earthquakes.
That one at Northridge (?) in particular was something else. Last year
was pretty tragic all over California, and apparently 1995 is starting
out badly for the folks there also. Your legislature may be bad, but
wait until you see the Chicago City Council -- what a bunch of clowns
they are. Did you know in the election coming up (for City Council members)
we have six ex-felons running for office? Seriously ... and over a
dozen of the ones who have been in office in the past seven or eight
years have been found guilty of something and sent to the penitentiary.
Real bunch of winners, all.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?
Date: 16 Jan 1995 03:45:17 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


Both PacBell and GTE have had spot outages. The Laguna Beach CO, which
was seen on the news, but nothing was said as what it was, had sand
bags and other blocks to prevent any more damage. I had heard that one
RSU way up north was running on its own since the Fiber cable got
washed out.  I would say it was either good planning or just plan luck
that more damage was not done. Though I'm sure that the people out
here that lost service were not happy. My computer kept going even
though we lost power since I have a UPS on it and the one I have could
run a Lan so it stayed up for almost an hour, running my BBS. but no
calls.


Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS
           Home of GBBS/LLUCE support
[phone] 12/24/14.4 V32/V42bis

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Greenberg)
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?
Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 23:33:14 GMT


The forcast on the local news station (KFWB) Saturday morning about
7am PST was predicting about an inch, 70% chance of rain Saturday night
and Sunday.  At the moment (3:30pm pst) its overcast and dry.  There were
some periods of sun yesterday and today.

> Have the floods in California affected telephone service to any extent?

Not in my local area (Near LAX airport).  The two hardest hit areas
are Malibu and an area south of here (I forget the name).

(A later update) ....

The "70% chance of rain" is now 100% at my place.  Light so far.


Rich Greenberg            Work: TBA.  Know anybody needing a VM guru?
N6LRT   TinselTown, USA   Play: [e-mail]               310-649-0238
Pacific time.    I speak for myself & my dogs only.
Canines: Val(Chinook,CGC), Red(Husky,(RIP)), Shasta(Husky)

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

From: plaws@comp..uark.edu (Peter Laws)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 15 Jan 1995 18:30:09 GMT
Organization: University of Arkansas


Bob Keller <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Sorry, that is absolutely false.  The FCC part 15 rules are the
>> specifc requirements for which RF devices must be tested against by
>> the FCC to CERTIFY them for initial sale to the public.  That is all
>> that the rules govern ... initial certification.  The rules do not grant
>> any "authority to operate" the device, nor do the forbid operation of
>> any certified device that has been modified after the initial sale nor
>> do they forbid operation of any uncertified device that may have been
>> built from scratch.  Bottom line...Part 15 rules impose absolutely NO
>> duty on the consumer.

> I don't agree.  Rule 15.1(b) provides:

> "The operation of an intentional or unintentional radiator
                                                    ^^^^^^^^

RADIATOR!!!  Not receiver!!  *Transmitters* are a "whole nother"  thing.

Radiator != receiver (I'll leave aside poorly shielded local oscillators:).


Peter Laws<[e-mail]>|"Suppose you were a politician. Now suppose you
n5uwy@ka5bml.#nwar.ar.usa.noam |were an idiot. Ah, but I repeat myself."-Twain

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Sohl  Budd Lake)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 15 Jan 1995 07:51:02 GMT
Organization: Planet Access Networks - Stanhope, NJ


Bob Keller ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> Sorry, that is absolutely false.  The FCC part 15 rules are the
>> specifc requirements for which RF devices must be tested against by
>> the FCC to CERTIFY them for initial sale to the public.  That is all
>> that the rules govern ... initial certification.  The rules do not grant
>> any "authority to operate" the device, nor do the forbid operation of
>> any certified device that has been modified after the initial sale nor
>> do they forbid operation of any uncertified device that may have been
>> built from scratch.  Bottom line...Part 15 rules impose absolutely NO
>> duty on the consumer.

> I don't agree.  Rule 15.1(b) provides:

>     "The operation of an intentional or unintentional radiator
>      that is not in accordance with the regulations in this part
>       must be licensed pursuant to the provisions of Section 301
>     of the Communications Act, as amended, unless otherwise
>      exempted from the licensing requirements elsewhere in this
>      chapter."

I have no problem with this statement and I'll state unequivocally that
scanners and/or other types of radio receivers are not (if designed properly)
included in the catagory "intentional or unintential radiator" and they
are not, therefore, licensed.

> Note that this rule addresses _operation_ of the device.  In most, if
> not all, radio services, the modified device would not be properly
> type accepted in the applicable service which would, in turn, preclude
> licensing of its use pursuant to Section 301 except in special cases
> (e.g., an experimental or developmental authorization, or possibly
> certain amateur radio uses within ham bands and subject to ham rules).

Agreed, but again, radio receivers and scanners are not described anywhere
as a radio service.

Bill Sohl previously said:

>> Anyone can buy any commercial receiver (or scanner, or TV, or
>> computer, etc.) and modify it in any way they want and not be in
>> violation (as you claim) of any law.  Additionally, hobbyists have
>> been building their own receivers and/or modifying commercial (as well
>> as military surplus) receivers for years.  Doing so is not a crime,
>> nor does it render the use of any such home built or modified RECEIVER
>> illegal.  Furthermore, there is NO license required to build, modify,
>> repair or otherwise tinker with any radio receiving equipment used by
>> the general population.

> I am not sure that this statement can be squared with Section 15.21 of
> the FCC Rules which provides:

>     "The users manual or instruction manual for an intentional
>      or unintentional radiator shall caution the user that
>      changes or modifications not expressly approved by the
>      party responsible for compliance could void the user's
>      authority to operate the equipment."

I have seen this warning in various part 15 "radiating" devices such
as my daughter's remote control dancing Barbie, baby monitors, and
other devices which are use some type of transmitting capability.  I
have seen no such warning in any receiving only equipment.

> While I would not necessarily go so far as to label scanner and other
> receiver adjustments and/or modifications as necessarily or even
> likely "criminal," it is nonetheless important to keep in mind two
> important factors:

>     (1) A device or a circuit within a device that is
>         "receive-only" may still be (and in the case of
>         radio receivers usually is) either an intentional
>         or unintentional radiator within the meaning of
>         Part 15 of the Rules; and

If it is then where is the case law?  Who has EVER been prosecuted.
How would this "square" with one's ability to build their own radio
receiving equipment?  Are all those "do-it-yourself" hobbyists
breaking the law?  A receive-only device should certainly never fall
into the catagory of an "intentional radiator."  If a receive only
device, after being modified, becomes an unintential radiator (that
is, it is emitting RF beyond a certain allowed limit) then its
operation would be illegal, BUT modifying the frequency coverage of a
receive-only device without changing the amount of incidental RF
emitted beyond an allowed limit, would not make it an unintential
radiator.

>     (2) Without even getting into the debate over the special
>         statutory and regulatory provisions applicable to
>         cellular-capable scanners, there is a _big_
>         difference between opening up a device to repair, allign,
>         or adjust it and modifying the manufacturer's design
>         features of the device.

Bob's comments above really focus on the "potential" RF radiating
associated with any electronic device.  That is not the issue with all
modifications, and would not, I contend, even likely be a problem for
the frequency coverage type modification that is accomplished by
"diode clipping" on many CELLULAR blocked scaners manufactured in the
past.

Note also that all of the above talks about the possibility of losing
the authority to operate ... it does not say that you can't clip diodes
or make modifications ... it just indicates that for SOME services,
modifications MAY render the device as "unusable" because it no longer
complies with part 15.  The act of making the modification is not,
howver, defined or identified as being illegal, nor does it say that
the device, once modified is illegal to own or subject to forfeiture
by the FCC, nor does it say that the person making the modification is
breaking the law.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you, Bob. Section 15.21 is all
> I was trying to get across to readers here. No, one does not have to
> have a 'license', ie. written document or whatever to operate a
> receiving only radio; authority is automatically given when you buy
> it from a licensed source.

So where does authority come from when you "build it yourself?"  As
above, are you claiming it is illegal or a violation of part 15 to
build electroonic equipment as an individual ... be it receivers,
computers, etc ... all of which, when produced commercially, must be
part 15 certified?  You can't have it both ways. If it is illegal to
modify it must, therefore, by logical extension be illegal to build
your own.  If it is not illegal to build your own, then modifying an
existing device (a commercially certified device) just turns it into a
do-it-yourself project with most of the work already completed which
is, therefore, legal!

> But as soon as you tamper with the innards and make changes in how
> or what the radio receives, and how it processes what it receives *and
> you are an unlicensed person* -- that is, you lack a tech ticket --
> then according the FCC and 15.21 you lose your authority (albiet
> granted originally by default) to 'operate' the radio, which may
> amount to nothing more than twisting the off/on switch and the tuning
> dial.

Pat, the FCC doesn't even require a second class radio license to do
repair work on most commercial transmitting gear anymore, I don't need
any license to build my own radio receiver OR modify an existing receiver,
nor do I need any license (real or implied) to operate receive only
equipment.  It just ain't so!

> May I suggest to readers the next time you decide to purchase some sort of
> radio, or television perhaps, *look at the user manual*.

You'll find the warning in radio control devices, baby monitors, and
other devices intended to radiate; you won't find it in TV manuals,
stereo receiver manuals, and other receive only device manuals.  And,
even if such a warning was included ... it has no impact ... it ranks
up there with the "Do Not Remove This Label" warning found on furniture.

> Read the manual. Note the legal verbiage in there somewhere about
> *losing your 'authority' to operate the darn thing if you make
> unlicensed repairs or modifications*. Why do you think General
> Electric, Best Buy, K-Mart, Wal-Mart, etc and oh yeah!  Radio Shack
> put that admonition in there?  The FCC *requires* them to do so.

No one needs any authority from the FCC to operate a receiver ... that's
one of the fundamental differences between the USA and many other countries.
Yes, commercial radio receivers must be certified to be sold, but
subsequent modification or repair by anyone has not now nor has it
ever in the past led to an individual "losing the authority" to
operate the receiver (or scanner).  Likewise, anyone can build a radio
receiver from indiviual parts they buy at Radio Shack.  The resulting
radio has NO certification, nor does it require any ... the builder is
in violation of nothing.  Indeed, Radio Shack sells such "do-it-yourself"
radio kits all the time.

Let me state catagorically here ... I have built my own receivers, I
have modified commercial receivers, I will continue to do so in the
future, I have done nothing illegal, I have defied no law, I am not in
any way afraid of the FCC "revoking" my authority to operate any of
the receiving equipment I own because they don't have the authority to
prohibit me from using that equipment as long as it isn't acting as a
radiator beyond certin defined limits.

Please if anyone can bring any example to this discussion of where any
individual has been prosecuted for modification of any type of receive
only equipment I'd welcome the information.  Until then saying it is
illegal to modify receivers is not going to make it so.

On a final note, nothing here is intended to condone listening to
CORDLESS or CELLULAR phone conversations which is illegal.  However,
owning the receiving equipment capable of listening, is NOT illegal.
Indeed, receiving equipment capable of receiving CORDLESS is
absolutely legal to be manufactured and imported today.  Receiving
equipment capable of receiving CELLULAR became illegal to manufacture
or import after 4/26/94 (but was absolutely legal to manufacture and
import before that).  Owning such equipment is absolutely legal.


Cheers,

Bill Sohl  K2UNK     (Budd lake, New Jersey)      ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce Roberts)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 12:46:00 GMT
Organization: The Great Escape - Gardena, CA - [phone]


[e-mail] (Tony Pelliccio) wrote:

> Actually the AOR-2500 comes through with the cell band intact. Or at
> least it did until the FCC attempted to clamp down on it. The nice
> thing is the AOR-2500 is considered a communications receiver and not
> a scanner and last I heard the whole thing was still tied up in
> hearings.

And the AOR-1000 hand held scanner with continuous coverage can still
be purchased.  These are "refurbished" units that look like new, come
with all the accessories and the same warranty as the "new" model.
The price, coincidentally, is the same as the "new" model which has
the cellular bands blocked.


TTFN -br-

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 20:17:39 GMT


Section [15.21] covers intentional and unintentional radiators.  I
don't interpret that as specifically germaine to receiving eqipment,
unless the equipment uses a local oscillator or some other detection
process that produces RF emission.  A passive TRF receiver should be
exempt from part 15.  Any manufacturer producing a TRF unit would
still probably find itself under the thumb of the FCC anyway, having
to prove such claims.

John Q. Public is free do anything as long as it doesn't violate part
15.  This means that any hacks done have to be in compliance with
emission regualtions as set forth in various subparts.

Part 15 doesn't prohibit modifications.  Of course you might need a
good lawyer to prove that, and a lot of money too.  There is relatively
little chance John Q. Public is going to have the time and financial
resources to outlast the FCC's limitless patience and funding.

The ECPA is what attempts to regulate what your permission to receive.
Ins't it great when our government tries to function as our proxy to
protect us from ourselves?  Grrrr.


Bill Mayhew        NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-0095  USA      phone: [phone]
[e-mail]       amateur radio 146.58: N8WED


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My point exactly. It is very hard if not
impossible to win anything from those people. And to Bill Sohl, yes of
course you can make those kits from Radio Shack yourself, *as long as
you made them exactly as described in the kit instructions*. Add a few
pieces, or change a few values from those given or furnished in the
kit, and you have broken the law, IMO.  Also please note the warning
in the instructions of so many devices which say in essence, 'you must
tolerate any interference which comes as a result of someone else
operating a licensed radiator, and you yourself are forbidden to cause
any interference. If you cause interference, you must disconnect this
device, etc ...'      PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #32
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10964;
          17 Jan 95 14:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19046; Tue, 17 Jan 95 09:15:08 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19036; Tue, 17 Jan 95 09:15:04 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 09:15:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #33

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 09:15:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 33

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    New Area Codes Working From Toronto (Dave Leibold)
    Cell Phone Programming - Follow-up (Alex McPhail)
    Caller ID Software (and Hardware) (Alex McPhail)
    Telplus 1648 Phone System Peripherals, Phones (James Deibele)
    Telecom Market Reports on Web (Joseph Flicek)
    Canadian Area Code Information Now on a WWW Page (Dave Leibold)
    Mercury Computer Products Now on the WWW (dspnet![e-mail])
    Computer Telephony Convention ([e-mail])
    Alert! USWest Cellular in 360/206 (Alan Shen)
    Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names (Tim Bach)
    Anyone from Globalstar, Inmarsat, Iridium or Odyssey? (Eric Tholome)
    Looking for TDM Box (Andrew P. Dinsdale)
    PC-Based Voice Mail and AMIS (David Reeve)
    BC Tel, SaskTel, Internet (Sarah Holland)
    T1BBS Gone? (Mark Fraser)
    Help Needed With Displaying X Windows on the PC (Ken Stack)
    US <> Puerto Rico: Options? (James Dollar)
    Where to Find Nice-Looking Phones? (Philip Borenstein)
    Distinctive Ringing Specifications (Vincent Lai)
    Returning Blocked Local Calls to b e Discontinued in Canada (Dave Leibold)
    Reports on Internet Communication Links (Christopher Dyke)
    How to Improve Line Quality? ([e-mail])
    Programmable Touch-Tone Interpreter Needed (Jeffrey A. Porten)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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, 16 Jan 95 20:58 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: New Area Codes Working From Toronto


Some of the directory assistance numbers for the newest U.S. area
codes are reachable from Toronto. In particular, there appear to be no
problems dialing the new area codes from payphones.

As of Sunday (the official start-up for the area codes is 15 Jan 95),
334 (Alabama), 360 (Washington state) and 630 (Chicago area) area
codes appeared to be working, if reaching directory assistance numbers
in those places is any indication. 520 (Arizona) is not active yet nor
is 970 (Colorado).

Strangely enough, I got the Seattle Public Library number from the
(360) operator (360 should not include Seattle). For [phone], I
requested the number for the Skokie, Illinois library and got it (just
the seven digit numbers retrieved in most cases, no mention of the area
codes in the robotic replies).

Dialing numbers in inactive area codes obtain strange messages from
Bell Canada's recordings ... things like the numbers aren't long
distance calls, etc. rather than mere not-in-service recordings.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of the Skokie Public Library,
I was over there for a few hours this afternoon looking at some very
old reference materials on microfilm:  Haines Cross Reference (crisscross)
directories from the 1950-60 era and Skokie telephone books for the
same period of time.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alex McPhail)
Subject: Cell Phone Programming - Follow-Up
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 05:19:35 GMT
Organization: TeraScope Research


I posted an article a while ago, but haven't had any luck yet (except
to hear from others that they too would like the same information).  I
am looking for how to re-program a cell phone's phone number for the
TechnoFone and the Motorola FlipPhone cellular phones.

If anyone as any information about this, or knows where I can look, I
would appreciate a reply.


Thanks in advance,

Alex McPhail   TeraScope Research
[e-mail]
Voice:  [phone]
Fax:    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alex McPhail)
Subject: Caller ID Software (and Hardware)
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 05:17:22 GMT
Organization: TeraScope Research


Someone asked some time ago about caller ID software for the PC.
Sorry for the delay, but I just came across something here and it
reminded me of the posting earlier.

A company in Canada, called VIVE, sells caller ID hardware and
software for the PC.  For more information, call the company at (905)
882-6107 and ask for extension 16, 20, or 25.  Or you can call their
fax-back product description service at [phone] and press '8'.


Alex McPhail  TeraScope Research
[e-mail]
Voice:  [phone]
Fax:    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Deibele)
Subject: Telplus 1648 Phone System Peripherals, Phones
Date: 16 Jan 1995 22:01:04 -0800
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


We are now the proud owners of a Telplus 1648 phone system.  We're
reasonably happy with the system but we have a couple of questions
about expanding it.  First thing is getting more phones -- is there a
good place to buy them?  Are there any portables available?  My Tropez
900MHz doesn't have the range I hoped for (it may be good for 2000
feet outdoors (though I haven't tried it) but it only goes down five
floors or so from our eighth floor office -- so much for checking
wiring in the basement with it nearby) but I have gotten used to the
portability.

Second thing is that we were told that it was possible to get
voicemail for the thing.  Doing this probably involves buying an
analog card and attaching an external unit.  Does anybody have any
suggestions on where to find a system that's known to work?  Ideally
we'd end up with voice mail, automated attendant, etc.

This is our second phone system and we don't expect it to last forever
 -- the future clearly seems to be computer/telephone integration.  But
we're a Windows/Mac/UNIX shop and that makes it a little more
difficult to come up with a solution that fits everybody.


Thanks,

[e-mail]                   "7104 newsgroups & nothing on ..."
Full internet (ftp, telnet, irc, ppp) available.     Voice: [phone]
Portland: [phone]  Vancouver: [phone]  Salem: [phone]
Bend, Corvallis, Eugene access coming in February.

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

From: Joseph Flicek <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 01:13:00 -0500
Subject: Telecom Market Reports on Web



BLAKE  TECHNOLOGIES, Ltd.
1 West 67th Street, suite 410, NY, NY 10023

Tel:[phone]  Fax:[phone]
Email: [e-mail]
URL: http://adware.com/mall/blake/welcome.html

SUBJECT: MARKET TREND REPORTS ARE NOW AVAILABLE ON THE WORLD WIDE WEB
AT:

URL: http://adware.com/mall/blake/welcome.html

REPORT TYPES BY KEY WORDS: CD-ROM, ON-LINE, TELCOM INDUSTRY,
LIBRARIES, EDUCATION, ELECTRIC POWER INDUSTRY, CHILDREN'S PUBLISHING,
INTERACTIVE TV & VIDEO.

If you have any difficulty locating the WEB please email, call or
write.


Thank you.

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

From: woody <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian Area Code Information Now on a WWW Page
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 21:40:19 EST


Various charts of exchanges for Canadian area codes, plus bonus charts
for Canadian long distance carrier codes (10xxx, 950) and 809
(Caribbean) exchanges are now available through a "Phone Booth" web
page.

This should be reachable at http://www.io.org/~djcl/phoneb.html

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

From: dspnet![e-mail] (DSPnet Administrator)
Subject: Mercury Computer Products Now on the WWW
Date: 17 Jan 1995 00:30:45 GMT
Organization: DSPnet, Inc., Waltham MA, USA


DSP Product NEWS on the World Wide Web

Mercury Computer Products has just introduced on DSPnet two product documents.

The first product:

Race SERIES 9U - MCV9 describes the System Module, Environment. The
Raceway Communications Fabric as well as the Interlink Module and the
Software environment.

The second document:

"Embedded Systems for Realtime Airborne Applications" describes
Mercury's Product profile and the Technology.

Access on the WWW through a browser.    http://www.dspnet.com

Access through a dialup line.         telnet dspnet.com  (login as lynx)

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

From: [e-mail] (TELEPHONETICS)
Subject: Computer Telephony Convention
Date: 16 Jan 1995 17:03:04 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Is anyone planning on attending the Computer Telephony convention in
Dallas on March 7th?

Please let me know.


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

From: Alan Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Alert! USWest Cellular in 360/206
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 09:16:08 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


All USWest Cellular Users that are being reprogrammed to the 360 NPA,
please note that For the past 10 HOURS, USWest Cellular has techs
working on a switch to get the bugs out of the switchover. They do
not know how widespread it is.

If you have had your phone reprogrammed, you MAY NOT be able to
receive calls. If you have digital messaging or message center, those
will be inoperable until the problem is fixed.

You can still dial out of your cellular phone. But you cannot receive
calls. The switch does NOT recognize your number, and will give you
the the message, "Your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please
check the number and dial again. Message 2."

I HIGHLY recommend that you wait until the bugs are fixed before you
change-over. This problem only affects people who have changed over. I
know that the whole 360, prefix 791 (Olympia, WA area) has been shut
down.

I do not know if Cellular One is having this much trouble.

I'll keep everyone posted on this.


Daniel Kao            E-mail Always: [e-mail]
Olympia, WA USA           Sometimes: [e-mail]
Voice/Voxmail/Pager: [phone] <-- *CURRENTLY INOPERATIVE*
Facsimile:           [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Bach)
Subject: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 11:43:13 PST


I have a bunch of names I need addresses and phone numbers to.  They
are all mostly in the same local calling area.  Is there a service or
product I can buy that will allow me to take a ASCII file of names and
have it try and lookup the addresses plus phone numbers?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know how many you think is a
'bunch', but unless it is really a lot, and you plan to do this on
a frequent basis, why don't you ask the telco serving the local calling
area for a copy of their directory.  Most telcos will send it free of
charge, or they may get some small handling/postage fee. Then you would
sit there and look them up. After you have found all you can, then call
AC-555-1212 for the (hopefully) few remaining names.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Anyone From Globalstar, Inmarsat, Iridium or Odyssey?
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 20:53:25 +0200


I need precise and up to date information about Globalstar, Inmarsat,
Iridium and Odyssey.

If you know how to get in touch with any of these organizations,
please let me know by email.

This is urgent.

Thank you in advance.


Eric Tholome
23, avenue du Centre          [e-mail]
78180 Montigny le Bretonneux  phone: [phone]
                    France    fax: same number, call first!

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew P. Dinsdale)
Subject: Looking for TDM Box
Date: 16 Jan 1995 22:27:21 GMT
Organization: The Greater Detroit Free-Net


Hi,

We are looking for a Time Division Multiplexing Box to split a 56k
digital line into one voice channel, one data channel and handle more
than one point-to-point digital circuit with one voice and one data
channel.

We are demoing a Tellabs Crossnet and are interested in demoing
others.

Please forward ideas or replies to the group or myself.


Andrew Dinsdale    DataServ,Inc   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Reeve)
Subject: PC-Based Voice Mail and AMIS
Date: 16 Jan 1995 03:13:01 GMT
Organization: Timberline Communications, Inc.


Hello group,

I am researching a business opportunity that will require extensive
use of the AMIS-Analog networkng protocol to send voice mail messages
from system (Octel) to a different PC-based voice mail system.

By way of explanation, the application is off-site technical support.
Does anyone out there have much experience in AMIS networking?

For instance, when a message is transferred via AMIS, what type of
call data (envelope information) is available?

Any recommendations (or warnings) regarding PC based voice mail vendors?


Thanks,

David Reeve   [e-mail]

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

Date: 15 Jan 95 22:22:59 EST
From: Sarah Holland <[e-mail]>
Subject: BC Tel, SaskTel, Internet


An interesting article recently in the {Vancouver Sun} told about
SaskTel's new universal access to the Internet, and BC Tel's refusal
to do the same.

Living as I do in a more remote area of British Columbia, where ALL
Internet access is long-distance, I find this most frustrating. I plan
to call BC Tel about this -- any bets as to how far I get? <G>


Sarah Holland   Fort St. James, BC

                == story from newspaper follows ==


SaskTel casts (Inter)net for clients, but BC Tel won't follow suit

David Smith - Sun Business Reporter
Vancouver Sun, January 10, 1995

    A Prairie telephone company will soon be offering all of its
customers universal access to Internet, but don't expect BC Tel to
follow suit.

    That's because this province already has the highest number of
electronic bulletin board services and value-added resellers in the
country offering Internet access, the product development manager of
BC Tel Advanced Communications said Monday.

    "For us to get involved in universal access we would be
competing with small businesses and we don't think that's to our
benefit or to B.C. as a whole," said Bill Neale.

    "For us to try and compete with that sector probably would be
a mistake."

    Recently, goverment-owned SaskTel, which serves Saskatchewan,
announced rates for its universal Internet access service SaskNet. The
services starts in the next few months.

    NBTel in New Brunswick was the first phone company in Canada
to offer universal Internet access to its customers.

    Neale said there are many B.C. companies such as Mind Link, Wimsey and
Cyberstore that link their customers to Interent.

    "There's more here than anywhere else in Canada. The Prairie
provinces have been kind of left out so the telephone companies had to
do this."

    Although it has no plans to offer universal Internet access,
BC Tel's Advanced Communications does provide the regional
infrastructure that allows resellers to connect their customers to
Internet and it offers commercial Internet access to its larger and
medium-sized corporate customers.

    It will cost $35 to sign up for SaskNet, including software.
The service carries a minimum monthly charge of $19.95, which includes
six hours of free usage. After that, subscribers pay 10 cents a minute
during the day and five cents a minute at night.

    "With SaskNet's dial access service, customers in the
province's smaller communities will not long [sic] have to pay long
distance charges to connect to the Internet, providing savings of up
to 64 per cent over existing access rates," SaskTel said.

    SaskTel said it will spend about $1.2 million to upgrade and
expand existing Internet access facilities. The province's two
universities have provided Internet access in the province since 1991,
SaskTel officials said.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fraser)
Subject: T1BBS Gone?
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 95 10:19:34 PST


Pat:

It's been a while since I last tried, but both of the net addresses
192.187.216.5 and ....3 don't return a ping, nor respond to telnet/ftp
respectively.  Likewise, phone calls to the previously published modem
numbers don't give much satisfaction.

I must admit I haven't spent much time reading traffic in this group
recently, so may have missed any announcement on the movement or
demise of the service.  Likewise, don't have an address for Art
Graham, so figured since you seem to know anything that matters in the
whole subject area of telecom, you'd be my first try for info.


Cheers,

Mark


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I'm afraid I cannot be much help
on this personally. Maybe others have the answer.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Stack)
Subject: Help Needed With Displaying X Windows on the PC
Date: 14 Jan 1995 13:49:51 -0500
Organization: University of Rochester, School of Engineering


I am trying to fins a way to display x windows on my PC from my Sun at
work.  The problem is that my Sun at work does not have slip or ppp
for security reasons.  I have attempted to use PSI's interramp service
coupled with white pine's exodus software to display x, but I can't
seem to make it work.  Does anyone know of a company or vendor that
sells a complete solution, i.e.  will sell me internet access so that
I can telnet into my Sun at work AND sell me the correct PC software
that s already configured? I am not a Unix person by trade and I am
also not a super user on my Sun at work, so I cannot do much in the
way of customizing my Sun.

Any thoughts or help would be greatly appreciated.


Kenneth D. Stack    Mechanics of Flexible Structures Project
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Rochester   Rochester, N.Y. 14627
tel: [phone]    fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]

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

From: James Dollar <[e-mail]>
Subject: US <> Purto Rico: Options?
Date: 15 Jan 1995 04:20:19 GMT
Organization: InfiNet


We are looking for options connecting an office in Carolina, PR to our
Domestic US WAN.  Currently we can barely maintain 9600 baud modem
connections for mail. The circuit would probably be switched/Demand-
Dialed, and the speed could be as slow as 9.6, if only reliable.  A
nailed-up 56k connection was estimated ~4k/month (not justified for six
users).


Thanks for your ideas,

j$

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

From: [e-mail] (Philip Borenstein)
Subject: Where to Find Nice-Looking phones?
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 1995 04:33:03 GMT


Is there any place (retail or mail order) that sells good quality
attractive telephones?

In our old apartment one phone on a long cord was enough, but in our
new house, we need several phones. Most of what we've seen in various
stores (AT&T Phone Stores, Circuit City, etc) are flat office-style
phones, cute Bart Simpson novelty phones, variations on the Trimline
theme, and one that looked like a giant marble. While I personally
have a fondness for the old desk style phone, my wife wants something
more aesthetic -- and we're not talking faux French phones either.


philip     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Vincent Lai)
Subject: Distinctive Ringing Specifications
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 95 05:20:45 GMT
Organization: Achiever Canada



Does anybody know how to get the specifications for distinctive
ringing in USA and Canada? Any help is appreciated.


Vincent

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 02:32 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Returning Blocked Local Calls to be Discontinued in Canada


[from Bell News, (Bell Canada) 9 Jan 95 - content is Bell Canada's]

No Call Return of blocked local calls

With the Call Return feature - one of the several SmartTouch[tm]
services we provide - a person who receives an abusive phone call from
an anonymous caller can, by dialing *69, call back to the phone from
which the disturbing call was made.

By June 30, a called party will no longer be able to do this.

In a decision handed down on December 5 [1994], the CRTC ordered Bell
to "implement the disablement of call return on blocked local calls."
Also told to do likewise were BC Tel, Island Tel, MT&T, NBTel and
Newfoundland Tel.

All must implement software changes to make it impossible for customers
to return local telephone calls where the caller has used a form of
blocking, such as per-call blocking.

Currently, Call Return and Last Call Return cannot be used to return
blocked long distance calls. However, they can be used to return
blocked local calls.

The companies must extend this privacy safeguard to local calling by
June 30, 1995.

While acknowledging that the CRTC's order was "not unexpected," Mike
Kassner, associate director, Consumer Market Management, said, "It
tilts the balance once again in favour of the calling party and might
cause problems with increased use of Call Trace now that the handling
of minor annoyance calls via Call Return has been taken away."

All is not lost, however. Call Screen, said Mike, is still an
"effective device" for preventing unwanted calls from the same number.

"Call Screen can be activated to work on the last incoming number even
though the number is blocked," he noted.

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

From: [e-mail] (Christopher Dyke)
Subject: Reports on Internet Communication Links
Date: 16 Jan 1995 20:54:25 GMT
Organization: Kingston University, Kingston-upon-Thames.


If anyone out there has got any reports on how the internet is linked
to other networks in terms of protocols etc. please send them to me; it
would be greatly appreciated.


Chris

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: How to Improve Line Quality
Date: 16 Jan 1995 04:36:00 -0500
Organization: [MindVox] / Phantom Access Technologies / (+1 800-MindVox)


Hi, I have a question for you all. I saw a post not to long ago about
how to improve the quality of the telephone line by changing the wire.
I live in a apartment, and I have a jack in a window, and from the
window to my modem is about 40 feet of 22# wires. From the panel in
the basement to the window is about 75 feet to 100 feet.

My questions are:

1) How much inprovement can I get from the window to the modem with
other types of wire, like 20#, or level 3 pvc or level 5 plenun or fiber?

2) How much inprovement from the panel to the window to the modem with
other types of wire, like 20#, or level 3 pvc or level 5 plenun or
fiber?

3) How good is the wire the telephone company uses?. It looks like it
is a cable with 100 wires or more probably 26#G. How can the quality
of the line in the apartment can be improved if the wire that the
telco uses from the panel to the telco office is 26#?

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey A. Porten)
Subject: Programmable Touch-Tone Interpreter Needed
Date: 16 Jan 1995 07:35:51 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


I need help in coming up with a solution for a client.  She wants to
provide her incoming callers with a automated system that will allow
them to schedule time with her by using a touch-tone phone, similar to
the system that Amtrak uses to tell people about the trains closest to
their selected travel time.

I just attended the Consumer Electronics Show, and was very
disappointed with the selection there; most vendors basically said,
"can't be done" or "I'll do it if you order 10,000 units."

Anyone with suggestions on how to do this?  Proposals from vendors
also cheerfully accepted.  I figure there are three basic genres of
solutions: a stand-alone box that intercepts calls; a program on a
computer with a voice-equipped modem; a service provided by a major
telco.  If there are other options I'm missing, please say so.

Anyone with a proposal who thinks we can do business, I can be reached
faster via e-mail to [e-mail].


Many thanks,

Jeff Porten   Millennium Consulting

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #33
*****************************



Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa27911;
          17 Jan 95 20:56 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20660; Tue, 17 Jan 95 10:14:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20652; Tue, 17 Jan 95 10:14:02 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 10:14:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #34

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 10:14:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 34

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    B8ZS, AMI, Bipolar Line Coding (William Wood)
    India Opens Doors to Foreign Telco's (Nikhil)
    Belgacom and Panaphone Greece (Viviane Engels)
    Antenna For Cellular Phone in Bangkok (Roland Peter Sauermann)
    GSM Information Wanted (Vincent Erwig)
    Question on Call-Back Operators (John Hacking)
    Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia? (Chuck Lukaszewski)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 06:24:16 -0800
From: [e-mail] (William Wood)
Subject: B8ZS, AMI, Bipolar Line Coding


In telecom 15.29.20, Phillip Schuman asks the question which many
people have asked about the issues of B8ZS, AMI and bipolar line
coding and their relationship to bit robbing for voice. Though I am
not an engineer and have limited understanding of some technical
issues, I offer my experience on the matter for those who wish to
listen. I hasten to add that it is my intent to convey concept level
information in order to build mental constructs which can act as a
framework for understanding technicalities. I have often been accused
of oversimplification in my efforts. I take this as a compliment,
flames notwithstanding, because the majority of people in
telecommunications do not have the technical training necessary for
understanding engineering level material; but were not stupid, and
can understand a coherent explanation if one is offered.

First the simple answer. There is no direct relationship between bit
robbing and line coding. Even so, there are some indirect relationships
if you skew you vision just a little. In order to understand, a bit of
history is needed.

Bit robbing is a process for transporting single line supervision and
signaling between two individual digital carrier (T type) channel
units.  It developed in a more or less logical fashion from the
necessity for converting battery and ground (DC) type supervision into
something which could go thru a carrier system.

The drop, loop, line, customer, user, access or phone side of a switch
(in Plain Ol Telephone Service POTS) consists of two wires. Battery
(-48v in USA, 50 v elsewhere) is applied to one of the wires by the
switch and ground to the other. When the phone is taken off hook a
loop closure is made (known as loop start signaling) which allows
current flow between the two (tip and ring) wires. This is supervision
to the switch to tell it to put dial tone on the loop pair toward the
telephone. Next, the user signals what number they want by either
rotary dialing or pushing keys on the DTMF (dual tone multifrequency)
pad.

In the case of the rotary dial, current flow (battery to ground) is
interrupted in series intervals which in turn tell the switch where to
connect. This kind of DC (direct current) signaling/supervision works
fine as long as all the lines are physically attached to the same
switch.

Let us say though, that you want to connect to a line that is out of a
switch which is in another city, state or country. The facilities
between switches are shared on an as-needed basis and are know as
trunks. The most significant thing to know at this point is that
battery and ground signaling and supervision cannot now, nor could
they ever, be sent over a carrier system. Carrier systems are used to
connect switches by providing the physical facilities for the trunks.
(The techies will insist that metallic [no carrier] trunks can send
DC. True, but there are so few left in the USA, and the Dxing methods
so numerous, I will not deal with them here.)

Analog carrier systems can transport only audible (voice) tones so a
conversion process is done to change battery and ground signaling into
an audible tone. Each of the individual voice frequency channels in a
carrier system are band limited to 4 KHz. The usable part (for
transporting conversations) of this pancake of capacity is further
limited to around 3 KHz (300 - 3400 Hz).  This range is known as the VF
Band to transmission folks.

DC signaling/supervision can be converted into a tone that is either
in-the-band or out-of-the-band. As an example, type N1 carrier
channels internally can convert a battery on-off signal into a 3700 Hz
on-off tone signal. This tone is out of voice band signaling because
it's above 3500 Hz. Filters in the channel units block the
signaling tones from the callers. A second option is to use an
external tone generator such as an SF (signal/single frequency) unit.
SF units typically convert DC supervision and signaling into 2600 Hz
(USA) on-off tones. This is an in band (between 300 and 3400
Hz) signal type. Notch filters are supposed to keep this tone from the
callers too. (Sometimes the filters dont kick in quick enough and
you can hear the tone chirp for just an instant as the distant
end hangs up on some long distance calls even today. Not much of the
in-band left because a good whistler can put up bogus calls so the
phone companies have disconnected most of these types of trunks.)

With the advent of digital carrier systems (T carrier in early 60's) a
decision was made to continue to use in-band (SF) signaling but also
support a twist on the out-of-band idea. Because the signal leaving an
individual channel unit was now digital, a single pulse (bit) out of the
periodic series of eight bits belonging to that channel could be
designated as a signaling/supervision bit. To illustrate; say that an
off-hook, battery or seizure signal was presented to the channel unit
by the phone or switch. This seizure would cause the channel unit's
signaling function to stop applying an idle state mark bit onto the
trunk facility. The receiving channel unit would detect the change from
marking to spacing for this bit position and in turn apply a seizure
toward its own switch or phone.

The earliest T systems reserved this bit all the time for signaling (and
sometimes even a second bit position) but this was soon replaced by the
current system. Because each channel creates an eight bit unit (octet or
byte), any single bit occurs 8 thousand times a second (the Nyquist rate
for a 4 Hz channel). The system was originally designed to facilitate
only interoffice dial pulse trunks. (In fact, in my area the telephone
company didn't even originally consider T as a carrier system. It
was an interoffice transport mechanism belonging to a different union
group than that which maintained carrier systems.) The rate for dial
pulses is only 10 to 12 pulses per second, so using a full 8 Kbps of
channel bits is massive overkill.

The current system still uses a single bit out of the eight, but now
it only does it during the sixth appearance of the time slot into
which the channel byte or octet is regularly dumped. The concept is
that there is 64 Kbps signal (8 K Nyquist x 8 bit unit) ostensibly
being created by the channel unit for payload transfer, but
occasionally (every 6th byte or octet from the channel) a single bit
is robbed and designated as a signaling/supervision indicator for a DC
state on the drop side of the channel unit. This still results in
creating a 1.3 Kbps out of (voice) slot signaling sub channel (sliced
into A, B, and sometimes C & D sub-sub channels) which is only
semi-massive overkill. Because dial pulsing is so slow for address
transfer, some trunking over T carrier uses the bit robbing function
for off /on hook supervision only and MF (multi-frequency which is not
the same set of tones as DTMF) for address transfer. In some
applications the bit rob is not used at all.  SF is used for hook
supervision and DTMF for address transfer. Lots of variations here on
the main theme of using a carrier transmission bit on/off as a
representation of a signaling/supervision battery on/off condition.
Hold this thought.

The Bipolar, AMI and B8ZS question relates to the composite, or
multiplexed, signal leaving the digital (channel bank) mux. A standard
DS1 digital stream consists of 24 DS0 time division multiplexed to run
at a combined rate of 1.544 Mbps (24 x 64 Kbps + 8 Kbps framing) plus or
minus a little . On twisted pair cables this is, even today, a
significant number of bits. The digital square wave which is the DS1
stream is physically constructed of either +3, -3 or zero voltage pulse
positions. The +3 and -3 volt pulses are known as marks and the zero
voltage pulse or time positions are called spaces, (words straight
out of  19th century telegraph). For a number of technical reasons, the
transmitter is required to reverse the DC voltage value as each mark is
transmitted. That's where AMI gets its name. Each Alternation of a Mark
must be Inverted in voltage value. Example with mark as 1, and space as
0: 101010111000001 could be transmitted (left to right) as
+3,z,-3,z,+3,z,-3,+3,-3,z,z,z,z,z+3. This signal form came to be known
as bipolar because it has two (bi) poles of voltage, although it is
actually a ternary (three) form because zero volts also counts as a
state.

If you've stayed with me this long, you get the reward here.

The B8ZS is what seems to put the twist in everyone's knickers. Since
the earliest days of T carrier, there has been a ones density and
consecutive zero requirement for the DS1 stream. For our purposes, the
most significant is that there be no more than 15 consecutive spaces
(zero voltage bit times) in the ongoing DS1 stream.  On the face of it,
this would not seem to be a problem because each channel generates only
an 8 bit unit for transmission. Even if it sent an all zero octet, no
harm would be done. Remember though the DS1 is a serial, time division
multiplexed stream with one channel octet following another like ducks
in an endless row. If two consecutive channel time positions contained
all zero octets the total zeros in series would be 16, which is
sufficient to cause clocking errors on the system.

There are three solutions to this problem. The first, and original, is
to restrict each individual channel from ever sending an all zero byte.
This is the solution which has always restricted services like DDS from
sending 64 Kbps. Each individual DDS channel unit allows only seven of
the eight bits to be used for DDS payload and reserves the 8th bit to
make it a mark in order to insure the channel can't send all zeros.
Because the Nyquist rate in T carrier channels is always 8 k, and the
DDS channel unit gives over only 7 bits to it, the result is 56 Kbps.
It's important to note here that even though the results of restricting
zeros and bit robbing for signaling/supervision may result in a channel
payload of less than the full 64 Kbps DS0, the two things are not
related.

The second way to meet pulse density rules is to have the transmitter
actively monitor the DS1 stream as it is applied to the transmission
line. This is the B8ZS solution. In this process when the transmitter
recognizes a series of eight or more zeros (and it doesn't need to know
if they are all from one channel or a combination of two channels) it
will substitute a different digital bit pattern for that series of
eight. Instead of sending z,z,z,z,z,z,z,z it will send z,z,z,v,s,z,v,s.
The z is zero volts, the v is a 3 volt pulse in the same polarity as the
last valid mark signal which is technically a violation of the AMI
rule. The s is a substitution bit for the original zero value at this
time position. At the receiver, this string is converted back to
z,z,z,z,z,z,z,z and given over to the channel receivers. Bipolar 8 Zero
Substitution (binary 8 zero suppression?) permits any individual channel
to send any combination of 8 bits with no restrictions. This allows
interoffice systems to provide clear channel 64 Kbps service. Once
again, notice that this has no direct relationship to bit robbing for
supervision. It has an indirect (skew your vision a little) relationship
because a robbed bit could be changed on the line to conform to B8ZS
format, but it will be changed back at the receiver to its correct form
with the process being transparent between the near and far channel
units. European systems can also do this process but use a different
substitution pattern.

 The third way is called ZBTSI for Zero Byte Time Slot Interchange. But,
that's a story for another time.


WE Wood    Technotranslater
Techish to English Translation
Techtrans Animatics Group

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

From: Nikhil <[e-mail]>
Subject: India Opens Doors to Foreign Telcos
Organization: National Centre for Software Technology, India
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 06:52:35 GMT


India has opened its doors to foreign telecom companies for providing
the telephone service in the local loop. So far, the Indian Government
held the monopoly for telecom for the last fifty years. This resulted
in a long waiting list of up to ten years for getting a telephone
connection.

For the last three years India has been reforming its economic policies
to speed up the development. Realizing that good telecommunications
are a necessity in a liberal economy, it has opened it doors to foreign
telcos and banned government companies from investing in the telecom sector.

The highlights of the new guidlines anounced yesterday are:

* Foreign telecom companies can bid for providing services
  as joint venture with a local company.

* Companies presently having minimum 0.5 million lines in
  service can qualify to bid.

* Foreign equity participation must be minimum 10% and
  maximum 49%.

* Area divided for bidding into Telecom circles of class
  A,B and C where class A circle is high density city.

* Minimum net worth of the joint venture company should be
  Rs.300 crores (US$ 100 million) for Class A, Rs.200 cr.
  for Class B and Rs.100 crores for Class C areas.

* Assured business for next fifteen years with provision to
  extend for another ten years.

However the long distance and international business still remain a
monopoly of government companies for the next five years.


Nikhil Thakkar
email: INTERNET: [e-mail]
X.400 : G=SYSTEMS S=NOVASOFT A=VSNB C=IN

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

From: [e-mail] (Viviane Engels)
Subject: Belgacom Be-Panaphone Greece
Date: 17 Jan 1995 05:59:36 GMT
Organization: University of Ghent, Belgium


I send this letter to protest for the services of Belgacom Proximus
Cellular Telephone service and that of the Greek Panaphone.  I am an
owner of a Panaphone number and I am visiting Belgium since 10
December 1994.  My telephone is not working in a certain area of
Belgium even the Proximus signal is very stong. This area is
established between the cities: Ghent, Antwerpen, Brugge, Kortrijk. In
none of the above cities the phone is working (except Kortrijk). The
Belgium coast has also a problem.  The networks work normal at the
rest of Belgium (as far as I checked).

After my contact with both companies they just blame each other.
Belgacom thinks the problem is for whole Belgium territory (so its a
Greek problem) and the Greeks say there is a problem in a part of
Belgium without being able to define where (Belgium problem).  My
remark is that all these people except doing their best to solve the
problem there are also deaf (they have a client service department
just to put nice music on the phone when someone is waiting for an
answer).  Finally except that they are losing money and credibility
for their services, they are also against the law since in Greece is
advertised use of Greek cellular phones in whole Belgium territory.
If someone responsible is listening I whould appreciate an answer.

P.S. I know Greek people doing business in Belgium that they were
forced to buy a Belgian-Proximus number also just to work.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, readers ... does the complaint
above sound familiar. Telco blames long distance carrier, and long
distance carrier blames telco for whatever is wrong. Each convinced
the other must correct the problem. Are there any European readers of
the Digest who can make suggestions to this fellow?    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roland Peter Sauermann)
Subject: Antenna For Cellular Phone in Bangkok
Date: 17 Jan 1995 11:31:54 GMT
Organization: National Electronics and Computer Technology Center, Bangkok


I am struggling with pretty poor AMPS 800 service in Bangkok on my three
Watt Diamond-Tel cellular phone that I have permanently mounted in my
car.  I have noisy calls, call overlapping, and disconnected calls.
The problems are probably not unique to any big city where the cells
are overloaded, and there are lots of tall buildings and interference.

My question is what is the optimum antenna for this environment? I
currently have one of those antennas where the cable side is glued on
one side of the windshield and the antenna proper is on the other side.
My windshield is also very steep on my truck so the angle between the
base and the antenna is very small.

Would I do better with a Magnetic mounted antenna on the roof? What would
suit me better a 3db or a 5db one?  There seem to be a whole bunch of
options, some cost three times others. One guy told me the material was
different ... some antennas simply have squiggles in them others have a
thick section of a ceramic or hard plastic. I know I need to be sure I
get one for the correct phone system (we have five different types here
from 470mhz, 800, 900 to the new Digital stuff). How do I evaluate these
different antennas that run between $25-$60 and apparently have different
properties?

Thanks for any suggestions.


Cheers,

Roland P. Sauermann   [e-mail]   Bangkok, Thailand

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

From: [e-mail] (Vincent Erwig)
Subject: GSM Information Wanted
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 13:32:37
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands


Can anybody give me some information on where and how I can find
information about GSM?  I'm interested in the development of the GSM
network, and the specific features that GSM / GSM telephone has, what
new technologies have been used, and the advantages / disadvantages
compared to other cellular phone systems.

I need this information for a study project.

Many thanks in advance.


Vincent Erwig    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 20:55:00 +1000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Question on Call-Back Operators


There has been a great deal of discussion in the Australian media
lately about Call-Back Operators and I'm interested in how they
operate from a customer's point of view.

 From the little I know, it would appear that there are four possible
ways of Call-Back Operator customers placing calls.  These are:

1.  Customer calls an international freecall number and talks to a live
    operator who then calls the customer back and presents the customer
    with dial-tone. The customer then dials the international number
    required.

2.  Automatic version of the above -- customer calls an international
    freecall number, lets it ring three times and then hangs up. Then some
    sort of black box works out which customer called, calls the customer
    back and presents the customer with dial-tone. The customer then dials
    the international number required. The customer can only do this from
    one telephone number.

3.  Customer calls an international freecall number, enters an account number
    PIN number and the number that they are calling from.  A black box then
    validates the customer account details and then calls the customer back
    on the phone number they entered and presents the customer with dial-tone.
    The advantage of this method over two is that the customer can get the
    call back to any phone number.

4.  A "bombardment" system -- the call back operator's black box polls
    the customer's phone line somehow and presents the customer with dial-tone
    without any call back.

My questions are:

a)  Are there any other methods of operation available? Obviously method four
    is the most convenient from the customer point of view.

b)  How does the "bombardment" system work (method four)?

c)  Are there significant savings in using call-back operators or is it
    just a matter of a few cents per minute depending on time of day?

d)  Are there any hidden tricks or traps that customers should be aware of?

I run a small business and make a significant number of calls to the USA, UK
and Canada and I'm interested in saving money on my international traffic.
Any information or advice would be appreciated.


Thanks in anticipation.

John Hacking   Manager
Queensland Training Systems


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why would method four (polling) be the most
convenient? I think it would be the least convenient since you never know
when you are going to want to make a call versus when it the next time you
are going to be 'polled'. The other thing to watch out for where callback
systems are concerned are the *huge* number of misdialed calls (and/or
telemarketer calls) to your 'callback number' which result in a call being
made to you at all hours of the day and night (relative to your time of
day) resulting in many cases in admin charges levied to your account for
calls you did not make, to say nothing of the inconvenience of answering
the phone at three in the morning your time to be greeted with callback
dialtone you don't want merely because some fool in the USA accidentally
dialed your callback number and let it ring a couple times before deciding
he dialed in error. I sold a service called Telepassport for awhile, and
wrong number/telemarketer calls to the numbers on their switch were an
awful nuisance to their subscribers. They tried everything to reduce the
instances of wrong numbers, i.e. they set their switch so if *more than
one ring was received* before the caller disconnected, it was assumed to
be a wrong number. This meant legitimate subscribers had to be instructed
to dial their callback number and disconnect *IMMEDIATLY* when they heard
a 'click' indicating they had connected and the switch was about to return
an audible ringing signal. The assumption was telemarketers would let it
ring at least three or four times before disconnecting, as would most
people getting a wrong number. Then instead of using numbers in lower
Manhattan -- apparently an area where incorrect dialing is legion -- they
got blocks of numbers in New Jersey, from an area where it is assumed
telemarketers are less interested due to the demographics of the area.
You know what? Their callback subscribers still get awakened at odd hours
by unsolicited callbacks due to someone in the USA triggering the switch
in error (or on purpose, trying to sell something).

There ought to be a flag which tells the CO receiving a call if the call
is from within or without the USA, and to reject those calls which originate
in the USA. ("I'm sorry, the number you dialed cannot be reached from
within the USA").  I am pretty certain this can be done since not long ago
I tried to call a place in Haiti (of all places!) and the response I got
at the distant end after dialing the number was "the telephone you are
calling does not accept calls from international points ... this is a
Cable & Wireless recording, <switch number ID>".   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (chuck lukaszewski)
Subject: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia?
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 14:23:22 GMT
Organization: Minnesota Regional Network


I received some information from LDDS/Metromedia yesterday about their
long distance service. The rates seem entirely too good to be true,
and I'm wondering if anyone here has experience (good or bad) that
they would share.

At the moment, I'm spending a lot of time on the telephone to NYC.
After a pretty exhaustive evaluation of AT&T, Sprint and MCI we found
the lowest we could get was 23.7 cents per minute peak on AT&T.  LDDS
claims to charge 15 cents per minute with a one year commitment
(includes a 90-day out clause). I talked to AT&T and they're pulling
the "we're regulated and can't compete with those numbers" routine.


chuck lukaszewski    [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #34
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04142;
          17 Jan 95 22:14 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27376; Tue, 17 Jan 95 13:24:09 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27368; Tue, 17 Jan 95 13:24:06 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 13:24:06 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #35

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 13:24:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 35

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (Michael P. Deignan)
    Re: Data Over CB? (John Lundgren)
    Re: Data Over CB? (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (John Lundgren)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Bruce Roberts)
    Long Distance Blocking, was Re: Old Rotary Service Question (D. Burstein)
    Payphones Rejecting AT&T LD (Chris Labatt-Simon)
    Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles (Mark Fletcher)
    CallerID and ANI (John W. Barrus)
    How Many SONET/SDH Network Terminations? (Roger Atkinson)
    Need Info on Two-Line, Digital Answering Devices (Richard Jay Solomon)
    Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging? (Anthony D'Auria)
    ATM Based PBX (Alex Zacharov)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 07:56:30 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (David A. Webb) writes:

> An officer found my 2 meter amateur transceiver, turned it on, and
> discovered it could transmit on frequencies licensed to the local
> county police.  I was not in my room during the time of the search,
> so I had no control over its operation.

> The radio was confiscated, and I had to defend myself in front of
> the school board.  The school did not find me in violation of any
> rules because I had a statement from a county officer who is also
> a Ham.  The officer wrote he knew my radio was legal for me to
> possess.
 ...
> The States attorney had three witnesses.

> Witness #1 was the university officer who stated under oath that he
> used the radio to transmit on county frequencies to verify the
> modifications.  He also stated in his professional capacity that my
> radio is illegally modified, and therefor illegal to possess.  He
> further stated that he called the FCC and was told my radio is illegal
> to possess.

The State's first witness lied.  It's not illegal to be in possession of a
radio transmitter, however it may be illegal to use it, depending upon the
frequency and location.

> Witness #2 was the county sheriff.  He indicated in his professional
> capacity that my radio was illegal to own.  He also voiced
> understandable concern for my capability to interfere with his
> frequencies.

The State's second witness has no "professional capacity" in Federal
radio regulation.  It takes no "professional capacity" to press a
push-to-talk switch.

> Witness #3 was a person who services amateur equipment.  He stated
> that my radio is type accepted, and therefor it is illegal to modify.
> Illegal modification therefor makes my radio illegal to possess.

The State's third witness is an incompetent.  Type acceptance is not
required for amateur radio equipment.  You can purchase any radio
equipment you like (type accepted or not), and modify it to your
heart's content, and operate it within the legal limits of amateur
radio service.  The only time such equipment becomes "illegal" is when
you exceed the legal operating parameter limits for your selected
frequency, or emit spurious emissions that affect other licensed
services, while OPERATING it.

And contrary to Pat Townson's claim, it is NOT illegal to operate (formerly)
type accepted equipment, assuming you are properly licensed for it's
ultimate use.  This precise issue came up several times while I in
charge of radio for the City of New York, Dept. of General Services.

One time was when a fairly large NYC radio service organization (not
Motorola) who was low-bidder on a contract to change operating frequencies
of a few hundred portable radios for a City agency, opened up the
sealed channel elements and replaced crystals, rather than supplying
new sealed channel elements.  The crystals were unreliable and the
channel elements were destroyed.  By modifying the channel elements,
the service shop voided the type acceptance on the radios.

Another time was when an incompetent servicer did extensive modifications
to another Agency's base station, resulting in interference to several
nearby police departments.  The modifications voided the type acceptance,
and the equipment had to be replaced.

I discussed the issue with an FCC inspector, who was inspecting the
base station.  While he agreed that the modifications voided the type
acceptance of the equipment, there was no regulation that forbade
their use, as long as their operating parameters were within the
rules, and that the equipment displayed their (former) type acceptance
in the form of a label on the outside of the equipment.  There was no
regulation that provided for penalties against the person who modifies
such equipment.  However, there were specific penalties against the
licensee who operated equipment without the required labels or with
operating parameters outside of the licensed parameters or
interference standards in the rules.

> The University officer must have called the field office in Chicago,
> because when I called there, I was also told my radio is illegal to
> possess.

Hopefully, Dave Popkin (formerly with FCC/NYFOB) doesn't have any relatives
working there. <g>

He must have spoken with a secretary or a clerk, since his statement just
isn't true.

> Witness #3 was wrong about the type acceptance.  Amateur equipment
> transmitters are not type accepted.  Its internal receiver it accepted
> to receive everything it was modified to receive.

It could also have been built to work on those frequencies.  I've got
amateur radio equipment that includes the 11 meter band (now known as
CB).  It hasn't been illegal to possess this particular equipment for
35 years, though it may be illegal to operate it on frequencies within
that band, depending upon operating parameters.  I also own a
synthesized radio that transmits and receives on Federal and amateur
frequencies, as well as Private Radio bureau UHF frequencies.  It's
never been illegal to purchase or own this particular radio, since
it's type accepted and never modified (however it may be illegal to
operate it, depending upon the frequency).  The only time possession
of a "receiver" becomes illegal is in narrowly-defined circumstances
having to do with moving vehicles (just about every state has them).

> I tried to submit the county officer/ham's statement, and the states
> attorney objected because the officer was not present for cross
> examination.

> Am I going to run into the same trouble when I try to submit the
> statement from the Private Radio Division of the FCC?

Absolutely you will.  You're dealing with anal-retentive law enforcement
officials who appear to be using whatever means they can find to slam
your ass in jail, and for issues that are simply out of their jurisdiction.
Keep in mind that none of these people have any reason to do ANYTHING
for you.  The State's got at least one "Wyatt Erp" who intends to nail
you for SOMETHING, if not for the only purpose of trying to save face.

> If so, how can I get around this obstacle?

Retain competent counsel, familiar with communications law, who can't be
"bought-off."  And have you contacted the ARRL?

> Although the university police violated FCC rules, it occurred over a
> year ago, and therefor time limits on me reporting them has expired.

There are no "time limits" on reporting such incidents, but, in general,
anything that an FCC inspector can't verify by himself won't go very far.

However, don't be so sure that they are not now violating the rules in
some capacity.  Does the University possess a valid FCC license for their
two-way radio system?  Are they licensed for all of the frequencies they use?
Do they own and operate any radar vehicular speed measuring devices? Have
they notified the FCC of how many such devices they currently operate? If
their license wasn't renewed on time, or if they're operating unlicensed base
stations, this would be the perfect time to file a complaint with the FCC
Field Office serving your area. <g>

> Neither the States Attorney, nor any of his witnesses, presented the
> judge with any law I *supposedly* violated.

> The judge ruled to NOT allow me to have my radio back UNLESS I paid
> to have it unmodified.

> I filed a motion for the Judge to reconsider his ruling, which is
> scheduled for February 9.

> The reason I have opted to do this on my own is that the radio isn't
> worth more than a few hundred bucks.  I am pursuing this on the
> principal.  My radio is legal for me to own, and I am tired of the
> harassment from university police.

Don't expect the judge to change his mind.  These arrogant morons seem
to feel that you'll give up trying to beat them at their own game.

You'll need to take this issue to Federal court to have the judge's, prose-
cutor's, and Sheriff's collective hands slapped.  All these issues deal with
*Federal* law, not local or state law.

But before you do anything, get competent counsel, and don't agree to,
or sign, ANYTHING without advice.  When "Wyatt Erp" sees you getting
serious, expect harassment like you've never seen before.  They might
even try planting something on you, or in your room, to get you thrown
out of school, or thrown in jail.  You're going to embarass them, and
"Wyatt Erp" doesn't like to be embarassed.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio
Date: 17 Jan 1995 15:05:06 GMT
Organization: Population Studies & Training Center


In article <[e-mail]>, David A. Webb <[e-mail].
edu> wrote:

[Story of police confiscating ham gear and not returning it.]

This problem should be very simple to solve. Call the American Radio Relay
League in Newington, CT (1-203-666-1541). Ask for the name of the ARRL
Legal liason in your area. Many of these attornies, also hams, act pro-bono
(for free) in cases like these.

Unfortunately, the story you describe is becoming more and more the norm
today. Local police officers, ignorant of anything except how to hand out
traffic tickets at the local speed trap, take it upon themselves to be
"experts" in federal law. They see ham radios or any scanner as a "burglar"
tool (why would any normal citizen want to listen to police frequencies,
after all?)  and confiscate it for the good of humanity. You Jeffrey Dahmer,
you.

Its not illegal to possess a radio capable of transmitting on any
frequency. It is illegal to use it on that frequency. And, not even to
mention the fact that, unless it was a federal judge, the judge who
ordered you to pay to have it modified back to its original state has
no jurisdiction over the matter, such a motion on the part of any
court is asinine. What next? Ordering you to only put 1/4 tank of gas
in your car because it "might" be used as a getaway car at a bank robbery?
Tell you to have all your steak knives dulled because you might stab
someone?

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Data Over CB?
Date: 16 Jan 1995 23:21:19 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Sharpened Software ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Are there any FCC regs concerning the type of information broadcast
> over the "Citizen's Band?"  In short, can I send data over CB?

TELECOM Digest Editor noted in reply:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: First off, you may not 'broadcast' over
> CB. The Crazy Band is intended, by FCC regulations for *two-way*
> personal communications. 'Broadcast' by definition is a one-way
> transmission intended specifically in a non-personal way for a large
> number of listeners. Is another site going to be responding to you in
> kind, with data back to you?

> Anyway, I think all this is very academic. Good luck if you want to try
> it. I presume the place you are broadcasting -- ooops!, communicating
> with is not more than 75-100 yards away. More than that and some Good
> Buddy will walk all over you. Its bad enough when two persons in actual
> voice communication have to ask each other to repeat themselves over
> and over because some local yokels are running way over the legal power
> limit. (So then you run extra power in order to get past the interference
> and he cranks his up a little more, etc.) Here in the Chicago area there
> are times and places the CB/eleven meter airwaves are solid heterodyne
> as the guys try to shove each other off the air. In the Crazy Band, no
> matter how loud your radio is; no matter how much power you put out or
> how well you are modulated, there is always someone out there whose
> radio is louder and has more power. They'll be glad to demonstrate it,
> you don't have to take their word for it. Just ask; they'll turn on
> their linear amplifiers and their reverberation units wired in series
> with their power microphones and Break rake rake rake rake for a
> Radio Check heck heck heck heck heck heck, and tell two old ladies with
> little handheld units seventy five miles away to 'back it down out there
> and give someone else a crack at it ..."  :)  I'd love to see the data
> before you send it, and after the other end gets it ... if it gets there
> at all.  PAT]

I love that. It has so much truth to it, and we on the coasts can often hear
the people in the south and midwest trying to get thru when the skip is good.

The nice thing about using CB for data is that the TNC or packet adapter never
gets frustrated and gives up trying to get through.  Not so for humans.  It
would be a good way to go, because the heavy-fisted and long winded breakers
out there can't keep talking forever, however implausible that may seem.  But
it *is* illegal.


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: Hey, don't you think we here in the Chicago
area don't hear the California guys working skip in the early morning hours
every day? At four or five o'clock in the morning on a summer day the guys
here are trying to talk to people in the UK. Around seven or so they start
screaming at California and the rest of the west coast.

One CB'er gets even:  This is a true story. A fellow using the handle-name
'Doctor Witch' at times and 'Witch Doctor' at other times in Chicago, in a
neighborhood known for its large population of Appalachian Mountain folks
(I could say 'hillbillies' but that would be rude) was known to be a very
loud, very obnoxious guy on the radio. His antenna sat on top of a nine-
story apartment building, on a twenty foot mast which was mounted on the
roof. With a two-thousand watt linear amplifier ('only used when I need
it to get out', he would always claim), this guy could be heard all over
Chicago to say the least, and usually half of the United States as well.
If you did not use a CB radio, then you could hear him on Channel 2 on
the television; that's how bad his harmonics could get sometimes.

He was prone to cussing a lot, but he was also very territorial, and since
he claimed Channel 16 (27.155 megs) as his private domain, generally no one
else was bothered too much by him; they just stayed off Channel 16 rather
than put up with his abuse. One day someone on Channel 16 got him riled up
over something. Witch Doctor had Nazi sympathies (if he was not actually a
member of the bunch here known as the 'American Nazi Party') so it did not
take a lot to get him started; hearing a black person on 'his' channel was
a good reason for him to let loose. This day was no exception, and a black
guy going on that frequency to get a radio check brought a stream of
obscenities and racial slurs from the good Doctor Witch.

But this time someone was waiting for him ... another CB'er had hooked up
a tape recorder with a mobious (endless) loop cassette; the kind you use
in telephone answering machines ... one of the long, 90 second tapes. When
Doctor Witch started, this guy hit that record button and started making a
nice, juicy 90 second recording of it all. Did he take it to the FCC? No ...
a lot of good that would have done ... instead, once he had that minute and
a half of tape, he *reversed* the process and started playing it back out
over the air on the same channel, knowing the Doctor was still listening.
Played back anonymously of course; just key up and play it.

 -- Turn on linear amp; plug tape player output into microphone jack; key
    up and start playing the recording back out over the air --

Third person: Hey Witch Doctor, you said all that already!

Doctor Witch: Why, #$$%@#m some &$$#@* tape recorded me!

The tape is allowed to just cycle over and over again, repeating for
everyone what the Witch Doctor had said about blacks and jews; all the
cursing and comments about your mother; you name it. Soon the frequency
is in an uproar since the black guy who went there originally has now
returned with his buddies on their CB's. The endless loop tape has
repeated itself over the air for the umpteenth time while the original
speaker is trying to explain yes, he said it once but he did not say
it a dozen more times.

Leaving the folks to have a good time on their own, the CB'er with the
tape recording goes around to all the other channels and plays it at
least once on each of them. After playing the tape, he remains silent
and as to be expected, a typical response:

"Witch Doctor, take it back to your own channel! Don't come over here and
start that garbage while my wife and her friends are talking." But when Witch
Doctor -- or more correctly, the pre-recorded tape -- failed to respond,
a few simply assumed he went back to 'his channel' so they went there also
to tell him off. Soon people from other channels are coming onto Channel 16
angrily telling him off; he tries to explain it was *not* him ...

"What's the idea of coming over to channel 31 and talking that way to my
wife?"

"It wasn't me!"

"Well who was it then?"

"It was a recording of me ... "

"In other words, it was you ..."

"Well no, it was not me, it was a recording of me ..."

"What do you mean, a recording of you? What is this, summertime and
re-runs of the best of Doctor Witch?"

 ... and on it went, all afternoon and into the evening. Black guys in other
parts of the city, on other channels, hear about the abuse a brother received
on channel 16 from 'one of those white trash hillbillies in Uptown' and they
tune in to give their responses. This would have been about 1979-80.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: Data Over CB?
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 00:40:08 GMT


If I recollect correctly, CB citizen's radio service is governed by
part 15 chapter J.  Three classes of serivce: A, B and C are defined.
Class A is intended as a commercial service.  UHF handie-talkies are
an example.  Class B is the familiar 40 channel good buddy trucker
radio in the ~27 MHz range.  Class C is for remote control with
allocations in the 27 and 72 MHz ranges.

Class C has to compete with interference in the 27 MHz band from
poorly maintained and illegal class B radios.  In the 72 MHz band,
class C has to put up with old fashioned garage door systems.  Newer
garage doors are on 390 MHz.

So, if your "data" is for remote controlling something, you might be
able to get away with a class C license.  You have to accept the
interference you get from the other services.  You can *not* transmit
text data with a class C license, i.e. forget using a class C
license to remotely read netnews on a terminal via a radio link.
There is some room for interpretation in terms of remote control: you
could concievably use PCM ASCII codes such as L and R to determine
whether a robot goes left or right.  Class C only permits RF
continusous carrier transmissions (of arbitrary duration).  Model
planes are typically controlled by pulse position modulation where a
series of short CW pulses are offset to various degrees in time
windows followin a long reference pulse.  AM and FM are *NOT*
permitted.

Class A and B permit only speech emissions.

There is a shared allocation in the 902-928 MHz region where the
gov't, RADAR, commercial serice, codless phones, hams, etc.  coexist.
Provided you maintain radiated power limits, you could legally
construct an experimental data device for this band, but you have to
tolerate interference from the priority users and have to generate no
interference of your own.  I don't have my regs here, so you'll have
to look up the section of part 15 governing this.


Bill Mayhew        NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-0095  USA      phone: [phone]
[e-mail]       amateur radio 146.58: N8WED

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?
Date: 17 Jan 1995 13:08:13 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


TELECOM Digest Editor ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Listening to WNIB on the radio this Saturday morning as I work on
> this issue ... the eight o'clock news says 'up to six more inches
> of rain due in California throughout the weekend ... more evacuations
> probably will be required ...'

> Well, good luck and my best regards, folks. It seems like the people
> in California spend all summer burning the place down, then spend
> all winter enduring mud slides and flooding.

> Have the floods in California affected telephone service to any extent?

Glub glub.

Actually, other than getting a little wet, I haven't seen much in the
way of damage.  I had to drive home in knee-deep water last week
because it came down too fast to run off.  It took me about an hour
and a half to go seven miles; usually it takes 25 to 30 minutes, even in
rush hour.  Stupid drivers don't know about hydroplaning, yet.

The only damage I've seen in our part of town is where the freeways
are being widened, and there is construction going on.  There's just a
lot of muddy runoff.  The nice thing is that there isn't much smog in
the air.  But that doesn't last long.

The funny thing is that of the 1500 plus lines from the CO that I end
up troubleshooting, I haven't had a single line called in because of
the rain.  We have had a complaint from one user on campus that might
be because of water in our interbuilding cabling, but I'm not sure.
This week the faculty comes back from semester break, so I expect to
hear complaints from some about their phones.


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] (Bruce Roberts)
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 07:31:00 GMT
Organization: The Great Escape - Gardena, CA - [phone]


> Well, good luck and my best regards, folks. It seems like the people
> in California spend all summer burning the place down, then spend
> all winter enduring mud slides and flooding. We are getting a lot
> of rain here today also, but the only effect has been to melt all
> the snow which had accumulated and leave some *huge* puddles of water
> to navigate at curbs where the street sewers are plugged, etc.

Ya know, now that you mention it, that IS what we do here in "sunny"
California.  <g>

> Have the floods in California affected telephone service to any extent?

Oh yes.  I haven't heard of any flooded central offices but I'll bet
it happened up North.  Had a chat at breakfast with some GTE field
crews and they said there was more overtime than they knew what to do
with.  Just locally they had a 900 pair cable (not mine, thank
goodness) get real wet and had to pull and splice a section.  We
ordered a couple of new lines at work and Pac Bell called to say there
will be a delay.  All the installers are now on field crew duty and
they don't know when they'll be able to get out circuits turned up.
Some of this happens whenever we get rain but this time is a LOT
worse.  Stay dry!


TTFN

Bruce Roberts, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: Long Distance Blocking, was Re: Old Rotary Service Question
Date: 17 Jan 1995 09:50:26 -0500


In <[e-mail]> Bill Parrish <[e-mail]>
writes:

> In the early 70s, I went to UCSB, and we were serviced by GTE in the
> dorms.  Occasionaly folks would decide to "share" a phone connection
> by making their own patches into terminal cabinets ....

> But there was a second funny thing about these "extensions" that was
> rather odd ... you sometimes could not make long distance calls  on
> them ...  If I recall right, there was some sort of a movable pin on the
> back of the dial that could be put into one of several (three?)
> positions, and if you moved the pin, it would enable the long-distance
> capability.  Could someone >explain how that worked?

There are lots of tricks used (or which were used) by Telcos to restrict
long distance call access. The simplest involved putting a diode in line
with the phone line.

In many central offices, there would be a current reversal as a toll
call would go through the connection process. Sometimes this was only
for a fraction of a second, othertimes for the remaining duration of
the call.  Putting a diode in the line would break the current as this
occurred, thus putting the phone back "on hook" and killing the connection.

I personally did this to my phone line when I was in dormitory type
situation and other people had occassional (legit) access to my phone
(i.e. Danny, could I use your phone, here's a dime ...).

You still see this current reversal on many poorly designed coin phones.
Far too often, when you call a number, you'll find the touch tone pad
has gone dead on you. (Has to do with very ancient history when touch
tone pads required the phones to be wired in one direction).

BTW, some additional "features" abotu using the diode trick:

a) Volume of the phone ringer would be cut by about a third. Remember
that it is AC and you're blocking one direction of current.

b) There was often also a current reversal when calling the operator
or some other telco numbers. But local calls would go through ok.

c) of course I would never have done this, but if you put the diode on
a "friend's" phone line it would have been perhaps weeks before they
noticed anything was wrong (remember local calls went through ok). And
a cursory telco check of their phone linewould find nothing wrong (at
least the way they'd do these things "back then"), and they would go
crazy complaining back and forth and not getting anywhere.


[e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Labatt-Simon)
Subject: Payphones Rejecting AT&T LD
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 03:08:16 EST
Organization: D&D Consulting


Howdy all -

I was driving down 22 in New York the other day towards Millerton, NY
and stopped to make a phone call at a payphone.  When I tried to dial
using my AT&T calling card the phone service wouldn't take it.  Then I
tried 10ATT0 and it still wouldn't go through.  Finally, I tried
1-800-CALL-ATT and the call didn't go through.  Drove down another
five miles to another payphone.  Same company, same problem.  I tried
calling the 800 number for the company who owns the phone, and had to
pay $0.25 for the 800 call.  Their offices were closed.

I thought this was illegal?  If it is, does anyone have a number I can
call to stop this, as I often drive through this area ...


Thank,

Chris Labatt-Simon                       Internet: [e-mail]
Design & Disaster Recovery Consulting              [e-mail]
Albany, New York                              CIS: 73542,2601
PHONE: [phone]                              FAX: [phone]
Subscribe to the Lotus Notes Mailing List - e-mail me for info....
For info on D&D Consulting, send e-mail to [e-mail]....


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What you need is a supply of our COCOT
'out of compliance' stickers. Review this file in the Telecom Archives
at lcs.mit.edu.  The idea is, when you find a phone which is not working
correctly (we assume the owner intended for it to operate in a legal way
but somehow the programming got messed up <grin>) then it is courteous to
place an 'out of order' sticker across the coin slot so no one else will
accidentally lose money in it ... <grin> .... and if someone removes the
out of order sticker without actually repairing the phone, then put a new
sticker on it, and just keep doing so. See the 'cocot' sub-directory in
the archives.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 07:18:37 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Mark Fletcher)
Subject: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles


I am the Communications Manager at a large Northeastern resort where
my department maintains a Northern Telcom Meridian Option 71 with two
Meridian Option 11's in remote sites. Here is my dilemma:

Currently we lease about 100 pairs from the local RBOC at a cost of
$15.50 each per month. These lines service locations about two miles
apart down a State Highway, all in one municipality, and are used to
connect the remote sitches.

I have been told that we can apply to the local municipality for a
utility franchise, and then place our own cables on existing poles. At
our current cost of $18,000.00 annually for special circuits, this
possibility is very attractive to us.

If anyone has information about the process, or could point me to any
pertinant legal documents on the subject, I would be very greatful.

Please reply via direct e-mail to [e-mail]. I will post my
findings and a summary for all interested.


Thanks folks!

<switch hook>

By the way if any one is interested in discussing our database used to
maintain our on property cable pairs, just leave me a note at the above
e-mail address.

<click>

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

From: [e-mail] (John W. Barrus)
Subject: CallerID and ANI
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 09:01:08 -0500
Organization: Mitsubishi Electric Research Labs
Reply-To: [e-mail]


My wife sometimes returns calls to mental health patients when they
phone an emergency number.  When CallerID was started in our area, we
called and specifically asked to have line blocking put on our line
(we have to press something like *67 to turn on CallerID on outgoing
calls.)  We don't want anyone calling my wife back after she helps
them ou.  She has been harrassed before, but only indirectly through
the paging number, not to our home phone.

Two evenings ago, I called PC Connection from our phone and casually
asked if our number had come through when the customer assistant
answered our phone.  He then proceeded to recite our phone number to
me.  I did not (and never have) dialed the code to turn on CallerID.

Does this mean that our phone number is being transmitted, even when
the phone company says that it isn't?  Or do commercial enterprises
have a different system that always gets our phone number?  I assumed
that ANI and CallerID were both blocked with line blocking.

Is there an easy way to test whether or not line blocking is working
(I don't have any friends with CallerID boxes).

Any ideas?


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If you dial an 800 number then the called
party gets your ID whether you like it or not. There is no way for you to
block this. Regards Caller-ID, it *should* be blocked as you requested
except I think on long distance calls you now need to do the *67 whether
or not you have per-line blocking for local calls. I am not even certain
if you can block CID on interstate long distance any longer after the most
recent FCC rulings.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger Atkinson)
Subject: How Many SONET/SDH Network Terminations?
Organization: R. F. Atkinson & Co.
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 01:34:29 GMT


Does anybody have some notion of how many SONET network terminations
are presently in service in the US and Canada?  SONET/SDH worldwide?
By 'network termination' I mean a connection to a public SONET/SDH
network at a customer premise, or a connection between networks,
public or private.

More important question(s): How many such connections will be in use
in the next three to five years, or how many will be installed each
year, three to five years from now?

We are trying to decide whether to jump on the bandwagon.  Educated
guesses will be greatly appreciated.


Thanks for your help,

Roger Atkinson

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 12:22:23 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Richard Jay Solomon)
Subject: Need Info on Two-Line, Digital Answering Devices With ANI


Has anyone tested or reviewed the Friday machine by Bogen or AT&T's
new two-line digital answering machine? Will they respond to ANI like
the NTI device mentioned in TELECOM Digest?


Richard Solomon   MIT Research Program on Communications Policy

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 11:37:35 EST
From: Anthony D'Auria <[e-mail]>
Subject: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging?


Hi! My name is Anthony D'Auria and I own a P90 super loaded desktop. I
use it practically every day for the net and business. I haven't
experienced any trouble with the floating point calculations (not that
I use them). I think that IBM is making a big deal of a little thing.
People with Pentiums start panicking, thinking that their system is
all messed up.  For an average user, it doesn't seem to fearsome, but
if you have some heavy duty stuff to do, it can really do some damage.

Question: Does this floating point calculation bug affect system
performance? Is that why some Pentiums bottleneck? What and where
should a person contact to get the messed up chip replaced? Is it
actually worth it?

If you have any ideas, respond: [e-mail].


With regards,

Anthony D'Auria

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

From: [e-mail] (Alex Zacharov)
Subject: ATM Based PBX
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 15:33:21 GMT
Organization: Telrad Ltd.


    Has anybody heard about ATM-based SX-2000 Light PBX from Mitel,
that has been advertised in Telecommunications, November 1993? How can
I get more information about this product?

Please, send answer to: [e-mail].

Thanks.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #35
*****************************



Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22392;
          17 Jan 95 19:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00565; Tue, 17 Jan 95 14:25:30 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00556; Tue, 17 Jan 95 14:25:23 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 14:25:23 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #36

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 14:25:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 36

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Horrible Earthquake in Japan (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (Bob Keller)
    Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (Ben Burch)
    Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (Bill Garfield)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Gary Novo)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Bob Keller)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Clifton T. Sharp)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (Peter Dibble)
    Re: Cellular NAM and ESN (Bob Keller)
    Re: Cellular NAM and ESN (Alan Shen)
    Re: Cellular NAM and ESN (Jeff Box)
    Re: Cell Phone PINs (Jay Hennigan)
    Re: Cell Phone PINs (Henry Baker)
    Re: Cellular Phone Pricing Question (Ken Weaverling)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Horrible Earthquake in Japan
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 14:00:00 CST


Word is reaching us of a very severe earthquake which hit Japan several
hours ago. This is reported to be the worst there in over a hundred years.
Over 170,000 people have died, and entire cities are in flames. The
government is attempting to cope with it, but is somewhat at a loss due
to the severity of it. President Clinton has been in touch with the
Japanese government and is sending immediate assistance as needed.

This comes by coincidence on the anniversary of Northridge ...

Can any of our Japanese readers give us more details?  What has been the
extent of the damage where telecommunications is concerned?


PAT

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 10:55:09 EST
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio


David,

I am not sure if this will be applicable, and therefore helpful, in
your circumstances, but you should be aware of a 1993 FCC Ruling
preempting state and local laws concerning amateur operator use of
transceivers capable of reception beyond the ham bands.  The official
citation is: PR Docket No.  91-36, Memorandum Opinion and Order (FCC
93-410), 8 FCC Rcd 6413, 73 Rad. Reg. (P&F) 1196 (September 3, 1993).

In paragraph 13 of the order the FCC wrote:

We hold that state and local laws that preclude the possession in
vehicles or elsewhere of amateur radio service transceivers by amateur
operators merely on the basis that the transceivers are capable of the
reception of public safety, special emergency, or other radio service
frequencies, the reception of which is not prohibited by federal law,
are inconsistent with the federal objectives of facilitating and
promoting the amateur radio service and, more fundamentally, with the
federal interest in amateur operators' being able to transmit and
receive on authorized amateur service frequencies.  We therefore hold
that such state and local laws are preempted by federal law.

I'd be happy to fax you a copy of the decision and/or chat with you
about it.  Email me or give me call.


Bob Keller (KY3R)                   Email: [e-mail]
Law Office of Robert J. Keller, P.C.   Telephone:  [phone]
Federal Telecommunications Law         Facsimile:  301.229.6875

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Burch)
Subject: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio
Organization: Motorola, Inc.
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 17:13:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (David
A. Webb) wrote:

> An officer found my 2 meter amateur transceiver, turned it on, and
> discovered it could transmit on frequencies licensed to the local
> county police.  I was not in my room during the time of the search,
> so I had no control over its operation.

This officer was in violation of federal law for tampering with an
amateur radio station.  Please turn him over to the FCC!


Ben Burch               Motorola Wireless Data Group:
[e-mail]   Makers of the Envoy(R) Personal
                        Wireless Communicator
                        Envoy(R) Information Line;
                        1-800-8-WIRELESS

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

Subject: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 07:43:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


> Witness #3 was a person who services amateur equipment.  He stated
> that my radio is type accepted, and therefor it is illegal to modify.
> Illegal modification therefor makes my radio illegal to possess.

> Witness #1 was the university officer who stated under oath that he
> used the radio to transmit on county frequencies to verify the
> modifications.  He also stated in his professional capacity that my
> radio is illegally modified, and therefor illegal to possess.  He
> further stated that he called the FCC and was told my radio is illegal
> to possess.

While the writer is correct in his statement that Amateur or Ham radio
equipment is not 'type-accepted', equipment which -lawfully- operates
on commercial frequencies (police frequencies) and is capable of
TRANSMITTING thereon, _must be_ type accepted, approved and certified
for such use.  The modifications therefore would constitute an equipment
technical violation.

Although the act of 'tampering' with non type-accepted equipment is
allowable, the moment that equipment radiates energy on frequencies
where type acceptance _is_ a requirement, then the modified equipment
is in violation and as "property" it becomes contraband.

While FCC regulations deal mainly with use and not possession, the
writer may still be on shaky ground.  I certainly wouldn't want the
local constabulary _aware_ that I possessed transmitting equipment
capable of operating on their lawfully assigned frequencies.

But the obvious question which remains unanswered is -why- was the
person's room searched in the first place?  "Reasonable suspicion" is
sufficient grounds in most jurisdictions, but suspicion of what?


Ye Olde Bailey BBS Zyxel 713-520-1569(V.32bis) USR 713-520-9566(V.34/FC)|
Houston,Texas    yob.com   Home of alt.cosuard


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, this is something the original
writer did not explain to us, and as you suggest, it seems like a very
important part of this whole mystery. If their 'reasonable suspicion'
had to do with improper or inappropriate transmissions on the radio,
then the defenses discussed to date may go topsy-turvy in court. This
may or may not be the best forum for David Webb to use to say everything
he knows about this case -- at least at this time -- but I hope David
will get an attorney and be completely straight with him. Attornies will
tell you how the worst thing in the world -- and a very common thing,
unfortunatly -- is to have a client who lies to them. Then they get in
court, and the *other side* tells the attorney stuff his own client had
'forgotten' to mention. End result, the attorney gets egg on his face
and looks like an idiot.  Attornies don't like that. So David, please
do get a competent attorney, and when all is over and done with, tell
us how things worked out, okay?   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 03:27:06 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Reply-to: [e-mail]


In TELECOM Digest; Mon, 16 Jan 95; 09:19:00 CST; Volume 15 : Issue 32
[e-mail] (Bill Sohl) writes:

> No one needs any authority from the FCC to operate a receiver ...
> that's one of the fundamental differences between the USA and many
> other countries.

In my view this so-called "fundamental difference" is a fairly hollow
one.  True, you don't need a license to operate a receiver in the
U.S., and there are no license fees or federal taxes to be paid.

I suppose, once upon a time, that "difference" implied a reverence for
personal liberties which was arguably greater than it was in countries
where receivers were heavily regulated, taxed, or even outlawed.

But in the intervening years, Congress has passed a series of laws making
the actual use of receivers illegal in a number of circumstances. The fact
that they have never passed a law taxing them is cold comfort.

ECPA as amended is only the latest insult. Previous laws made it illegal to
intercept certain satellite downlinks (and uplinks), radar speed guns,
and a number of other types of signals. If the trend continues, listening to
any signal not explicitly intended for broadcast will be illegal. I know that
at least one Congress member proposed legislation with just that wording.

The freedom to own a device which one is not free to use is ironically
appropriate in a country which increasingly seems to value ownership
and property rights above the civil rights of its citizens.

If I had my choice, I would much rather pay a tax or a license fee of a few
bucks per year on a receiver if it brought with it the freedom to use the
device as I saw fit.


Gary Novosielski   GPN Consulting   My opinions ARE those of my employer.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 10:25:41 EST
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges


In TELECOM Digest V15 #32, Bill Sohl <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I have no problem with this statement and I'll state unequivocally
> that scanners and/or other types of radio receivers are not (if
> designed properly) included in the catagory "intentional or
> unintential radiator" and they are not, therefore, licensed.

I did not realize this was such a heated matter or I never would have
stuck my nose into it ... but, now that I'm here <G> ...

A scanner most definitely is a "radiator".  If nothing else, the micro-
processor circuitry that makes it scan constitutes an unintentional
radiator within the meaning of the rules.  Many people in this thread
seem to be confusing "radiator," which is a defined term of art under
Part 15, with "transmitter" in the usual sense of that word.  Many
devices which are not "transmitters" (including not only receive-only
devices, but also devices that have nothing whatsoever to do with
transmission or reception of signals) nonetheless "radiate" electromagnetic
energy and are subject to Part 15.

In an oversimplified view, Part 15 governs two large classification of
devices: (1) transmitters (in the general sense of that word) that
operate at sufficiently low power levels and/or restricted
circumstances that individual licensing is not necessary, and (2)
devices that are _not_ transmitters (in the general sense of that
word) but which nonetheless generate electromagnetic fields.

The only points that I really wanted to make when I jumped in here
are: (1) It is not entirely accurate to say that Part 15 places _no_
obligations on the user or the consumer.  (2) The scope of Part 15 is
much, much broader than what we generally think of as "transmitters."
(3) User modification of a device _can_ (I don't say it _will_, I say
it _can_) invalidate the device's Part 15 certification and/or
verification.

I am _not_ saying that home-built devices and/or user-modified devices
are therefore automatically unlawful.  In building or modifying a
device, however, the user is responsible for keeping the technical
parameters of the device within the radiation limits prescribed by
Part 15 and, if those limits are exceeded, the user no-longer enjoys
the right conferred by Part 15 to use the device without a license.
With the possible exception of cellular scanners (which is an issue
contaminated by political/industry pressures and other laws having
nothing to do with the regulatory purposes of Part 15), I don't think
there is any intent on the part of the government to prevent someone
from building or modifying non-transmitter devices (on a
non-commercial basis) in ways that do not cause interference, nor do I
think there is any governmental interest in expending resources
worrying it.


Bob Keller (KY3R)            Email: [e-mail]
Law Office of Robert J. Keller, P.C.   Telephone:  [phone]
Federal Telecommunications Law       Facsimile:  301.229.6875

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

From: [e-mail] (Clifton T. Sharp)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 07:04:15 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> plaws@comp..uark.edu (Peter
Laws) writes:

>> "The operation of an intentional or unintentional radiator

> RADIATOR!!!  Not receiver!!  *Transmitters* are a "whole nother"  thing.

> Radiator != receiver (I'll leave aside poorly shielded local oscillators:).

But that was the whole point.  A receiver with a poorly shielded local
oscillator, or for that matter a computer or sparking relay or defective
fluorescent light, are UNINTENTIONAL radiators (see above) and are just as
thoroughly regulated (albeit not as often enforced :-).


Cliff Sharp   WA9PDM
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Dibble)
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 17 Jan 1995 01:21:53 GMT
Organization: Microware Systems Corp., Des Moines, Iowa


In article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Digest Editor noted
in response to Bob Keller <[e-mail]>:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you, Bob. Section 15.21 is all
> May I suggest to readers the next time you decide to purchase some sort of
> radio, or television perhaps, *look at the user manual*. Let's leave Radio

Are you sure about this Pat?  I looked carefully through the user
manual for an AM/FM receiver and couldn't find a single reference to
the FCC or any form of license or precaution except that there was
quite a lot of prose explaining that it could be dangerous to listen
to the radio at too high a volume.


Peter

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 11:04:50 EST
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular NAM and ESN


In TELECOM Digest V15 #30, Alan Shen <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> Call your cellular carrier about this. Some will allow you to have one
>> NAM for two different phones (with different ESN numbers) for an extra
>> charge usually from about $5-$8 a month.

John Covert responded:

> Absolutely not!  This is a violation of the cellular standard and
> forbidden by the FCC.  No carrier may permit it.  It will not work
> correctly; if both phones are on at the same time it may interfere
> with calls to other subscribers.

Setting aside the technology for the moment (NAMs, ESNs, etc.), what
some carrier's are offering is the ability to have the same cellular
telephone number active on more than one unit.  For example, Cellular
One in the Washington/Baltimore area just announced the service at
$17.95 per month for up to three different units.  What is illegal
under FCC rules is post-manufacturer modification of the ESN.  This
was done not for the purpose of precluding cellular "extension" phones
to otherwise legitimate users, but rather in response to the
ever-growing fraud due to "cloning" of cellular phones.  There are
ways that cellular carriers can accomplish the same result in the
switch without modifying the ESN and therefore without violating the
law.

The FCC staff has always had a policy prohibiting ESN cloining and/or
tinkering, but until recently in was based on interetation of rules
that really didn't directly address the matter, as well as to incorporation
by reference of external industry equipment standards.  A new rule
which significantly more teeth was therefore promulgated, and became
effective on January 1, 1995:

    New FCC Rule Section 22.919
    47 C.F.R. Section 22.919
    ---------------------------------

    22.919 Electronic serial numbers.

    The Electronic Serial Number (ESN) is a 32 bit binary
    number that uniquely identifies a cellular mobile
    transmitter to any cellular system.

        (a) Each mobile transmitter in service must have a
        unique ESN.

    (b) The ESN host component must be permanently attached
        to a main circuit board of the mobile transmitter
        and the integrity of the unit's operating software
        must not be alterable.  The ESN must be isolated
        from fraudulent contact and tampering.  If the ESN
        host component does not contain other information,
        that component must not be removable, and its
        electrical connections must not be accessible.  If
        the ESN host component contains other information,
        the ESN must be encoded using one or more of the
        following techniques:

        (1) Multiplication or division by a polynomial;

        (2) Cyclic coding;

        (3) The spreading of ESN bits over various non-
            sequential memory locations.

        (c) Cellular mobile equipment must be designed such
        that any attempt to remove, tamper with, or change
        the ESN chip, its logic system, or firmware
        originally programmed by the manufacturer will
        render the mobile transmitter inoperative.

    (d) The ESN must be factory set and must not be
        alterable, transferable, removable or otherwise
        able to be manipulated in the field.  Cellular
        equipment must be designed such that any attempt to
        remove, tamper with, or change the ESN chip, its
        logic system, or firmware originally programmed by
        the manufacturer will render the mobile transmitter
        inoperative.

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

Bob Keller (KY3R)            Email: [e-mail]
Law Office of Robert J. Keller, P.C.   Telephone:  [phone]
Federal Telecommunications Law       Facsimile:  301.229.6875

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

From: Alan Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular NAM and ESN
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 01:10:07 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Thu, 12 Jan 1995, John R. Covert wrote:

> Alan Shen <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> Call your cellular carrier about this. Some will allow you to have one
>> NAM for two different phones (with different ESN numbers) for an extra
>> charge usually from about $5-$8 a month.

> Absolutely not!  This is a violation of the cellular standard and
> forbidden by the FCC.  No carrier may permit it.  It will not work
> correctly; if both phones are on at the same time it may interfere
> with calls to other subscribers.

Are you sure? I've seen flyers from several different carriers now
offering one NAM with multiple ESN. It's perfectly legal. You must be
talking about have two phones with the same NAM and ESN.


Daniel Kao

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

From: [e-mail] (JeffB65582)
Subject: Re: Cellular NAM and ESN
Date: 16 Jan 1995 16:20:15 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JeffB65582)


Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems in Dallas does offer the "same number
with two different phones" (each with different ESN) for $10 per
month.  You are cautioned that if both phones are turned on, incoming
calls will generally go to one phone (at random) but not both.  Also,
the phones can't call each other.

Its a popular offering for those who have a mobile and want a handheld
also.


Jeff Box

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

From: [e-mail] (Jay Hennigan)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone PINs
Date: 17 Jan 1995 01:40:37 GMT
Organization: RAIN Public Access Internet (805) 967-RAIN


A. Padgett Peterson ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Mark Smith    Mercerville, NJ writes:

>> By contrast, customers not using PINs must bring their phones back to a
>> carrier or dealer for a new phone number, notify business associates
>> and friends of the number change, or even modify business cards and
>> stationery.

> Don't understand the last part, the ESN is what needs to change, not
> the phone number, guess someone does not understand the difference.
> This is from a telco press release?

Changing either will disable the cloned phone.  The ESN and MIN (phone
number) must match the carrier's records for the call to go through.
As it is easier for the carrier to change the MIN than the ESN, they
suggest this as the solution, despite the obvious inconvenience to
their customers.

Even if the carriers had the capability to reprogram ESNs, I doubt
that they would release it to their field-level techs.  There would be
a lot of under-the-table cloning for customers who want two phones on
the same number originating from the carriers' own service facilities.

For someone who has been hit by the cloners and wants to keep the same
phone number, he can either buy a new phone (at premuim prices because
of no new activation), send it back to the manufacturer for a new ESN,
or find a cloner to change it to something different and not in use on
the home system and then get the carrier to update its records with
the new ESN.

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

From: [e-mail] (Henry Baker)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone PINs
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 10:18:24 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeffrey
Mattox) wrote:

> In article <[e-mail]>, Carl Oppedahl <oppedahl@patents.
> com> wrote:

>> I was reading a book about the cellular system that was published
>> eight years ago ... it identified the problem that if people copy down
>> the ESN and phone number they could get free calls ... despite this
>> the cellular industry moved ahead with the present system.

> Somewhere, the person(s) that made the design/political decisions to
> implement the system this horrible way are watching.  They probalby
> even have cellular phones themselves.  I wonder what they are
> thinking.  "Gosh, I was a dumb so-an-so for ..."  I wonder if it's the
> same guy who invented the VCR programming scheme -- in which case he's
> probably more of the mind to be laughing at the mess he's created.

Highly unlikely.  The attitude in big business has always been to
move in packs, so that no individual will ever be blamed.  "The _committee_
made the decision", etc.  These guys are so clueless, that even if
you pointed it out to them, they still wouldn't understand.

The banking system's electronic funds transfer system is only a mite
more secure than the cellular telephone system (this has been
discussed on comp.risks).  Even though hundreds of millions of dollars
of fraud have been admitted (who knows how much worse hasn't been
admitted), these guys still won't move to really fix the system.

Apparently, so long as they can get insurance, they don't care what
the losses are.

So long as the cellular carriers can continue to pass on the losses to
the _paying_ customers, and the totally clueless regulators allow them
to do so, they won't lift a finger to stop the problem.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Weaverling)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Pricing Question
Date: 17 Jan 1995 12:56:13 -0500
Organization: Delaware Technical & Community College


In article <[e-mail]>, John McGing <jmcging@access.
digex.net> wrote:

> Anyway, I have a couple of questions: Even including the $25.00 year
> to the employee association, the monthly base cost is $11.03 month vs
> $24.95.  Over three years that's $167.00 x3 or over $500.00 in
> savings.  Is this deal too good to be true?  The three year thing
> doesn't worry me (we're NOT moving <g> and the car phone we have is a
> real top drawer Motorola we can switch to a new car.).  Should it?

One of the reasons for a three year contract may be due to the cell
company planning on, or expecting, cell prices to drop in that period.
If they do, and you are locked in for three years, they get to keep
charging you under the older higher terms. For example, in some parts
of the country, under certain plans, weekend local air time rates are
FREE.

If you are simply planning on using the phone for emergencies, then the
lowest monthly rate is the best deal, and the three year committment isn't
as important. If you make a lot of calls, then it is a gamble.


Ken Weaverling   [e-mail] |*| My opinions .NEQ. college's position

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #36
*****************************

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01119;
          17 Jan 95 21:35 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05620; Tue, 17 Jan 95 16:16:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05613; Tue, 17 Jan 95 16:16:04 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 16:16:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #37

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 16:15:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 37

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Japan Earthquakes (Gerald Serviss)
    Re: Horrible Earthquake in Japan - Correction (Andrew Laurence)
    FAQ or File on LD Providers Wanted (Ron Parker)
    206 to 360 Experience (Ron Parker)
    900 Providing Advice Sought ([e-mail])
    INMARSAT Standard Wanted (Glenn Shirley)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Paul Havinden)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Ari Wuolle)
    Re: 800 Numbers and Caller ID (Glenn Foote)
    Re: 800 Numbers from Overseas (Paul Robinson)
    Re: SNA Over Token Ring (K. M. Peterson)
    Re: GSM SIM Implementation (Harri Kinnunen)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Ben Burch)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Seymour Dupa)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Jonathan Mosen)
    Re: ISDN BRI Lines (Ed Goldgehn)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Gerald Serviss)
Subject: Japan Earthquakes
Date: 17 Jan 1995 19:53:52 GMT
Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola


I just received some information on the effect of the Japan
earthquakes on the cellular systems that we have installed. Motorola
has analog cellular systems that cover about 90% of the land mass of
Japan.

This is taken from two different notes:

An excerpt from an internal memo from Motorola Corporate:

Telephone service is out for most of Kansai (Osaka area) which causes
our cellular system to be down in some areas.  Regarding Kansai
Cellular Telephone (KCT), (Motorola's) system, 16 digital sites and 35
analog sites were down due either to electric power failure or the
telephone network.  We have had our entire cellular field force, as
well as our subcontractor, Daimei, at work around the clock getting
the system back into full service.  All JSMR infrastructure is
confirmed to be working, except we do not have information yet in
Kyoto.

An excerpt from a man on the scene in Osaka:

As you may or may not know by now, there was an earthquake measuring
at about 7.2-7.5 on the R scale. Buildings, highways and bridges
collapsed.  Needless to say this caused a dramatic increase in the
call traffic on the KCT system that was running at about 90% capacity.
Our apartment was shaken pretty good but we got lucky to escape with
no damage, but we did get one heck of a scare when we were rudely
awakened at 5:46 am when our bed turned into roller coaster. Almost
all public transportation is out-of-service, I am lucky enough to live
within walking distance of the MTSO so I am one of the priviledged few
who got to work today.

The bad news is, if we had MP16s we probably could of handled the load
with minimal load shedding. However, we had to rough it with MP10s.
The good news is The load has been over 100% of the determined
capacity(Using Load line analysis and confirming CPU usage in the
upper 90s) for about 12 hours now and the system is doing a great job
at shedding load. The percentage of attempts to mobile completions has
remained the same even though the total loading has fluctuated
greatly.  All of these numbers have not been confirmed and are just
based on my preliminary analysis.


Jerry Serviss    Motorola Inc   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 13:41:38 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Horrible Earthquake in Japan


In comp.dcom.telecom TELECOM Digest Editor wrote:

> Over 170,000 people have died ...

I heard the death toll was 1,700.


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]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This error of a extra zero in the
total was caught about five minutes after that issue of the Digest
was released. You and several others pointed it out as well. Now the
count is up to about 1,800.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Parker)
Subject: FAQ or File on LD Providers Wanted
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 19:55:28 GMT
Organization: Internet for the Olympic Peninsula


Is there a FAQ or file anywhere that compares the services and rates
of different LD providers?

I have been sweet talked into switching to AT&T's Small Business
Advantage plan that was to 'provide the best rates possible for the
small business'.  My costs have gone up by 33% over the flat rate I
was paying, my last bill was dated Nov. something and their customer
service lines are swamped.

I am looking for a better service.


TIA,

Ron P.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Parker)
Subject: 206 to 360 Experience
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 20:01:31 GMT
Organization: Internet for the Olympic Peninsula


I have just gone thru the area code change from 206 to 360.

One customer said that when she dialed our new area code she was put
into a mailbox in her own company.  I was aware that some PBXs would
not allow a zero or one middle digit to pass but I never thought of
the mailbox problem.

How prevelant is this mailbox numbering problem?


Ron P.

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

Subject: 900 Providing Advice Sought
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 14:01:08 EST
From: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I was hoping someone could tell me the most cost-effective way to set
up my own 900 service given the following:

  1. It will use touch-tone, menu-driven prompting, with the
     ability to transfer to a live operator.

  2. I am technically knowledgable enough to set this up on
     a PC, and I have sources of voice-mail cards, etc.

Is it more cost-effective to do it myself, or can I deal with one of
those 900 resellers?  If I go the reseller route, can I customize the
menus, and set up transferring, etc?  I will also probably want to
allow people from payphones to call an 800 number and give their CC.


Thanks for any help,

Ron

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: INMARSAT Standard Wanted
Date: 16 Jan 1995 04:05:22 +1100
Organization: Stanilite Electronics Pty. Ltd. Sydney, Australia


The subject nearly says it all.

I'm after the standard for INMARSAT.  I know there are ITU docs that
have interface specs to INMARSAT but what is the standard that defines
frequencies, air word protocol, call states etc?

Also is there anyone out there that knows rough estimates of prices of
GSM mobiles. Seems to me Australians are paying about double what
everyone else in the world is (and I want to get one next time I'm
overseas).


Glenn

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Havinden)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas
Date: 17 Jan 1995 10:53:57 GMT
Organization: Graphic Data System Ltd, Cambridge, UK


Judith Oppenheimer ([e-mail]) wrote:

> The call being completed with the message "this is not a free
> call" are being done by Sprint.

Since the caller is paying the normal call charges and I assume the
800 owner will be paying their normal rate for the call, does that
mean that Sprint are in fact getting paid twice for that call?


Paul Havinden          Email: [e-mail]
Graphic Data Systems   Tel: [phone]
Cambridge,UK           Fax: [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, it means they are getting paid once,
in two parts by two subscribers. One subscriber pays for the overseas
call to the USA gateway; the other subscriber pays *what he agreed to
pay all along* for a domestic 800 call from the USA gateway to wherever
the call is terminated.   PAT]

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

From: Ari Wuolle <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 16:51:06 +0200
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas


> Well I just tried it from the UK via British Telecom and got the usual
> message "800 numbers from outside the **US** are not free ..." and
> then I got the ringing tone, so I guess it works. Didn't stay on the
> line to see who answered though!

Maybe you should have stayed on line for few seconds longer. I tried
to call that Canadian number at home and got:

990-1-800-668-2355 (800-NOT-BELL)
{3 seconds silece}
{One short US-style ringing tone}

Female voice 1 :"Access to the 800 number you have dialed is not free
of charge outside the United States. If answered, you will be charged
international direct dialing rates for this call. If you do not want
to proceed with this call please hang up now."

{One normal US-style ringing tone}

Female voice 2 : "We are sorry your call cannot be completed as
dialed. Please check the number and dial again or call your operator
for assistance. This is a recording 702-7."

{US-style busy tone}

This call didn't cost anything.

I also tried this again few hours later from a different location. On
my first try the line went dead after the first announcement. But when
I tried immediately again, I got the same response as I got when I
called that number at home.


Ari Wuolle

E-mail          [e-mail]    Mail    Kolkekannaksentie 10 B 4
Telephone       + 358  0 509 2073            02720  ESPOO
Cellphone       + 358 49 431 140             FINLAND
Fax (temporary) + 358  0 428 429


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It probably went dead because at the
gateway point -- wherever that is -- after the first announcement the
call was re-dialed to be sent to its destination. Most likely there was
some error there which caused it to abort at that point.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn Foote)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers and Caller ID
Date: 15 Jan 1995 04:08:03 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet


Jonathan Bradshaw ([e-mail]) wrote:

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

>> Can someone explain IF, not why, full telephone numbers of people
>> calling 800 numbers are shown (either on the bill, or as part of the
>> call) to those who OWN the 800 numbers?

>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The answer is yes. People who have 800
>> numbers receive the ANI -- not the Caller-ID,

> I get Caller ID NOT ANI through my 800 number depending on the
> origination. From Indianapolis, I know I get full Caller ID from South
> Bend and Bloomington, IN where I have tested it. This shows up as the
> NAME and Number (so its NOT ANI) but if the caller dials me directly,
> I see "OUT OF AREA". I don't know how far this extends but it does
> seem to be quite extensive in Indiana.

> Somehow One Call is picking up and transferring the CID data along
> with the call.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think however we can correctly answer
> the original query by stating that yes indeed, the persons who own 800
> numbers do get identifying data on all or almost all calls they receive.
> If there is some reason they want to make an issue out of it, they nearly
> always can backtrack to the source of the call. I think that is what our
> original writer was asking about.   PAT]


Pat,
    You are right.  That was what I wanted to know.  However, this
issue is going to raise some interesting questions among that portion
of the public which is a little "touchy" about Caller-ID and "privacy".

    It does seem like the telephone companies are trying to have it both
ways ... you pay for Call Blocking and it works, UNLESS someone else has paid
for the right to see the numbers of everyone who calls ...

    Sooner or later I expect some group will bring this matter to
court, or at least make a major public relations issue out of it.
There WAS a time when those 800 numbers did not have access to the
numbers calling them, they had to take "Ma Bell's WORD" on the
accuracy of the bill.  For that matter, the current practice of
providing the ANI to the 800 number is not (to the best of my
knowledge) founded in any tariff.  On the other hand, those with Call
Blocking are PAYING FOR a SPECIFIC service, the right NOT TO HAVE
their phone numbers disclosed to those whom they wish to call.
Therefore, one could argue that the Telephone Companies are in direct
violation of their contract with the customer, that this situation
took place with the full knowledge and INTENT of Telephone Company
management personnel ... etc..

    It will be interesting to see what will happen when (not, I
expect if) this challenge takes place ... makes me kind of glad I
retired from the Consulting business ... ;-).


Glenn L Foote ...... [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They are NOT 'paying for the right to
see your phone number'; they are *paying for the phone call*, period.
The person or company or whatever paying for a phone call is entitled
to know where -- to what telephone number -- the connection was extended.

For example, you have a non-published number and you call me collect
through the operator. In all probability your number will not be displayed
on my Caller-ID box. When I get my bill at the end of the month however
your number will be listed there in the long distance portion of the bill
saying something like 'From Columbus, OH xxx-xxx-xxxx' and the time of
day and number of minutes, etc.  Are you suggesting because I get this
information I 'paid to get your number'?  All I paid for was the phone
call, which legally means the call *belongs to me*, and I am entitled
to know the uses made of my phone when I am charged for those uses.

Any 'contract' with telco regards blocking of ID is governed by tariff.
Furthermore, in my phone book where the enhanced custom calling features
are explained in detail, it says plainly 'although you may choose to
block delivery of your number to the telephone you are calling, you may
NOT block delivery on calls to 800 numbers or collect calls.'  I would
think that 'contract' is rather plain. So people can be as 'touchy' as
they like -- and I know a few who are -- but that is really their problem.
*They* are the ones who want things both ways at the same time:  *you*
pay for my phone call, and *you* don't have any right to know what you
are paying for, because I am a prima-donna about such things. Har har har!
Then start dialing my seven digit number and paying for it yourself, bozo.
Either that, or handle those calls similar to 'blocked number blocking'
with an intercept saying 'the 800 number you have dialed requires your
phone number. Since you wish to not give it, please hang up and dial the
regular number, paying for the call yourself.'    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Robinson)
Date: 17 Jan 95 09:50:48 -0500
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers from Overseas
Reply-To: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring MD USA


Mr Robert Hall <[e-mail]> writes:

> What about calls from the U.S. to other countries' toll-free
> numbers? Since Hong Kong is a small country and local calls are
> free, the use of 800 numbers here has been pretty much limited to
> accessing a particular foreign carrier's "home direct" service.
> For example, from within Hong Kong, I dial 800-1111 to get the AT&T
> "bong" to place calls charged to my AT&T card.  If someone
> Stateside dials 011-852-800-1111 do they loop back to AT&T's "bong?"

They're smarter than that.  I called it from Montgomery County, in
Maryland and got a recording saying my International Call could not be
dialed, probably the same as if you, in Hong Kong, tried to dial
1-703-950-1022, the access number for MCI here in the Washington, DC
area.


Fidonet:  Paul Robinson 1:109/417
Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (K. M. Peterson)
Subject: Re: SNA Over Token Ring
Date: 17 Jan 1995 15:48:18 GMT
Organization: KMPeterson/Boston


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

> Timothy S. Chaffee <[e-mail]>, writes:

>> I am looking into moving our print traffic from a SDLC/SNA
>> connection to run over our Token Ring network. Can this be done? Any
>> pointers in the right direction would be greatly appreciated!

> There is a company -- the name escapes me -- selling a product called
> the "Hydra" which connnects in place of a terminal controller, and
> allows RS232 connections to look like 3270 terminals, allowing a
> person on a PC or a modem to call into an SNA terminal network as if
> their terminal WAS a 3270 terminal. If they can do this, they probably
> have something that will do what you want.

Yes, but no.

Token Ring runs SNA natively.  If you're running in an IBM host
environment (mainframe), it's just some configuration and hardware
changes.  If you're running TCP/IP on that Token-Ring, you have the
changes above and a change of protocol.

Remember the idea of a protocol stack: which layer is giving you a
problem, the physical media or the higher layers?  If you use SNA for
printing, then you have an LU type that needs to be converted to
LPR/LPD in the worst case... which is not a pretty picture.  If it's
only a physical layer change (running over the Ring v. SDLC), it's
simple.


K. M. Peterson    eMail: [e-mail]     WWW:
http://www.tiac.net/users/peterson/home.html
Phone: [phone] voice   [phone] fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Harri Kinnunen)
Subject: Re: GSM SIM Implementation
Date: 17 Jan 95 14:35:29 GMT
Organization: Helsinki School of Economics


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John
Leske) writes:

> It is a Smartcard (ISO-7816). That is, a single chip micro with its
> own ROM, RAM and non-volatial storage. The specific implementation for
> GSM is defined in the GSM specs. There are multiple manufacturers of
> this card. The specific characterisitics vary from manufacturer to
> manufacturer. I believe some companies are looking at up to 16k or
> 32kbit on the chip. The GSM-related data lies in a sub-directory on
> the chip.

Most of the hand-held GSM phones use a "punched-out" section of the
Smartcard, being about 1cmx2cm in size. The punch-out dimensions are
also standard, but I don't know if they are included in ISO-7816.


Harri

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Burch)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Organization: Motorola, Inc.
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 21:47:07 GMT


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

> Recently I saw someone who appeared to be trying to steal a car, so,
> being a good citizen, I ducked around the corner out of sight and
> dialed 911 on my handheld cellular phone. Though I was standing on a
> street three blocks from San Francisco City Hall, I was connected to
> the California Highway Patrol. I waited several minutes for an operator
> to come on the line, and finally gave up.

> Good thing no one's life or safety was in danger.

This bad result is because you did the wrong thing!  How many time do
people have to be told to dial the cellular operator, and say;

"Operator, this is an emergency, please connect me with the <location>
police department emergency line."

This takes a few seconds longer, but reaching help was the job here, not
airtime minimization.


Ben Burch     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Seymour Dupa)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Date: 17 Jan 1995 10:14:47 -0500
Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc.


Gerald Serviss ([e-mail]) wrote:

> The use of the strongest signal is no guarantee of routing the call
> correctly, especially if you are in a building.

As I understand it, the cell site receiving the strongest signal locks
on to it, but all of the surrounding cell sites still receive the
signal, althought at a lower level.

If this is correct, could some sort of 'triangulation' be done to
narrow down the phones' location?  I know true triangulation requires
directional antennas to determine from what direction the signal is
comming, but in this context, couldn't the signal strenghts received
by the surrounding sites be used somehow to narrow down the location?

For example, if the signal received by three cell sites was almost equal,
wouldn't the phones' location be at the center of the area between the
sites?

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

From: [e-mail]@actrix.gen.nz (Jonathan Mosen)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Actrix Networks -- NZ Internet Service Providers.
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 01:24:01 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Robert Lindh) wrote:

> Luxemburg    Telekom
> Norway       Tele-Mobil
>              Netcom
> Portugal     TMN

New Zealand also has a GSM network, run by Bell South.


Jonathan Mosen,   Manager Government Relations,
Royal New Zealand Foundation for the Blind,
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Re: ISDN BRI Lines
Date: 17 Jan 1995 06:25:58 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


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

> GTE South has offered ISDN service here in Lexington, KY for the last
> two years.  However, when I enquire about a BRI line, they tell me I
> must PREDETERMINE what I want to do with the two B-channels.  For
> example, B1 will always be used for voice calls, and B2 will always be
> used for switched 56 data.  I don't consider this true ISDN.  Has
> anyone else run across anything like this?

This is quite standard ... in fact there are many additional questions you'll
need to answer before you get your line (terminal type and switch settings to
name a few).

For more info, read the ISDN FAQ which can be found on comp.dcom.isdn


Ed Goldgehn                         E-Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr. Vice President                  Voice:   [phone]
Open Communication Networks, Inc.   Fax:     [phone]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #37
*****************************

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa05751;
          17 Jan 95 22:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09675; Tue, 17 Jan 95 17:57:04 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09668; Tue, 17 Jan 95 17:57:02 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 17:57:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #38

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 17:57:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 38

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert) (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Tor-Einar Jarnbjo)
    Re: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die! (Raymond Mereniuk)
    Re: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die! (Jim Cebula)
    Call Waiting and Comm Software (Mansoor Chishtie)
    Call Waiting and Caller-ID Question (Repeat) (Keith Knipschild)
    Re: Bellcore Standards Question (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: B8ZS, AMI, Bipolar Line Coding? ([e-mail])
    Re: Where is PicturePhone II Now? ([e-mail])
    Re: ATT Entering Rochester Market (Steve Samler)
    Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs? (John Nagle)
    Re: Some Questions About the LDDS Calling Card (Rob Boudrie)
    Re: "High-end" Phone Products (Paul Crick)
    Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California (Eric Paulak)
    Re: SNA Over Token Ring (James Dollar)
    Re: Urgent Help Needed With European Phone Systems (Christian Weisgerber)
    Re: Urgent Help Needed With European Phone Systems (Harri Kinnunen)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Judith Oppenheimer)
Subject: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert)
Date: 17 Jan 1995 13:32:56 -0500
Organization: Interactive CallBrand(TM)


Negotiations are under way for a new International Freephone Service
which would compromise the value and integrity of existing 800 numbers
for U.S. 800 customers.

There is a User Statement which was presented in Geneva in November
'94 that calls for grandfathering of existing 800 assignments.  This
position protects and promotes the interests of all U.S. businesses
utilizing 800 service for brand reinforcement, direct marketing,
customer service, etc.

This user position fully supports the U.S. position as developed in
January, '93, and was signed by the Ad Hoc Telecommunications Users
Committee, Aeronautical Radio, Inc., American Airlines, American
Express Company, Continental Airlines, Electronic Data Systems Corp.,
Ford Motor Company, International Communications Association, Norwest
Technical Services, Inc., USAir, and Versus Strategy Group, Inc.

However, due to the immense revenues awaiting their clearance into
international freephone service ($1.10 per minute), the U.S. carriers
are not supporting the U.S. position. (No disrespect to European
participants of this newsgroup.)  They are siding with the European
position that calls for starting with a "clean slate" because they can
then enter this market more quickly.

The European position imposes a lottery where there is more than one
applicant for a specific international freephone number.  You can
imagine the land rush this will create among European carriers and
their customers, especially for valuable numbers such as 800 THE CARD,
800 HOLIDAY, and 800 FLOWERS, or Home Shopping Club's well-ensconced
800 284-3200.

This per the final report from a source who has been present at the
meetings:

"U.S .Carriers appear to be rushing for approval of a service that is
unsatisfactory. Although the proposed service is unfair to the U.S.
Customer as it is currently written, it appears that if the service
can be approved before there is wide spread customer awareness of the
situation, the carriers can "blame" the Europeans for not supporting a
compromise that would protect users."

Some of you may already be aware of this, but having just found out
about it, I'm bringing it to the attention of everyone I know who is a
major 800 subscriber.


J. Oppenheimer, [e-mail]    Interactive CallBrand(TM)

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

From: [e-mail] (Tor-Einar Jarnbjo)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas
Date: 17 Jan 1995 17:38:31 GMT
Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany


Mr Robert Hall ([e-mail]) wrote:

> So, I wonder if the assumption that it's up to my local IDD provider
> to just turn on access to U.S. toll-free numbers is, in fact correct,
> or whether the U.S. 800 service provider has a say in the deal as
> well.  Are there all of the usual tariff negotiations between the
> carriers?

I have tried sometimes to call US 800-numbers from Norway, and either
they are completed or I get a message telling "Your call cannot be
completed as dialed. Please check the numbers and try again, or call
your local operator for assistance". When you try to call 800-numbers
from Germany you get a German message telling, that the area-code you
have dialed does not exist. Dialing Norwegian toll-free numbers from
Germany does not work (exept for the tip-phone of the Norwegian
Customs) because the phone-system in Norway have recently been
changed, so when I call 00 47 80 0x xx xx (which is a toll-free
number) the Norwegian exchange believes of some reason that I have
dialed the Norwegian number (080) 00x xx, and since the (080)
area-code earlier was for cellulars, it just tells me that the number
have been changed, and to call a local operator for the new one.


Tor-Einar Jarnbjo

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 15:38:10 -0800
From: Raymond Mereniuk <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die!


> ..land in Francois Lake - near Burns Lake in Northern BC
> .."Gee, what about ISDN"

Canada has 26 - 27 million people living mainly within 200 miles of
the 49th latitude.  I live in the Lower Mainland area (Vancouver),
within 30 miles of the 49th latitude, which has a population of
approximately two million and within this area ISDN is very difficult
to obtain.  ISDN is available only out of selected COs and even if you
have a local loop out of one of these COs you will find ISDN very
difficult to obtain.  Switched 56 (Northern Telecom Datapath) should
be available out of most Lower Mainland COs providing your local loop
is less than 4.5 kilometers.  Burns Lake is at least 360 miles north
of Vancouver; considering the strengths and weaknesses of BC Tel you
may be lucky to have access to any sort of functioning land line.

The telcos in Canada are still regulated monopolies and BC Tel is
definitely not one of the best managed of the Canadian telcos.  Some
third-world countries have better infrastructure than BC Tel and it is
difficult to have employee relations that can be any worse than BC
Tel's.  The union problem is so bad at BC Tel that all sales people
and some management people are unionized, the good union brothers
can't have too many scabs near them.  Dealing with BC Tel is very
difficult, BC Tel may offer certain services but they don't keep your
BC Tel rep informed and finding someone who is in the know is almost
impossible. I worked for a company which sold data comm equipment and
it was not uncommon to send a service tech out to do an install who
then spent a day or more trying to convince BC Tel that their lines
had a problem or two.  Now you want `IS..D..what'.

I heard a rumor a few years ago which indicated BC Tel's main source
of CO switches was Chile, as the Chilian telco upgraded their switches
BC Tel took all their old switches through a deal with BC Tel's parent
GTE.  In an attempt to satisfy demand for digital and enhanced analog
services they have installed at least one Northern Telecom DMS 100
switch in all exchanges within the Lower Mainland area; not all have
the software to offer ISDN.  If you do not live within a major
population centre, Lower Mainland, Victoria, Kelowna, or Kamloops you
are right of luck if you require anything more than POTS.

The Telco in Saskatchewan has announced universal Internet access as
part of their normal offering.  BC Tel responded with a statement,
something like since the Lower Mainland area has the highest density
of Internet access providers in Canada there is no requirement for BC
Tel to provide universal Internet access anywhere in BC.  I believe BC
Systems Corp., a BC government Crown corporation, is attempting to
become the main source of Internet access in BC, but possibly primarily
on a wholesale basis and maybe only to government facilities.

The best solution may be for you and your neighbors to contact the
local MLA (member of the legislative assembly - BC gov't) and have him
help you make your voice heard.  Unfortunately, due to Canadian
politics, if your MLA is part of the oppostion you are really out of
luck.  Maybe you could try the CRTC, the same people who attempted to
institute a $6 per month (over three years) increase in basic
telephone rates which the telcos did not even request.  Welcome to
Canada, the country where the government taxes you but never listens
to you.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They probably learned how to govern by
following the example seen to their south in the USA. Down here we get
taxed a-plenty also and no one wants to listen to anything you have to
say ... nothing.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Cebula)
Subject: Re: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die!
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 01:45:27 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon Computer Club


In Article <[e-mail]> TELECOM Digest Editor noted in
response to John Leong <[e-mail]>:

> maintain the subscribers who have it. I don't think telcos in the USA
> can take on new party line customers either; they just have to sit and
> wait patiently to get rid of the ones they have had all along.    PAT]

I'm certainly not sure about the regulations regarding new party
lines, but Bell Atlantic (Greater Pittsburgh area) still states "A
two-party line is available for $xxxx" in the front section of the
phone book where they list the rates for the different residential
service plans.


Jim

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

From: [e-mail] (Mansoor Chishtie)
Subject: Call Waiting and Comm Software
Organization: Texas Instruments, Houston
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 21:14:19 GMT


I am wondering why I have to disable my call waiting feature before I
can run my PC comm software. I know that there are some comm packages
available such as PC Anywhere that automatically detects call waiting
beeps and warns you that a call is coming in. You can do a quick save
and software will connect you to the incoming voice call. It probably
disconnects itself from the remote modem (loss of carrier) and reestab-
lishes the connection after the voice call is over.

I think that it is possible due to the fact that modems on both sides
are running the same software. Hence they can communicate with each
other and hang-up safely without any loss of data. But I'm not sure
how they detect call-waiting beeps from real data and during brief
moments when exchange switches from data to warning beeps, how do they
manage to recover.

Any thoughts from telecom experts welcome. I'm interested in learning
how to do that as well as any comm software that successfully does
that. If possible, please email any responses directly to me. I can
post a summary here if others are interested.


Regards,


Mansoor A. Chishtie

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: America's Suggestion Box - BBS [phone]
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 18:46:37
Subject: Call Waiting and Caller-ID Question (Repeat)


I posted a message last week concering CALL-WAITING's CALLER ID, But
got no responces ... so here I go again:

I just my the lastest copy of the "HELLO DIRECT" Catalog and on page 24
they adverise a Northern Telecom phone model# " PowerTouch 225 "

The ad states :   CALLER ID, CALL WAITING MODULE
       Comming in mid-1995, You'll see who's
       on a CALL WAITING call, without inter-
       rupting the call you're already on ...

I never heard of any telcos offering this. The only way to achive this
was by having an ISDN line.

Also, they mention "ADSI" ????

The ad states: Looking ahead to the future
Comming in late-1995, is ADSI
It will help you do your banking,
pay bills, and such - by phone...


If anyone has info please POST or E-Mail me ...


Thanks,

Keith   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: We briefly discussed Caller-ID on Call
Waiting here about a month ago or so. Maybe someone will point you to
that message for starters.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Bellcore Standards Question
Date: 17 Jan 1995 04:25:57 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Craig
Harris) writes:

> I am looking for any Bellcore specification on an idle T-1 channel.
> That is, if the channel is idle, would the T1 equipment send 01111111
> or 10000000?

The "classic" spec is PUB 43801. Equivalent information, however, is
contained in many other documents.

For PCM voice, idle channels are required to be encoded with a near
zero level which may not necessarily be a continuous code. Digital
generation of a zero level, however, result in all zero PCM level
which can be transmitted as all ones. There are actually two zero
level code words in PCM which are sometimes called positive and
negative zero. Some equipment will alternate positive and negative
zeros for a zero level. Accordingly the MSB may alternate between zero
and one.

The LSB will contain signalling every 6th frame. The state of the
signalling bits will depend on the particular channel units (or
equivalent) involved.  Unequipped channels MUST transmit a 1 in the A
bit position. This normally corresponds to a OFF-HOOK state for most
channel units.

The general rule is that a receiver should interpret X111111X as an
idle or zero level code.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve)
Subject: Re: B8ZS, AMI, Bipolar Line Coding?
Date: 17 Jan 1995 11:55:29 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


AMI (Alternate Mark Inversion) is a linecode that has a one's density
requirement so as to prevent the repeaters from freaking out.

B8ZS (Binary Eight Zero Substitution) is a linecode that substitutes a
special string when eight zeroes in a row are presented.  This method
was developed so as to eliminate the one's density requirement thus
allowing various "clear channel" applications to flourish (64k,
crypto, video, ...)

When you order a T1 from telco you specify the linecode flavor and set
your CSU/DSU accordingly.


Take it easy,

Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve)
Subject: Re: Where is PicturePhone II Now?
Date: 17 Jan 1995 11:57:41 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


My RBOC has a few floating around as conversation desk ornanments.


Take it easy,

Steve


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder whatever happened to the various
private vendors of 'picturephone' like instruments a few years ago?  One
company was offering a slow-scan version in sets of two. Presumably you
had one and members of your family elsewhere had the other one. Then too,
in a unique approach to the adult sexphone market, about three years ago
an Information Provider made an unusual offer: He had this bunch of nice
ladies working for him, and not only did they want to talk to you about
whatever, they wanted to *show* you what they were doing! His solution to
that was to offer slow-scan video/picturephone devices to his customers.
You could purchase one outright and get some period of time free on his
network to chat and view the folks of your choice, or you could lease the
device from him, having made some sort of security deposit with your credit
card. After a certain number of months on the lease, you bought it for a
dollar more if desired. His ad ran in a few adult magazines for several
months, then I did not see it any longer. He was based out of Florida
somewhere; Pensacola comes to mind. Anyone know who I mean?   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 10:14:24 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: ATT Entering Rochester Market


MFS Intelenet is planning to offer service by March 31.  Time Warner
has plans for mid year.

Both will be using their own switch MFS (AXE 10) TW 5ESS.  For more
info see page 6 of last week's {Telephony}.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 17:48:47 GMT


Linc Madison ([e-mail]) wrote:

> In some of the recent discussions of the swarm of new area codes
> coming this year, I've seen notations that the wireless companies are
> challenging plans to move wireless services (cellular, beepers, etc.)
> into an overlay area code.  The challenges are being made to the state
> regulators and/or to the FCC.

> My question is, on what grounds are they challenging the overlays?  It
> seems to me that the tariffs have always been pretty clear that the
> telco does not in any way guarantee that you will be able to keep a
> given number or area code.

     It's a monopoly competition issue.  The RBOCs shouldn't be allowed to
keep the "good" numbers while insisting that competitors use the new "bad"
numbers.  See the article in the 13 Jan 95 {Wall Street Journal}.


John Nagle

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie)
Subject: Re: Some Questions About the LDDS Calling Card
Date: 17 Jan 1995 13:30:25 -0500
Organization: Center for High Performance Computing of WPI


> b) My card has the logo of "American Travel Network" on the
> upper-right-hand side.  I also hear "Metromedia" associated with the
> LDDS name, but it doesn't appear on the card.  Who's ATN, are there

ATN = American Travel Network.  Some sort of reseller/marketer of
LDDS.  LDDS is sold through other hcannels at apparantly higher rates.

> different versions of the card, and if so are there different rates?

I think the ATN card is 17.5 (at leat that's what mine is, and it's
mode of delivery and card description matches mine).

The only "catch" is that they apear to round the calls individually,
then add.  (i.e., 10 one minute calls at $.175 round to $.18 each and
add to $1.80, not $1.75).

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Crick)
Subject: Re: "High-End" Phone Products
Organization: L C Bickler & Co
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 13:37:46 GMT


> I'm 99.9995832% sure there are no three-line cordlesses, other than
> those dedicated to work with specific multi-line phone systems.

99.9995832? Obviously using a Pentium :-)

Sorry - I couldn't resist!


Paul Crick: [e-mail]  --  [phone] (24 hours)
            [e-mail]  --  PO Box 783, Jersey JE4 0SH, UK

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 11:36:51 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Eric Paulak)
Subject: Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California


Linc Madison asked:

> Have the IXC's reduced their rates on calls between LATAs in
> California to be more in line with both the new intra-LATA and
> interstate rates?

The answers a resounding "yes." In fact, AT&T, MCI and Sprint have all
undercut Pac Bell's rates. For example:

For a 45-mile call from L.A. to Anaheim using basic 1+ business service,

        Pac Bell charges $.136 for the first minute and $.114/minute
thereafter.
        AT&T charges $.11 for all mintues

With its Preferred service, MCI charges $.04075 for the first 30-seconds
and $.00815 for every six-second increment thereafter.

There are currently 98 long distance carriers who have signed up to
offer service in California's intraLATA market. Call the Consumer
Affairs Branch of the Public Utility Commission to get a complete
list, to inclue the 10-XXX codes. They can be reached in-state at
[phone].


Eric Paulak
The Center for Communications Management Information
[phone], ext. 327
11300 Rockville Pike, Suite 1100, Rockville, MD 20852

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

From: James Dollar <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: SNA Over Token Ring
Date: 17 Jan 1995 07:09:24 GMT
Organization: InfiNet


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Timothy S. Chaffee <[e-mail]>, writes:

>> I am looking into moving our print traffic from a SDLC/SNA
>> connection to run over our Token Ring network. Can this be done? Any
>> pointers in the right direction would be greatly appreciated!

What my company moved to was using Novell's SAA gateway with HostPrint
software; allowing sdlc or sna attachment on one side and both
ethernet and token ring connections out the other. Novell captures the
print job and spools it to Novell's print queues using JetDirect
cards, old pc's, Intel Netports, and we even print to printers on
tcp/ip terminal servers via Novell's Flex/IP product.

Not a CNE; just solved a problem with their software.


j$

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 21:03 MET
From: [e-mail] (Christian Weisgerber)
Subject: Re: Urgent Help Needed With European Phone Systems


In comp.dcom.telecom you write:

> What should I do to make a cordless phone work in Europe?

DO NOT ATTEMPT TO DO THIS.

> I bought it in Canada.

North American cordless phones operate in frequency ranges reserved
for entirely different services in Europe. Using such a phone will
interfere with those services.  E.g. Berlin airport was not happy to
find people's chatter from foreign cordless phone in their tower/aircraft
communications.

This is *not* like connecting an unapproved modem/telephone set/
answering machine/etc to the phone network. Using a North American
cordless phone will be operation of an illegal radio transmitter, i.e.
constitute a felony.

AFAIK, in Germany the usual sentence for *possession* of such illegal
transmitters is one year on probation. (Licensed amateur radio operators
are allowed possession.)  Laws in other European countries are likely
to be very severe about this, too.


Christian 'naddy' Weisgerber, Germany                [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Harri Kinnunen)
Subject: Re: Urgent Help Needed With European Phone Systems
Date: 17 Jan 95 14:29:13 GMT
Organization: Helsinki School of Economics


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Petar Nikic) writes:

> What should I do to make a cordless phone work in Europe? I bought it
> in Canada. There are two problems with the plugs: the phone plug and
> the plug for the recharger. Both of them are different than those
> which Europeans use.

This is not authorative answer, but: If your phone has RJ-plug (the
small (1x1x1cm) kind), local phone companies carry adapters for those.
I'm not sure about the wiring scheme, but give it a try.

> I am sure that somebody else has been faced with these problems. So, I
> would appreciate any help.


Harri


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But, as our earlier correspondent notes,
this fellow's problems go a lot further than just swapping around a
few plugs to get it hooked into the phone system. Apparently the entire
frequency range is off-limits for this use. I am sorry all this information
did not get back to him before he left on his trip. Oh well, maybe they
will be lenient on him and simply settle for confiscating the phone.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #38
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa06416;
          17 Jan 95 23:44 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA12057; Tue, 17 Jan 95 19:26:17 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA12050; Tue, 17 Jan 95 19:26:13 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 19:26:13 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #39

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 19:26:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 39

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Call For Papers: JMLICS (Mehmet Orgun)
    Re: How to Keep Track of Calls on Busy (Caller ID on Busy)? (Seymour Dupa)
    Re: Prepaid Telephone Debit Cards (P1854)
    Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way? (Ted Hadley)
    Re: 10-XXX Codes (Lizanne Hurst)
    Re: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names (Tony Waddell)
    Re: Cellular Phone Pricing Question (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia? (Paul Beker)
    Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia? (Dave Rand)
    Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1? (Barton F. Bruce)
    Re: Bellcore Standards Question (Bill Mayhew)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (John Rice)
    Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly (B Thompson)
    Where Can I Buy Telephones ([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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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, 18 Jan 95 10:41:38 +1100
From: [e-mail] (Mehmet Orgun)
Subject: Call For Papers: JMLICS


                              Call for Papers

          The Journal of Methods of Logic in Computer Science
    Special Issue:  Formal Methods in Logic for Responsive Systems

A responsive computing system is one which responds to internal
programs or external inputs in a timely, dependable and predictable
manner.  These systems are a hybrid of real-time, distributed, secure,
safety-critical, and fault-tolerant systems.  In such a system, any
failure can cause catastrophes ranging from financial loss and loss of
privacy to physical damage and loss of life.  Thus, it is important to
ensure that the system is not only correct, but remains correct at run
time, under abnormal circumstances.

The major difficulty facing designers is the complexity inherent in
responsive computing systems.  In practice, informal approaches are
often used which can result in latent failures, under-specified
systems, or inconsistencies.  One way to counteract these problems is
to bring the idea of rigor and formalism from traditional systems
engineering fields into the development of software through the use of
formal methods.  Formal methods of logic, in particular, can be used
to rigorously synthesize, specify, verify, debug, and model responsive
computing systems.  However, formal methods of logic are usually
dismissed as the domain of academicians and viewed as irrelevant or
not applicable to the design and implementation of large-scale
software projects due to their mathematical complexity.

To bring these two opposing camps together, work that emphasizes and
reinforces the point that formal methods can, and should, be used in
the practical construction of high quality, reliable distributed
software is of interest.  This special issue will bring together
papers in the following areas that support the use of formal methods
of logic in the construction of responsive computing systems:

o Formal Specification/Verification/Refinement Techniques
o Requirements Specification
o Assertional Reasoning and Executable Assertions
o Model Checking
o Testing and Debugging (Predicate Detection)
o Tool Support
o Formal Semantics of Concurrency/Recovery
o Compositional Proof Systems
o Distributed Systems Security
o Experience Reports

Papers should, ideally, emphasize results that can be applied to the
construction of actual responsive computing systems (although, work is
in no way solely limited to experience reports).  Please submit six
copies of your manuscript to the guest editor by June 1, 1995:


Bruce McMillin
Computer Science Department                   (516)-632-8334 (FAX)
State University of New York at Stony Brook   (516)-632-8218 (Office)
Room 1420 Computer Science Building           (516)-632-8471 (Secretary)
Stony Brook, NY 11794-4400 USA                e-mail([e-mail])

Instructions for submitting papers: Papers should not exceed 30 double
spaced pages.  Papers should not have been previously published, nor
currently submitted elsewhere for publication.  Papers should include
a title page containing title, authors' names and affiliations, postal
and e-mail addresses, telephone numbers and Fax numbers.  Papers
should include a 300 word abstract and 5-10 keywords and be written in
the IEEE Transactions style.  Each paper will be peer-reviewed by at
least three referees.  [Note: If you are willing to referee papers for
this special issue, please send a note with your research interest to
the guest editor.]

Notification of acceptance will be sent by September 1, 1995; final
versions will be due by October 15, 1995.  The special issue will be
published in the 2nd Quarter 1996.

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

From: [e-mail] (Seymour Dupa)
Subject: Re: How to Keep Track of Calls on Busy (Caller ID on Busy)?
Date: 17 Jan 1995 12:16:57 -0500
Organization: Exchange Network Services, Inc.


Steve Cogorno ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Ask your phone company for an analysis.  They will do it, but maybe
> not for for a residential customer, and it may not be free.

  I would think the phone company would be *happy* to do that report
for you.  This is the way the phone company can show their multi-line
customers how many calls they are missing and take their order for more
lines.

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

From: [e-mail] (P1854)
Subject: Re: Prepaid Telephone Debit Cards
Date: 17 Jan 1995 13:20:36 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (P1854)


Peter Pappas in Tampa 813-288-3253 is looking for prepaid cards for
friend in Mass who wants to use for school financing. Any leads would
be appreciated.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 10:35:31 PST
From: [e-mail] (Ted Hadley)
Subject: Re: Would You Believe More Rain on the Way?


Pat,

> Well, good luck and my best regards, folks. It seems like the people
> in California spend all summer burning the place down, then spend
> all winter enduring mud slides and flooding.

Thanks, but you forgot the earthquakes! :)

I live near San Jose, and yes, we have had lots of rain. But there
have been no real problems in the majority of the areas. Mudslides in
the mountain passes and flooding where the cities left flood control
work unfinished in the last few years and highway flooding where the
routine maintenance wasn't. The only real problems were in Marin
County along the Russian River and in Sacramento.


Ted Hadley    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lizanne Hurst)
Subject: Re: 10-XXX Codes
Date: 17 Jan 1995 15:20:24 -0500
Organization: Lehigh University


Thanks for posting this information.  However, I think one key point
requires clarification.

> According to a law that was passed in 1990, all aggregators must
> unblock their switches so that a caller can reach their long distance
> carrier of choice. What this required so that you wouldn't get stuck
> paying for the cost of the calls was that your switch had to pass
> through and differentiate calls that started with either 10-XXX-1 or
> calls that started with 10-XXX-0.

If you're referring to the Telephone Operator Consumer Services
Improvement Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-435), aggregators (hospitals,
hotels, universities) are required to unblock only 10-XXX-0 calls,
*not* 10-XXX-1 calls.

All the rest of your remarks are pretty much in line with the Act as I
remember it.  Additional information is available in the FCC's Report
and Order, FCC 91-214.

As a side note, ACUTA (the Association of College and University
Telecommunications Administrators) lobbied unsuccessfully to overturn
universities' classification as aggregators.  An aggregator, as
defined in this case, is an entity which provides service for the
public and/or transient users; ACUTA challenged the assumption that
student users are "transient."


Lizanne Hurst        Office of Telecommunications
Lehigh University    [phone]

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

From: Tony Waddell <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names
Date: 17 Jan 1995 16:47:11 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know how many you think is a
> 'bunch', but unless it is really a lot, and you plan to do this on
> a frequent basis, why don't you ask the telco serving the local calling
> area for a copy of their directory.  Most telcos will send it free of
> charge, or they may get some small handling/postage fee. Then you would
> sit there and look them up. After you have found all you can, then call
> AC-555-1212 for the (hopefully) few remaining names.    PAT]

I'm not sure if this is PACBELL policy only, or whether it's fairly
consistent across the country, but I wanted a phone book from my home
town, Davenport, Iowa. I was quoted a charge in excess of $50!  And
its not even a very thick book. Naturally, I declined.

Another alternative might be available. Don't most telcos offer a listing
service? I seem to recall that you can mail a list of names to the
business office and they will attempt to provide a phone number for
each name providing the number is published (I don't know if they'll
provide addresses), There was a charged for this, but I don't remember
it as being excessive.

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Pricing Question
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 21:40:58 GMT


[e-mail] (Ken Weaverling) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, John McGing <jmcging@access.
> digex.net> wrote:

>> Anyway, I have a couple of questions: Even including the $25.00 year
>> to the employee association, the monthly base cost is $11.03 month vs
>> $24.95.  Over three years that's $167.00 x3 or over $500.00 in
>> savings.  Is this deal too good to be true?  The three year thing
>> doesn't worry me (we're NOT moving <g> and the car phone we have is a
>> real top drawer Motorola we can switch to a new car.).  Should it?

> One of the reasons for a three year contract may be due to the cell
> company planning on, or expecting, cell prices to drop in that period.
> If they do, and you are locked in for three years, they get to keep
> charging you under the older higher terms. For example, in some parts
> of the country, under certain plans, weekend local air time rates are
> FREE.

I have GTE Mobilnet, and when they lowered the rates on my plan by
$3.00 per month and allowed users to choose a peak/off-peak rate or
stick with the flat rate at their option, I received the discount and
was able to switch to peak/off-peak without extending my one-year
contract (which had about eight months to run at the time).

I DO have unlimited weekend calling, but I pay $15.00 per month for
the privilege.


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] (Paul Beker)
Subject: Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 23:16:39 GMT


[e-mail] (chuck lukaszewski) writes:

> I received some information from LDDS/Metromedia yesterday about their
> long distance service. The rates seem entirely too good to be true,
> and I'm wondering if anyone here has experience (good or bad) that
> they would share.

I've been using LDDS/Metromedia quite a bit in the past few months, and am
generally pleased with them.  The rates I have are actually through American
Travel Network (a LDDS/Metromedia reseller). (800-477-9692)

o ATN/LDDS/Metromedia Calling Card:
    - 17.5c/minute anywhere in the USA, anytime.
    - No per-call surcharges, no minimum.

The quality of the connections on these calls occassionally seems
marginal, by 1990s standards, but in my opinion, well worth saving
upwards of a dollar per call.  Most of my calls are to check voice
mail, so ...

o ATN/LDDS/Metromedia "Dial 1" residential (?) LD service:
    The rate schedule is split, with the five area codes with most usage
    being on one schedule, and other calls on the other schedule:

                Five NPAs     Other NPAs
Day (8am-5pm)     17.5c          22.5c
Night (5pm-8am)   10.0c          12.5c

There is a minimum monthly usage of one hour.  The quality of the
calls seems, again, slightly below 'big three' standards, but
definitely acceptable.  Call setup time is slower (2-4 sec., I would
guess), and the actual ringing / busy tones sound horrible (! - dunno
why).  But once the connection is made, the calls sound fine.

One more thing to note: You are billed separately from your local
telco's bill.  In other words, I receive a bill each month that
contains only my calling card calls and my dial 1+ calls from home,
directly from LDDS/Metromedia.

My opinions only -- although this does look a lot like an ad for ATN,
it isn't ... I have no connection with them or LDDS/Metromedia
whatsoever.  (I only wish I had thought of the no-fee calling card
years ago.)


Paul Beker - Atlanta, GA   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Rand)
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 10:05:00 PST
Subject: Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia?


> I received some information from LDDS/Metromedia yesterday about their
> long distance service. The rates seem entirely too good to be true,
> and I'm wondering if anyone here has experience (good or bad) that
> they would share.

Their rates are very good.  *HOWEVER*

Be warned.  They quoted rates of 0.27/min inbound 800, 0.25/min
outbound switched to Canada for me.  As most of my call volume on 800
comes from Canada, this is a significant decrease from the normal
rates of 0.60-0.30.

Having read the fine print on the contract -- it claims that the
contract term is for service only, and does not guarantee rates -- I
added a notation on my contract that the Canada rates were to be as
quoted.  This was a *very* good idea.

First, LDDS slammed all nine of my telephone lines.  I switched them
back.  They slammed them again.  I switched them back.  They slammed
all but my primary outbound line, and I didn't notice for a month!
Around $250 or so in PIC charges, that month.  Moral -- make sure that
you have *all* your lines protected, as they *will* find out all your
phone numbers, even if you don't give them out.

Then the bill came. The calls are rated at 0.37/minute.  Customer
service says "too bad".  My salesman says "oops -- the rates went up
*the day after* we signed up, too bad.".  I said, "PUC, fraud,
bait-and-switch, contracted amount!"  Long discussions followed.  The
salesman wasn't allowed to change the contract, according to LDDS --
their problem, not mine, I pointed out to them.  As of now, we are
still fighting over credits, but they have agreed to give me the
contracted rate, for the contracted period (one year).

The dust has not settled.  Be careful out there in telecom-land!


Dave Rand    Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1?
Date: 15 Jan 95 22:54:43 -0500
Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Ted Hadley)
writes:

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

>> There is a company in California called Cylink.  They make several
>> different kinds of crypto gear for communications.  I'm unable to come
>> up with a telephone number for them at the moment.

> Telephone number is 408-735-5800.

Try 800 info for their 800 number.

The cylink guy posting should have at least tooted his horn about
their *EXCELENT* and *EXTENSIVE* collection of FAX-BACKable material
you can just get yourself -- no salesfolk needed.

They also make spread spectrum no-license needed radio links.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Mayhew)
Subject: Re: Bellcore Standards Question
Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 19:50:36 GMT


I have some doucmentation from Wescom, who makes a lot of T1 eqipment
for telco applications.

There are two codes for zero.  The coding of the signal is mu-law 255.
There are 16 chords in the same with linear values in each chord.  The
coding is two's-complement.

As it is set up, the MSB is the sign.  That yields -0 and +0 as
equally valid codes of 01111111 and 11111111 respectively.  The code
codes are fed out of the bank as a PCM NRZ data stream.  A zero bit is
coded as no voltage shift in a bit time cell.  A one bit is coded as a
voltage level transition in either direction.

No more than seven zeros in a row are permitted, or an automatic on
insertion occurs to prevent the demodulator from losing lock on the
incoming bit stream.  This can result of one LSB resoultion on a
maximal signal.  Since low levels contain a lot of ones, there is no
loss of resolution on small signals due to forced ones.

Also, if you are using older D4 non ESF (extended superframe) equipment.
A bit will be robbed every 6th frame for signalling.  The robbed bits
alternate between the A bit and B bit.

                    FX Station                    FX Office
cirucit           xmt      rcv      dir         xmt       rcv
                  A  B     A  B                 A  B      A  B
busy/tip grd               0         <-         0
idle/tip open              1         <-         1
busy/ring                      0     <-            0
idle/no ring                   1     <-            1

idle/loop open    0                  ->                   0
busy/loop closed  1                  ->                   1
busy/ring rnd         0              ->                       0
idle/ring open        1              ->                       1

                  0   1    1   1  g strt idle   1  1      0   1
                  1   1    0   1  g strt busy   0  1      1   1

ESF cahnnel banks code the PCM the same way, but use a technique called
forced bipolar violation to code the signalling and other control bits
in the data stream and also remove the restriction of no more than
seven consecutive zeros.  The ESF signal is almost NRZ, but differentiates
by coding two ones in a row of the *same* polarity when the offending 00
code would have occured.  The dobule ones alternate so that the DC
offset is still held to approximately zero (exclusive of any "sealing
current" that the trnasmission eqipment injects on the circuit).

You should se a lot of ones on an idle circuit.  The most significant
bit could be either zero or one.  I don't know if Belcore has a spec
on what should be done; my docs aren't that specific.  The LSB is
going to vary if you are on a D4 channel bank depending on the A and B
bits.  See the table above.


Bill Mayhew        NEOUCOM Computer Services Department
Rootstown, OH  44272-0095  USA      phone: [phone]
[e-mail]       amateur radio 146.58: N8WED

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

From: [e-mail] (John Rice)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly
Date: 17 Jan 95 14:45:54 CST
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(gordon hlavenka) writes:

> Payphone owners receive no revenues from 800 calls.  Hence I'd imagine
> that they don't rate 800-access problems very high on their list of
> priorities.

Hotels are getting just as bad (or worse), especially the 'majors'. I
was in the Ohare Ramada last night and they wanted .50/call to call an
800 number or to call collect.


John Rice        K9IJ
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Ohare Ramada?  Why didn't you call
and say hello?  Whenever Digest readers are in the Chicago area they
are invited to call, or meet as long as we plan it a little ahead.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Thompson)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Airport's Pay Phones Reject 1-800 Numbers Randomly
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 08:31:34 GMT
Organization: Tezcat.COM, Chicago


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Paul
Beker) writes:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You wonder what AT&T had to do to get the
> account?  Well I can tell you what Illinois Bell had to do to get the
> O'Hare Airport account a few years ago: when the newspapers exposed the
> city council members and Aviation Department employees who got the bribes
> and the IBT employees who paid the bribes, there was quite a stink for
> a short while, then everyone sort of forgot about it.  PAT]

Wasn't the epic airport struggle (some years back) the one at DFW between
GenTel and AT&T.  This was of course in the 'old' telephone days. Anyone
remember any details.


/bob/ (in Chicago, yet)

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

Subject: Where Can I Buy Telephones?
From: [e-mail] (Emilio)
Date: 17 Jan 95 18:27:11 +0200
Organization: University of Maribor, Slovenia


Hello,

Please, can someone give me a email address of a person which sells
telephones (Panasonic, Sony, AT&T).


Regards,

Franci!    email: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here in the USA we are very accustomed
to seeing stores everywhere that sell phones. Any of the brand names
you mentioned above are for sale anywhere you go here. All the stores
have deals with one or more of the above, and quite a few others as
well. Perhaps one or more of the various dealer/distributor/retail sales
people reading this Digest will respond to you and assist you.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #39
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07333;
          18 Jan 95 2:04 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA15639; Tue, 17 Jan 95 21:48:04 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA15632; Tue, 17 Jan 95 21:48:01 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 21:48:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #40

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 21:48:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 40

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Modem-Voice Incoming Call Switching (Harold Buehl)
    Re: Call Overflow Question (Chris Hardaker)
    Re: Cellphone Now Giving ANI? (Steve Brack)
    Re: 206 to 360 Experience (Carl Moore)
    Re: Distinctive Ringing Specifications (Wayne Huffman)
    Re: General Datacom ATM Switches Sign Deal With Siemens (brenner@mars)
    Re: Long Distance Blocking, was Re: Old Rotary Service Question (W Huffman)
    Re: Horrible Eartquake in Japan (Peter Leif Rasmussen)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Matthew Richardson)
    Re: How to Find Your Number (Carl Moore)
    Re: 500 Number Assignments (Carter Thomasson)
    Re: 500 Number Assignments ([e-mail])
    Re: AT&T Enters Rochester NY Local Telephone Market (Bob Thompson)
    Re: Acronym for "Information Superhighway" (Mark Brader)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Kimmo Ketolainen)
    Re: Address Wanted For KPN (Hendrik Rood)
    Digital Cellular Phones (Mark Stieger)
    PBX Information Needed ([e-mail])
    Re: LD ISDN Service (Ed Goldgehn)
    Re: Address Wanted For KPN (Jean B. Sarrazin)
    Zombie Voice on COCOTS (Carl Moore)
    Re: About the GIF Incident and Substitutes (Dik T. Winter)
    Re: Mail Order Outlet For Cellular Batteries (Doug Reuben)
    Need Phone Numbers for Consumer Tel. Equipment Companies (norbert@primenet)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: Modem-Voice Incoming Call Switching
Date: 17 Jan 1995 19:51:36 GMT
Organization: Des Moines Internet
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jan
Mandel) writes:

> A while ago I have posted a question how to switch incoming calls to
> an answering machine or a modem. Many have pointed out that incoming
> modem call is just silence and it is the answering modem that makes
> the shreeking noise. Thank you all.

> Consequently to decide if the incoming call is modem or not one would
> have to subject all callers to the unpleasant shreek.

I am a little late in seeing this thread, but there is another
solution.  The modems can be set up as reverse-carrier which means
that it is the calling modem that "shreeks" and the receiving modem is
silent.  This is the way that FAX/MODEM switches work where you can
share a single line between a Fax Machine, a modem, and a answering
machine.  Unfortunatly, both the sending and receiving modems need to
be set up as reverse-carrier so you cannot use this for a
bulletin-board type of setup since the callers will have to use a
non-standard setup inorder to access your dial-in line.


Harold Buehl

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

Subject: Re: Call Overflow Question
From: [e-mail] (Chris Hardaker)
Date: 17 Jan 95 09:21:15 EST


This is in reply to Mark Kelly's question about overflowing from one
DN to another.

It depends on the technology supporting your T1. If it is sitting on some
advanced switch like a DMS (advanced in relation to electro-mechanical), a
simple 'replace tuple' after the overflowing trunk group and then send
the switch back to it's digit analysis tables will do the trick. This
set up will work with a few of the MITEL and GEC PBX's out there also.
If it's anything older than a DMS, a second trunk group appears to be
your only choice.


Chris Hardaker   Network Manager
CLEAR Communications
Auckland  New Zealand
Ph + 64 9 912 4286
Fax + 64 9 912 4451

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 17:11:55 -0500
From: Steve Brack <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellphone Now Giving ANI?


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Mr. James Holland) wrote:

> The ANI returned on my cellular service (CellOne of Tennessee) is that
> of the business office of the local 911 office. Any idea why that is,
> or if it's only a fluke?

Applying some social engineering, the ANI of the 911 business office
would probably be a good flag for special subscriber numbers that
don't return a true ANI, like cellular numbers.

After all, how often do you think their own business office calls 911?


Steve Brack, Consultant | [e-mail]
Toledo, OH  43613-1605  | [e-mail]
MY OWN OPINIONS         | Tel: [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My beeper works something like that. If
you call it and punch in a number, then I get the number on the display
screen. If you don't punch in a number but just leave a voice message
then it still beeps me but displays the number of itself.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 23:40:49 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 206 to 360 Experience


Regarding the person whose calls to area code 360 wind up in her own
company's voicemail boxes ...

How does she dial calls to:

1. long distance points (originating at the company, right?);
2. mailboxes within the company?

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

From: [e-mail] (Wayne Huffman)
Subject: Re: Distinctive Ringing Specifications
Date: 17 Jan 1995 23:44:03 GMT
Organization: Netcom


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Vincent Lai) writes:

> Does anybody know how to get the specifications for distinctive
> ringing in USA and Canada? Any help is appreciated.

As I recall, Distinctive ringing is (was) called Multiple Directory
Numbers per Line with Distinctive Ringing - MDNL/DR in the AT&T 5ESS
Switch documentation. This may help someone researching this.  (I used
to be a 5ESS switch tech in an AT&T Digital CO).


Wayne Huffman

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

From: [e-mail] (Brenner)
Subject: Re: General Datacom ATM Switches Sign Deal With Siemens
Date: 17 Jan 1995 14:34:09 GMT
Organization: SuperNet Inc.


MCI announced that it would be using GDC ATM switches.  I'm not
_positive_, but I think AT&T is using its own GlobeView 2000 switch.


Brenner

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

From: [e-mail] (Wayne Huffman)
Subject: Re: Long Distance Blocking, was Re: Old Rotary Service Question
Date: 18 Jan 1995 00:32:49 GMT
Organization: Netcom


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (danny burstein)
writes:

> b) There was often also a current reversal when calling the operator
> or some other telco numbers. But local calls would go through ok.

As I recall, this was also used as a method to return coins at a coin
telephone when calling a (then) "free" nomber such as 411, "0" operator,
and the telephone company business office. My mom used to be the cord-
board (!) operator at the local Ma Bell business office, and I would
call her at work and get my dime (later quarter) back when the local
CO would reverse the current momentarily. Ah, memories!


Wayne Huffman

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 09:37:15 JST
From: [e-mail] (Peter Leif Rasmussen)
Subject: Re: Horrible Eartquake in Japan


Yes, it was an eartquake of quite some magnitude, but you have got a
few figures a little wrong.

The last count I saw with the number of dead poeple were around 1500,
so if you skip a zero in your "170,000 people have died" then it looks
more realistic. It will probably go over 2000 when they have finished
their clean up.

I don't know if it is the worst quake in over a hundred years in
Japan, but maybe in the area called Kansai in Japan (with Kyoto, Osaka
and Kobe). I think the earthquake in Tokyo in 1923 are considered to
be worse (I don't remember the figures) and then many thousans died,
not so much because of bulidings crashing, but more because of the
burning down of the (woodden) houses.

I don't live in the area, but 500km away from it, however even here
they were able to measure it. All TV stations only had one program
yesterday: The Earthquake. I think the quake is comparable to the one
in Los Angeles some time ago, but I think also this time the burning
down of buildings will be bad, because of the little (and expensive)
space, they are built very close.

That is all I have, but somebody living closer might have more
details?


Peter Rasmussen


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Regards the increasing death count, on
the television news tonight it was over 1800.  Having the buildings as
close together as they are does not help, and as you point out it makes
the fires even worse. A couple months ago here in Chicago we had an
entire city block burn down. About a dozen buildings were involved
which are built very close together (just perhaps five feet of space
between each of them) combined with extremely strong winds. As the burning
embers flew through the air they landed on rooftops up and down that
block; a couple buildings on the other side of the street also caught
fire as a result.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew Richardson)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Organization: I.T. Consultancy Limited, Jersey
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 19:31:14 GMT


Another one for the list:-

Jersey Telecoms
Jersey (obviously!)
Channel Islands
British Isles

The service went live in December, 1994.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 18:40:12 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How to Find Your Number


The 800-MY-ANI-IS number proved to be useful to me in some stretches
of travel where I was making an AT&T call at virtually every exchange
I passed through.  I encountered numerous cases where no number was
displayed on the telephone.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 12:55:04 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: 500 Number Assignments


In Vol. 14, issue 459 [e-mail] provided a list of the 500
number assignments by company. What was the effective date of the list
and is there an updated version available?


Carter Thomasson    Intercontinental  Telecommunications

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 16:53:35 PST
From: Kronos <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 500 Number Assignments



[e-mail] wrote:

> In Vol. 14, issue 459 [e-mail]  provided a list of the 500 number
> assignments by company. What was the effective date of the list and is there
> an updated version available ?

That data was effective 12/1/94 and there have been no modification to
the assignments as of this date (1/17/95).

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Thompson)
Subject: Re: AT&T Enters Rochester NY Local Telephone Market
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 08:24:17 CST
Organization: Tezcat.COM, Chicago


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

> Several recent messages to the Digest have discussed the recent
> changes to the local telephone service regulations that allow for
> competition in the Rochester, Ny telephone market.  The January 10,
> 1995 edition of the {Rochester Democrat & Chronicle} contains a full
> page ad from AT&T advertising that they are entering this market.  For
> fun, I called the toll free number contained in the ad (1 800 716-4ATT)
> to learn more about what AT&T is offering.

> The AT&T rep didn`t know what the rates would be after the three
> month period, but suggested thay they would remain competitive.

> AT&T is offering most of the advanced services that Rochester Telephone
> offers, with voice mail being the most asked for missing service (again
> all of this is implemented by Rochester Tel and resold by AT&T).  I
> also learned that there is no sign up fee through March 31.

Don -- well, let me tell you what ATT did to us here in the Chicago
market.  They began offering service (accessed by 10288) for longer
intra-lata calls (over eight miles, which are timed calls here, less than
eight being untimed).  They advertised the hell out of it -- cheaper than
Ameritech (formerly Illinois Bell), they advertised.  And it was.  15-mile
calls were (these are from memory but fairly accurate) around 1 to 1.5
cents/minute, vs Ameritech at 1.5 to 2.0 cents (depending on day and time).

Then, three months later (December) the rates changed.  No ads, no
announcements. Seven cents/minute now -- roughly three times the Ameritech
rates.  It turns out the low rates were "temporary, introductory rates."

Talk about bait and switch.  This is hook and switch!  A fair number
of businesses had programmed their systems to automatically add the
10288 dial string.  And they didn't find out about the change, often,
till the new bills were processed, perhaps after six to eight weeks of
paying higher rates.

So, if you switch to ATT for local service, watch what they do to you.

OTOH, we still go ATT for interstate long distance.


/bob/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even though AT&T did not advertise their
increase in rates, Illinois Bell made sure to let everyone know about
the changes. Did you see the ads run by Ameritech (IBT) saying 'AT&T
has such a deal for you!  They want you to pay 81 percent more for you
local calls than we do ...'  The ad went on to explain how the AT&T
rates had increased after the short 'introductory' period.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Acronym for "Information Superhighway"
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 22:10:22 GMT


> [ ... I guess now they will make things so miserable on the Internet
> large numbers of people will drop out.  PAT]

 ... calling it a cesspool and a dungheap as they do, Pat?


Mark Brader, [e-mail] | "Those who mourn for 'USENET like it was' should
SoftQuad Inc.           |  remember the original design estimates of maximum
Toronto                 |  traffic volume: 2 articles/day" -- Steven Bellovin


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Wait a minute! *I* invented the 'cesspool
and dungheap' descriptions. If other people want to use those, they are
going to have to pay me royalties.  <g>   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kimmo Ketolainen)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Organization: Turun yliopisto - University of Turku, Turku, Finland
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 03:01:08 GMT


> Estonia      EMT

New:
Estonia=09=09Radiolinja

> Hong Kong    Smartone

Also:
Hong Kong=09Telecom CSL


Kimmo Ketolainen University of Turku            home [phone]
[e-mail]                    shoe [phone]
FIN-20540 Turku  http://www.utu.fi/finland.html work [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hendrik Rood)
Subject: Re: Address Wanted For KPN
Date: 17 Jan 1995 04:15:29 GMT
Organization: Hendrik's Humble Home Hero


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Stephen Warner) says:

> Can someone tell me the smail address of KPN, a Dutch Telecoms Company?

PTT Telecom Netherlands is the telecom-division of KPN (the others are
a mail division and a multimedia division). It can be reached at:

PTT Telecom Netherlands
P.O. Box 30150
2500 GD The Hague
The Netherlands.

I suggest you write the IEB (Dutch abbreviation for internal and
external affairs) Department.


Hendrik Rood

PTT Telecom    Network Services
Switched Services department.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Stieger)
Subject: Digital Cellular Phones
Date: 13 Jan 95 10:49:24 GMT
Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc


I'm looking at getting a Motorola Digital cell phone (Micro Digital
model) and was wondering if anyone on here had expierience with it,
specs on it, technical info, etc. Also, does it use the same accessories
as the standard Motorola flip phones?

Also, are there any places that sell it via mail unactivated for a
decent price? they want $699 for it here.


Thanks,

Mark

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: PBX Information Needed
Date: 17 Jan 1995 23:37:06 GMT
Organization: Portland Trail Blazers Inc


I am at present evaluating the AT&T 3gi PBX as well as the NT 61c.
Anybody have any good information on these systems to help me with my
decision.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Re: LD ISDN Service
Date: 17 Jan 1995 06:29:08 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...

> At long last, Southwestern Bell is offering ISDN service in St. Louis.
> We need to select a LD company, our current carrier LDDS says they
> don't offer it.  Any recommendations from the crowd?

What LDDS is saying is that they don't have SS7 signaling in your area
for data calls. Where are you going to be calling with your ISDN line?

IMHO, you're better off with either AT&T or MCI for overall deployment
reasons.


Ed Goldgehn                          E-Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr. Vice President                    Voice:  [phone]
Open Communication Networks, Inc.       Fax:  [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 11:19:13 +0100
From: [e-mail] (Jean BSarrazin)
Subject: Re: Address Wanted For KPN


I have the address for the Amsterdam District office:

La Guardiaweg 5
1043 DE Amsterdam
The Netherlands.

Although recently privatized, KPN still suffers from the Dutch
bureaucracy syndrome -- in other words, you may have to make a few
phone calls there before getting an answer. Their phone is +31 20 484
8484.


Jean B Sarrazin    Ekkosys Communications BV   Amsterdam

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 17:46:09 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Zombie Voice on COCOTS


Does anyone know what I am talking about when I describe a voice
frequently heard on COCOTS (saying things like "thank you", "please
wait", "this is not a valid number", etc.) as female and "zombie"?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I certainly do. 'Please deposit thirty
five cents' is my favorite of the zombie's instructions.     PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dik T. Winter)
Subject: Re: About the GIF Incident and Substitutes
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 00:06:53 GMT


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

> With the recent problems over the use of Unisys patented LZW
> compression in GIF files, there has been suggested people switch to
> JPEG format.  Then someone else pointed out that IBM has a patent on
> the compression format that uses.

> Aparently both are the same algorithm.  David Winfrey <[e-mail]>
> points out that the information on this is in rtfm.mit.edu:/pub/usenet/
> news.answers/compression-faq/part[1-3].

They are not the same.  GIF uses LZW, patented by Unisys; JPEG uses
arithmetic coding, patented by IBM.  But JPEG also allows Huffman
coding which is used by most generally available JPEG software.  (BTW,
actually LZW is also patented by IBM to make it more confusing.)


dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj  amsterdam, nederland, [phone]
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn  amsterdam, nederland; e-mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: Re: Mail Order Outlet For Cellular Batteries
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 03:42:33 PST


On 4 Jan 95 03:54:48 GMT, [e-mail] (G. Robert Arrabito)
wrote:

> I'm looking for a mail order outlet in either Canada or the U.S. which
> carries NMH batteries for my Motorola cellular phone. Can anyone suggest
> good, reliable companies?

It took me a while to dig out the info, but we've ordered from Cellular
Products Distributors in LA. We never bought NMH from them (yet), but
I've seen some offered there at rather good prices.  (Nothing for my
Audiovox Ultravox [the smallest one] -- anyone know of a good source
for these rather unusual NMH batteries?)

Their info is:

Cellular Products Distributors
1616 Contner Ave
Los Angeles, CA, 90025

[phone]
[phone] (CA)
[phone]
[phone] (Fax)


Doug Reuben     [e-mail]/[e-mail]   (203) 499 - 5221
  CID Technologies*Interpage(TM) E-Mail/Internet Paging and Fax Services

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Need Phone Numbers for Consumer Telephone Equipment Companies
Date: 18 Jan 1995 00:18:24 GMT
Organization: Primenet


I would appreciate telephone numbers for any mail order companies
which concentrate on telephone equipment including equipment for the
general consumer market. Also any comments based on experience with
these companies regarding service and pricing would be appreciated.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: When this comes up, as it does quite
often, the one standard recommendation I always make is to contact
'Hello Direct' for a copy of their catalog. Call 1-800-HI-HELLO. Gee,
I wish those folks were sponsors of this Digest; I talk about them
often enough some have already accused me of getting paid by them! <g>
I don't though ... its just that they have pretty good stuff. My other
suggestion is to not forget Radio Shack. 1-800-THE-SHACK will get you
on their mailing list.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #40
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08959;
          18 Jan 95 3:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16801; Tue, 17 Jan 95 22:44:11 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16793; Tue, 17 Jan 95 22:44:07 CST
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 22:44:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #41

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 22:44:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 41

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd (Dave Levenson)
    Re: ANI Information in Realtime (Dave Levenson)
    Re: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Names ([e-mail])
    Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)
    Re: Need Info on Two-Line, Digital Answering Devices With ANI (S Schwartz)
    Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia? ([e-mail])
    Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert) (Dik Winter)
    Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert) (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: 360 NPA in Partial Service (Don Skidmore)
    Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California (Linc Madison)
    Long Distance Caller ID (Paul J. Zawada)
    New Tennex Codes in 516 (Stan Schwartz)
    630 Area Code and New Dialing Patterns (Mitch Weiss)
    Cattle Call (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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: Bell Atlantic Mobile Joins the PIN Crowd
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 02:21:15 GMT


The cellular carriers appear to be under the mistaken impression that
a PIN, transmitted in the clear over the air, will somehow be more
secure than a MIN and ESN, also transmitted in the clear, over the
air!  If only a few subscribers use a PIN, then it will appear to be
secure, because those who would clone the MIN and ESN don't bother
trying to intercept the PIN.  When everybody uses a PIN, then the
cloners will have sufficient incentive to intercept and use the PIN
along with the MIN and ESN, and we'll be right back where we are
today.

This is merely another example of an attempt at security through
obscurity.  I predict that the benefit will be temporary.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: ANI Information in Realtime
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 02:40:08 GMT


ESSMAN ([e-mail]) writes:

> I currently have 800 service through AT&T and I receive ANI
> information with my bill once per month.  I'd like to receive the ANI
> info real-time but no one at AT&T seems to know what I'm talking
> about.

AT&T does offer real-time ANI on 800 numbers, but only if the inbound
calls are delivered through AT&T MegaCom(sm) or ISDN service.  MegaCom
is their bypass service, where a leased T-1 span connects their tandem
switch directly to the customer premises.  They use wink-start to
deliver ANI or DNIS (maybe both? I don't know) using in-band DTMF
signaling.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even though ANI and Caller-ID are two
> separate things ... with this in mind, at least one carrier
> providing 800 service *does* display in realtime the ANI of the
> calling party via the Caller-ID display unit. I've forgotten which
> company it is ... someone remind me.

WillTel (who is resold by Cable & Wireless and probably a few others)
provides ANI over the CallerID channel.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (BUBEYE!)
Subject: Re: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 03:01:59 GMT


Tony Waddell <[e-mail]> writes:

> I'm not sure if this is PACBELL policy only, or whether it's fairly
> consistent across the country, but I wanted a phone book from my home
> town, Davenport, Iowa. I was quoted a charge in excess of $50!

Shop around for phone books like everything else! I needed a Phoenix
book and called US West (who serves Arizona) and was quoted what
seemed to be a high price.  On a lark, I called Pac Bell and was
quoted a price much lower for the identical book!

Get the numbers for the various Baby Bell's directory departments
(they all have 800 numbers) and call around.  You'll be surprised.
This is one market (foreign directories) where they actually compete
against each other.

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

From: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)
Subject: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio
Date: 18 Jan 1995 03:34:06 GMT
Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)


I can't comment on the radio aspects, but can shed a little light on
university judicial environments.

I've been a university faculty member since 78, and, so far as I can
see, typical university judicial proceedings for students are run like
child abuse determinations, or like the Elizabethan Star Chamber --
in total secrecy and with no one having any statutory rights.  Where I
work:

- Trials, names of the defendant, and verdicts of the student-run judicial
board are secret, except for a sanitized one-sentence summary. ("Stolen $1000
computer, Bray Hall, last week, restitution and 100 hours service").

- Even the plaintiff has no right to attend the trial or to learn the
verdict.  (This came out when a woman accused a man of date-raping
her.)

- The defendant and witnesses have no right to keep silent, but must
answer questions.  This rule is in the student handbook.

This system survives because the student leaders like it.  The secrecy
preserves the rights of a defendant who is found innocent, and the
general anonymity is considered to be required by the Buckley
amendment.  This is a law that makes student academic records secret.
(In contrast, the comparable rule for people's financial records is
that there is not even an expectation of secrecy.)

So it's not at all surprising how the student with the radio was
treated.  Regrettable, yes.  Surprising, no.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: He wrote me earlier today and now I am
unable to find his letter (dammit!) ... he said the reason they were
there was because it was believed he was in possession of stolen
property. He said he knew that was not the case, had nothing to hide
or be concerned about, so he told them go ahead and search.  Apparently
they did not find any stolen property -- he knew in his own heart he
was innocent of that -- but I guess he did not expect them to get off
on a tangent about his radio equipment either.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stan Schwartz)
Subject: Re: Need Info on Two-Line, Digital Answering Devices With ANI
Date: 17 Jan 1995 22:34:04 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Richard Jay Solomon ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Has anyone tested or reviewed the Friday machine by Bogen or AT&T's
> new two-line digital answering machine? Will they respond to ANI like
> the NTI device mentioned in TELECOM Digest?

Richard:

I had the Friday for about a week.  It's a pretty flimsy machine for
the $300 MSRP.  It doesn't handle ANI or CID, but it does recognize
distinctive-ringning.  It went back within a week.


Stan

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

From: [e-mail] (Prime perf)
Subject: Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia?
Date: 17 Jan 1995 20:50:20 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Prime perf)


The numbers that you have for LDDS/Metromedia are correct for no
volume commitment and a one year time commitment. I switched to them
about four months ago because of their rates and found the service as
good as that from the previous carrier -- Sprint. Besides, the calling
card rates are also excellent.

You can get AT&T to come up with a better line than the one you are
getting if you can commit to more than $200 per month for a period of
one to three years. Their Option "S" offering has commitment levels of
$200 - $1,000 - $3,000 - $5,000 per month for the one to three year
period. The higher the level you are willing to commit to, the better.

Then again, if you can get a really good rate and equivalent service
from the fourth largest service provider with no volume commitment,
who needs any of the three largest!

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 03:08:06 +0100
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert)


> The European position imposes a lottery where there is more than one
> applicant for a specific international freephone number.  You can
> imagine the land rush this will create among European carriers and
> their customers, especially for valuable numbers such as 800 THE CARD,
> 800 HOLIDAY, and 800 FLOWERS, or Home Shopping Club's well-ensconced
> 800 284-3200.

Why would any European customer wish numbers like 800 THE CARD, unless
they expect most of their traffic from the US?  If I would wish to
dial that number I have to go to my cupboard, take out a photocopy
from a newsletter of the Dutch Telecom that has a photograph of a US
phone to be able to translate it to digits.  And why is 284-3200 so
charished?  I see no reason at all.

In Europe letters are *not* used.  And when they were used assignment
was not identical to the US assignment.  See the telecom archives for
an article were I gave some European assignments.

For your information, when letters were present on the phones in the
Netherlands, I could translate my phone number below as: +CABKEJBDKJH,
not very interesting.


dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj  amsterdam, nederland, [phone]
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn  amsterdam, nederland; e-mail: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 21:18:58 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert)


[e-mail] (Judith Oppenheimer) writes:

> Negotiations are under way for a new International Freephone Service
> which would compromise the value and integrity of existing 800 numbers
> for U.S. 800 customers.

> There is a User Statement which was presented in Geneva in November
> '94 that calls for grandfathering of existing 800 assignments....

> The European position imposes a lottery where there is more than one
> applicant for a specific international freephone number.  You can
> imagine the land rush this will create among European carriers and
> their customers, especially for valuable numbers such as 800 THE CARD,
> 800 HOLIDAY, and 800 FLOWERS, or Home Shopping Club's well-ensconced
> 800 284-3200.

Could you provide more background, please?  The last I heard about
international free-phone service was a proposal a few years ago for a
new "800" country code.  Is that what the Geneva plan is about?  If
so, I can't see how it would "compromise the value and integrity of
existing 800 numbers".  The new international numbers would be a whole
separate number space, dialed as +800 XXX...., while existing NANP 800
numbers could still be dialed from withing the NANP as they are today:
1-800-NXX-XXXX.

What are the details about the proposal for "grandfathering of
existing 800 assignments"?  Is the idea that any existing NANP 800
number will in the future be reachable as +800-NXX-XXXX as well?
(I.e., there will only be a single free-phone number space for the
whole world?)  That doesn't sound very practical.  Also, how can
grandfathering be done fairly for *all* existing 800 numbers,
including those in other countries?  If some company in the US
currently owns 1-800-234-5678, and another company in the UK owns
0800-234-567, then who wins?

And what about the problem we already have in the US, where the 800
NPA is almost full anyway, which means that we will probably see the
introduction of another free-phone NPA soon anyway?  How will
international free-phone service deal with such new NPAs?

In short, what is the numbering space of the proposed international
free-phone service, and why exactly would it cause problems?


Bob Goudreau        Data General Corporation
[e-mail]    62 Alexander Drive
[phone]        Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Skidmore)
Subject: Re: 360 NPA in Partial Service
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 95 15:20:54 PST
Organization: The Lone Net-Surfer :-) !


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

> Area code 206 is now like the Chicago (312/708) situation.  360 will
> surround 206.  Once 360 takes effect, 206 will become the Seattle,
> Tacoma, and possibly Everett (and surrounding areas) with the rest of
> what was 206 becoming 360.  At least that's my understanding.

Actually, 206 is *not quite* completely surrounded by 360.  There is a small
area at about 3 o'clock (summit of Snoqualmie Pass) where 206 abuts 509.

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

> There are local calls across the 301/410 border (Md.) and 215/610
> border in Pa., and the area code is used for this where just the seven
> digit number was used before.

It will be interesting to see for sure, but the local telco claims
local calls can be dialed as local numbers even if you are calling
from one area code into another.



[e-mail]    [e-mail]
Bellevue, Washington  USA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yet someone has stated that starting
in about two years we here in 312/708 will be forced to dial eleven
digits for all our calls, even if they are in the same area code. See
a later message in this issue for details.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 03:54:20 GMT


Eric Paulak ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Linc Madison asked:

>> Have the IXC's reduced their rates on calls between LATAs in
>> California to be more in line with both the new intra-LATA and
>> interstate rates?

> The answers a resounding "yes." In fact, AT&T, MCI and Sprint have all
> undercut Pac Bell's rates. For example:

> For a 45-mile call from L.A. to Anaheim using basic 1+ business service,

But you haven't even addressed my question.  My question was about
INTER-lata rates -- calls **BETWEEN** LATAs.  For example, a call from
L.A. to San Francisco.  I know that INTRA-lata rates have been reduced
dramatically by Pacific Bell and even more dramatically by the IXCs,
but the last I checked it was still about $0.30 or $0.35 for a
one-minute daytime call from one end of the state to the other on any
of the Big Three.

So, I'll ask the question that has still not been answered: have the
IXCs reduced their INTER-LATA rates in line with the new INTRA-LATA
rates?  (Hint: they can't be undercutting Pacific Bell, because
Pacific Bell is still not permitted to carry these calls.)


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

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 18:32:18 -0600
From: Paul J Zawada <[e-mail]>
Subject: Long Distance Caller ID


I've had a couple of interesting conversations with the folks at
Ameritech regarading the delivery of interstate Caller-ID information.
I have a question or two regarding the availablity of the above service,
so let me summarize and pose a question or two to the readers of TELECOM
Digest.

Having been frustrated with having Caller ID in Champaign, IL for over
six months and having ~70% of my calls come up with "OUT OF AREA", I
decided to call Ameritech and try to figure out whether or not I
should keep this near-useless service.  If I receive a call that
originated on one of the two DMS-100s in town, I will get the calling
party's number(CPN).  Otherwise, I usually get the "OUT OF AREA"
message.  One time I actually received the CPN for a call from the 415
NPA (I think), but otherwise the CPN doesn't come through for numbers
outside of the Champaign area.

I had read somewhere that the FCC was going to require carrier (both
LEC and IXC) to pass CPN info back and forth where SS7 was in place.
Sure enough, I dug a little and found that a "Report and Order and
Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" was issued with such a requirement.
(URL= http://fcc.gov:70/0/Orders/Common_Carrier/orcc4001.txt.)
However the order doesn't seem to have any effective date and seems a
bit wimpy to me ...

With this under my belt, I called the Ameritech residential service
number and asked the rep if there was anyway she could find out if and
when this was going to happen.  I mentioned the above rule to at the
very least rationalize to myself that I wasn't off my rocker  She
said someone would get back with me.

About a day later I received a message telling me to call back the
same number.  After finding my way around the Touch-Tone menu maze, I
finally reached a rep who seemed very disinterested in helping me.
She told me that the official response from within Ameritech was "No
one at Ameritech or AT&T had heard of the particular ruling you
mentioned and that the problem was not with Ameritech."  She went on
to say that I should contact my long distance carrier for more
information.  The call was over in less than 45 seconds.

I spent the day stewing over this terse response and decided I'd call
back and tell them I wasn't satisfied with their first answer.  So I
called back and luckily got on the line with a rep that had a clue.
(Yes, there are some RBOC customer reps that are polite and know what
they are talking about!)  I explained the whole story to him and he
replied that even though such a ruling may have been made, no IXC
really has done anything to implement interstate Caller-ID nor have
any plans been announced.  So as a pratical matter, I am out of luck.
I also asked him if he could find out if Ameritech uses SS7 for any of
their IXC interconnections for the Champaign area.  (I already know
that the LEC surrounding Champaign, GTE North, is not SS7 capable in
this area, so I'm not expecting any Caller-ID information for
Intra-LATA calls ouside of Ameritech's service area any time soon.)
The rep said he'd try to get a copy of ruling and see if he could dig
up any more info.

After dealing with my questions we had a fairly good technical discussion
that lasted about ten minutes. One of the things that he mentioned was
that no DMS-100s could speak SS7.  I pushed further and asked him if
Northern Telecom didn't support SS7 on any DMS-100s or if it was just
Ameritech's DMS-100s that did not support SS7.  He said he wan't sure,
but he thought NT didn't support SS7 and the DMS-100 at all ...

So this leads to the first question:

Does the NT DMS-100 (with the proper software of course) support SS7?
I find it hard to believe that there is no SS7 capability for the
DMS-100 ... can someone prove me wrong?

I guess the other questions I have are:

How useful is Caller-ID in other parts of the country?  Do other folks
that have the service get "OUT OF AREA" for 99.5% of their interstate
calls, or am I just in the wrong city to get that info?  I'd be
especially interested to hear how well it works in the Chicago area
since Chicago is also served by Ameritech Illinois.

Should I dump Caller-ID since I'm getting very little functionality
for my $6.50 a month or will things get better?  If things will get
better, how long should it take before at least some of my friends'
out-of-state phone numbers will be lighting up my caller-ID display?


Thanks for any info.

Paul J. Zawada               URL: http://headroom.ncsa.uiuc.edu/zawada
Network Engineer              EMAIL: [e-mail]
National Center for            PHONE: [phone]
   Supercomputing Applications AMATEUR RADIO: KB9FMN


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well I can tell you that north of you in
the Chicago area of Ameritech's territory, we have been getting very good
results on Caller-ID for awhile now. Lots of long distance calls are having
their ID shown ... interestingly, even some recent calls from California
in the 415 area code were displayed.  Of course all this is relevant to
*where* most of your calls originate, and maybe I just lucked out but I
would say about 90 - 95 percent of my incoming calls now show Caller-ID,
or they show that the caller is blocking it, etc.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stan Schwartz)
Subject: New Tennex Codes in 516
Date: 17 Jan 1995 22:40:55 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Quick FYI:

 From the 516-694 exchange (NYNEX), I dialed 1010288 1 908 889 XXXX
and the call was completed via AT&T.

Also, the 630, 334, and 360 NPA's are all dialable from here.


Stan

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 07:42:35 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 630 Area Code and New Dialing Patterns


The new 630 area code is a subject of big debate here in Chicagoland.
Chicago Tonight, a local TV show just had a half-hour debate on that
very subject.  According to an Ameritech spokesman, the intended plan
(as of today) is as follows:

1.  630 will be an overlay area code for all of the 312 and 708 area codes;
2.  630 will initially be assigned for new phones (land and mobile) in 708
    area;
3.  In early 1996, 630 will also be assigned to Chicago (312);
4.  In September 1996, ALL of Chicago and suburbs will require eleven digit
    dialing, even if you are calling the same area code.
5.  Area code 708 is already exhausted.  No new cell phones will have 708.

The representative from the City of Chicago who appeared on the show
is against the new code.  The City has filed an objection with the
Illinois Commerce Commission (the local PUC), and is considering
appealing to the FCC.  They claim that this confusion is bad for
business.  They also claim it to be a safety issue.  Small children
have too many numbers to learn.

Either way, it is a pain in the neck.  If I am in 708 and order a
second phone line, it will possibly be a 630 line.  Regardless, if it
goes through, I will have to dial eleven digits for all calls in the
future.  I think this is the first shot in the war to end seven digit
dialing nationwide.  We probably will see more of this in the future.


Mitchell Weiss   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, there is one good thing to be said
about having to dial the area code as well as seven digits on all calls.
Once it is made mandatory, we will no longer have to dial *eleven* digits;
we will be able to just dial ten digits since the '1' will no longer be
needed to show that an area code rather than a local exchange sequence
is following. What follows will *always* be an area code ... right?  We
will be able to use '1' rather than '011' for international dialing since
the '1' will no longer be needed domestically. So even though we will be
dialing more digits, we will on *true* long distance calls be able to
dial fewer digits than now.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: 17 JAN 95 16:38
Subject: Cattle Call


Saw this in an internal news group:

    -------  Forwarded message -------

    Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 1:45 pm CST (19:45:57 UT)
    From: C Rader

A local magazine (I think it was "Twin Cities Business") quoted an
item from an investment newsletter saying that some dairy farmers now
use pagers to call their cows.

They reportedly strap a vibrating pager around the neck of the herd
leader cow and call the pager when it's time to return to the barn.
The cow is taught to respond to the vibrations.

One person here who's family raises cattle asked whether it wouldn't
be cheaper to keep a feeding a dog that herds the cattle instead of
paying monthly charges and air time.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #41
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09841;
          18 Jan 95 5:23 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19362; Wed, 18 Jan 95 01:10:28 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19355; Wed, 18 Jan 95 01:10:26 CST
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 01:10:26 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #42

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 17 Jan 95 23:45:16 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 42

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: More CO Codes For Each NPA - Any Telcos Take Advantage? (Carl Moore)
    Re: Returning Blocked Local Calls to be Discontinued (Robert Schwartz)
    800 Numbers/Letters Overseas (Richard Jay Solomon)
    Re: Where to Get Text of the ECPA? (John A. Thomas)
    Re: Cross Keys (Carl Moore)
    Re: NEC Neax 2400 (John Stewart)
    Business Telephone Sales Expected Salary/Commission Ranges? (Neil W. Giles)
    Phone Bill Has Wrong Area Code and City (Carl Moore)
    Help With Number Plan (Robert Smith)
    Re: What is a T1 Line? (Butch Lcroan)
    Re: Bellcore Standards Question (Wally Ritchie)
    Wanted: We Buy and SellL Used Telephone Systems and Parts (David Russell)
    Economics of the Telecommucations Industry (Victor Prochnik)
    Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging? (Wally Ritchie)
    FCC PCS Auction Information (Darryl Kipps)
    Aministrivia: Sendmail Let's Me Down (TELECOM Digest Editor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 23:03:28 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: More CO Codes For Each NPA - Any Telcos Take Advantage?


You mentioned 206-803.  But 206 was running short of prefixes before
the NNX area codes were available, and it staved off a split for a
while by generalizing from NNX to NXX prefixes.  As you know, the
phone number shortage in 206 is to be relieved by new area code 360,
which has now entered permissive mode.

What Dave Leibold was asking was what I mentioned (in different words)
in the area code history file: With the generalized area codes, what
becomes of "no N0X/N1X prefixes unless NNX prefixes are running out"?
In other words, all area codes -- not just the ones running short of
NNX prefixes -- now have published dialing instructions which can also
accommodate N0X/N1X prefixes.

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 04:09:00 UTC
Subject: Re: Returning Blocked Local Calls to be Discontinued in Canada


> By June 30, a called party will no longer be able to do this.
> In a decision handed down on December 5 [1994], the CRTC ordered Bell
> to "implement the disablement of call return on blocked local calls."

This is OUTRAGOUS!  We finally reap the benefits of peace and
tranquillity from heavy breathers thanks to technology and now the
government is talking this peace away from us!  What is going to deter
pranksters from calling now.  We have just taken a HUGE step backwards
in time.  Another first <g> for the Canadian Telecommunications
Industry.  I think the ministers are getting fed up of walking to the
pay phone to call their mistress!

> While acknowledging that the CRTC's order was "not unexpected," Mike
> Kassner, associate director, Consumer Market Management, said, "It
> tilts the balance once again in favour of the calling party and might
> cause problems with increased use of Call Trace now that the handling
> of minor annoyance calls via Call Return has been taken away."

Sure!  Why spend $0.50 to deter a prankster when you can spend $5.00
on Call trace and have to go through the hassle of getting a court
order so that the law takes action on your behalf ... for a prank
call!!!!

> All is not lost, however. Call Screen, said Mike, is still an
> "effective device" for preventing unwanted calls from the same number.
> "Call Screen can be activated to work on the last incoming number even
> though the number is blocked," he noted.

Sure, another $5.00 a month service charge ... will it ever end!?

If anyone knows the e-mail address of the government body responsible
for this fiasco, please let me know.


Robert Schwartz    Ottawa, Ontario.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 23:52:06 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Richard Jay Solomon)
Subject: 800 Numbers/Letters Overseas


In TELECOM Digest V15 #38:

> The European position imposes a lottery where there is more than one
> applicant for a specific international freephone number.  You can
> imagine the land rush this will create among European carriers and
> their customers, especially for valuable numbers such as 800 THE CARD,
> 800 HOLIDAY, and 800 FLOWERS, or Home Shopping Club's well-ensconced
> 800 284-3200.

Before the land rush starts, American firms should take a hard look at
the telephone dials overseas. Not only are the letter/number combinations
not always the same as in North America, but in the U.K., the competing
wireless firms don't even have the same set of letter/numbers! And
some places have no letters at all, or they have non-Roman letters, as
in several Mideast countries. A little due diligence goes a long way.

I can remember when AT&T tried to convince us that letters were stupid
 -- they spent a fortune on advertising "all-number dialing," as if it
made any difference. Now they are trying to tell us that letters are
valuable.  Reminds me of a Dr. Seuss story.


Richard Solomon   MIT Research Program on Communications Policy

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

From: [e-mail] (John A. Thomas)
Subject: Re: Where to Get Text of the ECPA?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 20:29:26 GMT


Wilson Mohr ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I have been poking around the FCC's FTP server to no avail so I will
> ask: Does anyone know where/how I can get a full text of the ECPA?

Try ftp to ftp.eff.org.  They might have the text on-line.  Or else go
to a law library.  The ECPA was codified in the statutes dealing with
wire interception, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521, and the statutes
dealing with stored electronic communications, 18 U.S.C. Sections
2701-2711.


John A. Thomas        [e-mail]
N5RZP            214/263-4351


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Now that you mention it, I have a full
copy here sent recently to me by someone, and I think I will send it
out as a special mailing in the next day or three. It is quite huge,
so I may have to just put it in the archives for reference.    PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 20:52:10 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cross Keys


What is the meaning of the + in front of the 51 in the Telex line?

> Coldra Woods, Chepstow Road, NEWPORT, Gwent, NP6 1JB  UK
> tel. [phone]
> Telex 497557 (from outside the UK, [phone])


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That plus means 'dial whatever you dial to
make an international call, then add what follows.'     PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 09:23:19 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: NEC Neax 2400
Organization: West Virginia Network


My predessor was able to crash the call accounting and the Maintence
terminal with-in a 4 month period prior to his release. They wanted
over 8 Gs to fix the call accounting using very old and outdated
equiptment. For this reason we found it more cost effective to write
our own software. We do off site collection on a Vax VMS. When doing
off site accounting there MUST be a short haul modem on each end or
the SMDR card will be lost. They are very touchy about spikes,surges,
and the like. If you need more info contact me.


John Stewart  ([e-mail])
Salem-Teikyo University  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Neil W. Giles)
Subject: Business Telephone Sales Expected Salary/Commission Ranges?
Organization: NCCOSC RDT&E Division, San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 23:13:14 GMT


What kind of salary and commission structures can a person entering
the Business Telephone Sales industry expect?

I am curious about major corporations as well as smaller VAR type
reselling positions.

For comparison purposes, I am primarily interested in information
based on major city locations but I would be interested in hearing
about the smaller areas too.


Thanks,

Neil Giles    [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jan 95 14:49:48 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Phone Bill Has Wrong Area Code and City


On the AT&T part of my phone bill, I found a call which I had made
from 815-945 prefix on a pay phone at Chenoa, Illinois (along I-55
between Joliet and Bloomington).  It showed up with the wrong area
code (309, which happens to be next door to the Chenoa exchange) and
the wrong city name (Geneseo, apparently served by 309-945).  Geneseo
is along U.S.6 and I-80, way out toward Rock Island.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Smith)
Subject: Help With Number Plan
Date: 14 Jan 1995 14:42:03 -0500
Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation


I am documenting a dialed number plan.  I am looking for advice on how
to present the data to a reader.  I know I can show two switches, the
trunks between them, all the data under the trunks, etc.

Is there another way to show this data that is easy to follow?

I figure I will have to do a table and a graphic to catch the entire
audience.  Recommendations or experiences appreciated.


Thanks,

bob

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

From: [e-mail] (Butch lcroan/.nameBalcroan Lilli)
Subject: Re: What is a T1 Line?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 08:28:19 GMT


ARGHHH !! I am really getting tired of this BIT-Robbing conversation
that Jeffery Rhodes started. I used to work with Jeffery and he
certainly is a smart guy, but he is no expert in this area. I would
just like to point out that for DATA it is 56k because the 8th bit is
robbed every 6th frame to give line staus information so rather than
deal with this on async data circuit they just ignore the eight bit
completly rather than have to track the status of the transport systems
framing for voice. Believe me, all modems use voice; that is to
say they use the voice bandwidth to transmit a carrier (or multiple
carrier at the same time in the higher speed techniques) that passes
thru the network as if it were voice. Therefore the encoding scheme, not
the minor bit robbing is what limits the bandwith for noise or
quantizing distortiion.

That is to say that since the analog waveform is quantized to a level
that is represented by number (the eight bits) the problem with
Jeffery's statements is that yes indeed a bit is being lost every sixth
frame but this bit is the least significant bit. That is to say its
weight is that of a " ONE " so an actual 254 might be encoded as a 253
 ... but there is more to consider here. The " MU LAW " is not a linear
scale it is more of a log function with more steps closer to the lower
levels where the ear is more senstive. I really can't believe 2 DB;
come on Jeff, 3 db is half power *and also the least amount the ear can
detect*. I really doubt that the modems are affected by this as
much as Jeffery has stated. I would more believe than something more
common such as " ECHO " and several other more common impairments are
really alot more important than a occasional bit robbing.  There are
also several new technologies such as fiber that have introduced
timing impairments such as " Jitter " into the equation. I think that
the newer modems are more senstive the the phase angle modulation that
a SONET based " Fiber Optic " system might introduce.

I advise everyone to look into the volumes of information that pours
out of the ANSI T1.101 group on this very subject matter.  I was on
the leading edge of this matter and as such expect alot of flames from
people like Jeffery who I worked with in the past. I can only say
please feel free to flame but remember it wouldn't hurt to checkout
T1.101. We all can learn how much of a poorly planned product SONET
was and how we end users were sold a illusion with SONET and FIBER!

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Bellcore Standards Question
Date: 18 Jan 1995 05:35:04 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> No more than seven zeros in a row are permitted, or an automatic on
> insertion occurs to prevent the demodulator from losing lock on the
> incoming bit stream.  This can result of one LSB resoultion on a
> maximal signal.  Since low levels contain a lot of ones, there is no
> loss of resolution on small signals due to forced ones.

Actually, the All Zero Code word is prohibited in D4. This is done by
replacing Bit 7 (Number 1 - 8 sign - lsb) with a 1 when an all zero
code word would otherwise be transmitted. This is not the lsb but the
second least significant bit.

> Also, if you are using older D4 non ESF (extended superframe) equipment.
> A bit will be robbed every 6th frame for signalling.  The robbed bits
> alternate between the A bit and B bit.

Even with ESF, a bit will be robbed every 6th frame for channels that
use Robbed Bit Signalling, i.e. other than clear channels or DDS
channels. ESF extends the AB signalling to ABCD. ESF by itself does
not eliminate the robbed bit signalling. What ESF does is to enable
clear channel e.g. 23B+D ISDN PRI by removing the coding restriction
on the all zero octet.

Just picking nits to keep the record straight.


Wally Ritchie    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

From: [e-mail] (David M. Russell)
Subject: Wanted: We Buy and Sell Used Telephone Systems and Parts
Date: 17 Jan 1995 19:20:24 GMT
Organization: Integrity Telecommunications


We buy and sell used telephone systems and parts.  Please fax, smail
or email your used and surplus inventories.


David M. Russell   Integrity Telecommunications     "The Name Says IT All"
2970 Blystone Lane, Ste. 102  Dallas, TX 75220-1515
Voice    214-357-7484   Fax    [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Victor Prochnik)
Subject: Economics of the Telecommunications Industry
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 1995 18:55:43 -0300


I am working on the economics of telecommunication industry.  My next
research will be on the demand of Brazilian large enterprises for
global telecom services.

I would be pleased to discuss this and other subjects.  Can you share
your insight with me?


VICTOR PROCHNIK    INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS INSTITUTE
FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF RIO DE JANEIRO, BRASIL
E-MAIL: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging?
Date: 18 Jan 1995 06:05:15 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, Anthony D'Auria <dauriaa@voyager.
bxscience.edu> writes:

> Hi! My name is Anthony D'Auria and I own a P90 super loaded desktop. I
> use it practically every day for the net and business. I haven't
> experienced any trouble with the floating point calculations (not that
> I use them). I think that IBM is making a big deal of a little thing.

It's not a little thing that spreadsheets produce wrong results. IBM's
concerns reflect the major concerns of its corporate clients many of
whom depend on their machines for mission critical applications.
Neither is it a small thing for CAD programs, Signal Processing, or
any other programs that depend on heavy floating point calculations.
Customers with lots of machines that use floating point are going to
see real problems.  For these customers the Pentium is Russian
roulette with only a few chambers in the gun. If you don't use
speadsheets, or CAD, or other floating point programs, no big deal. If
you're a single user user with a single machine and you do use
speadsheets and/or CAD programs, you too are playing russian roulette.
The probabilites are small, but they are a threat if you care what
your results are.

> People with Pentiums start panicking, thinking that their system is
> all messed up.  For an average user, it doesn't seem to fearsome, but
> if you have some heavy duty stuff to do, it can really do some damage.

> Question: Does this floating point calculation bug affect system
> performance? Is that why some Pentiums bottleneck? What and where
> should a person contact to get the messed up chip replaced? Is it
> actually worth it?

> If you have any ideas, respond: [e-mail].

I personally think that the outrage felt by users is due to three factors.

First, Intel kept information of the flaw to itself for a relatively
long time.

Second, Intel downplayed the potential seriousness of the problem.

Third, Intel has spent tens of millions of dollars on the Intel Inside
ad compaign with the effect of brainwashing (like all advertising)
masses of users to buy Pentium. Some of these users might have better
off putting their money in faster video cards. Clearly, a flawed
Pentium is much worse the alternatives. Intel must now make these
people whole again.


Wally Ritchie     Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

Date: 18 Jan 95 02:01:38 EST
From: Darryl Kipps <[e-mail]>
Subject: FCC PCS Auction Info


Good day to all,

I've just come from ftp fcc.gov to see how the PCS auctions
are going and have some questions.

1. I see there are both Broad and Narrow bands.  What's the difference?

2. Narrowband has both Nationwide and Regional while Broadband seems to
   be entirely regional (or by market) -- Why the distinction and how
   are the regions (markets) defined?

If anyone could shed some light here would be appreciated, or just
point me in the right direction if the answers are available
elsewhere.


Thanks,

Darryl Kipps

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

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Administrivia: Sendmail Lets Me Down ...
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 00:15:00 CST


On Tuesday some of you got two or three copies of issues 32 through 34.
Others of you received only one copy. Hopefully everyone got at least
one copy of each and a copy of issue 35. If you did not get one of
these, let me know so it can be replaced.

What happened was those three issues (32, 33, 34) had been handed over
to sendmail for processing to the mailing list. All of a sudden for
reasons unknown to me, this machine (delta.eecs.nwu.edu) belched and
shut down for about five minutes. During that time I was locked up here
unable to get any response. When I got back online, I noticed that
those three issues had stopped moving, but I guessed they would restart
when sendmail got around to it again. In the meantime, issue 35 was
finished and sent to the mailq. Issue 35 seems to be going okay, but
mailer-daemons began flooding in ... those three issues had started up
again, but sendmail was quite confused.

   Can't find programs!      (my own little group of hacks done to
                             sendmail for use with very large mailing
                             lists like this one so I can have as many
                             invocations of sendmail going at one time
                             as desired with no ill-effects or slow-
                             downs for other users. I frequently have
                             six or seven invocations of sendmail going
                             at one time against my mailing list.

   Can't locate mailing list!  I don't leave it out under its most obvious
                             names where hackers who like to sneak in the
                             back door with commands like VRFY and EXPD
                             can snoop into it. Aside from the fact that
                             I think the admin here disabled VRFY and EXPD
                             why take chances?  Part of my 'send-telecom'
                             does 'mv bogus.name real.name' in the process
                             of getting it out for use in mailing. Trouble
                             is I had it out when delta went down and when
                             it restarted obviously the mailing list(s)
                             were not where sendmail expected to find them.
                             So then it wrote all over the one that was
                             out and ruined it. I had to use the backup
                             copy it created the day before, and reinstall
                             all the adds and deletes from the several
                             hours prior.

   Unknown Host!             Oh Lord, were the name servers hosed Tuesday.
                             Were they?  WERE THEY?  About 80 percent of
       or                    the mailing came back due to unknown host.
                             A few sites hung a long time before sendmail
                             decided they had not accepted its delivery.
                             Of course, that does not really mean the mail
   Timed out during          did not get delivered, just that sendmail is
   user open with ..         saying it didn't. So, a third time around and
                             that time, the mail seemed to stick.

Maybe you got those issues once, maybe you got them three times, or maybe
not at all ...  <grin, albiet somewhat bitter one, with teeth bared> ...
But I just about lost control when 400 -- yes, *four hundred* mailer
daemons arrived all in the space of about fifteen minutes.

You tell me what needs to be replaced/retransmitted between issues 31 and
42, Tuesday morning through Wednesday morning. And for those of you who
wrote to tell me you got three copies of it and to stop already, all I
can say is something lewd, crude and rude. But I won't say it, I'll just
think it.  Have a nice Wednesday!


PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #42
*****************************



Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa15322;
          18 Jan 95 15:46 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26024; Wed, 18 Jan 95 09:35:14 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26016; Wed, 18 Jan 95 09:35:11 CST
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 09:35:11 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #43

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 18 Jan 95 09:35:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 43

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: FCC PCS Auction Information (Bob Keller)
    "Dial & Save" Long Distance Service (Bibb Cain)
    Re: Bellcore Standards Question (Chip Sharp)
    McCaw/NACN Call Delivery Toll Charges (Doug Reuben)
    Re: ANI Information in Realtime (Doug Reuben)
    Dial Modifiers and International Callback Service? (Daniel Winkowski)
    Small Business PBX/Fax Back Server Needed (Jon Zeeff)
    Re: Call Waiting and Caller-ID Question (Navneet Patel)
    Looking For a CHILL Compiler (Andreas Junklewitz)
    Freephone Forum vs. ITU Question (Judith Oppenheimer)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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, 18 Jan 1995 09:14:53 EST
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FCC PCS Auction Information


In TELECOM Digest V15, #42, Darryl Kipps <[e-mail]> asks:

> I've just come from ftp fcc.gov to see how the PCS auctions
> are going and have some questions.

> 1. I see there are both Broad and Narrow bands.  What's the
> difference?

> 2. Narrowband has both Nationwide and Regional while Broadband
> seems to be entirely regional (or by market) -- Why the
> distinction and how are the regions (markets) defined?

The two major distinctions between narrowband and broadband PCS are
(1) the amount of spectrum allocated to each, and (2) the particular
frequency band allocated to each.  Narrowband PCS resides in the 900
MHz band and is constituted of 26 different channels ranging from as
little as 50 kHz unpaired channels to as much as two 50 kHz channel
pairs.  Broadband PCS resides in the 2 GHz band (actually, fixed
microwave users reside there now and will have to be moved by the PCS
licensees -- but that's a whole other story) and is constituted of
either a 30 MHz allocation per license or a 10 MHz allocation per
license.

You can think of Narrowband PCS as the next, more advanced, generation
of paging services, and Broadband PCS as the next generation of
cellular service.  I say that knowing that I may get flamed (because
it is an inaccurate, oversimplification), but it is nonetheless a good
way for the uninitiated to get his or her brain around the concepts.

Depending on the particular frequency block, licenses are awarded for
different geographic areas: Nationwide, Regional, MTA, and BTA.  MTAs
and BTAs are market areas devised by the Commission based on Rand
McNally Marjor Trading Areas and Basic Trading Areas.  A BTA is made
up of a group of counties.  There are 493 BTAs which, together,
include all of the United States and its territories.  MTAs are
collections of BTAs and are much, much larger.  There are 51 MTAs
covering the entire country.  Finally, there are six narrowaband PCS
regions, each region being a collection of MTAs.

If you want to get more detail on the geographic definition of each
PCS market area, I recommend to you a file in my anonymous ftp
directory:

    ftp://ftp.clark.net/pub/rjk/pcs_mkts.txt.Z

The compressed archive includes a very large text file containing a
data compilation, made available on a shareware-like basis, providing
a county-by-county breakout (with 1990 and 1980 population data) for
each PCS Region, MTA, and BTA, as well as each cellular MSA/RSA.  If
the shareware fee is paid, I send out a disk that includes the same
data in *.dbf, *.xls, and *.csv format so it can be imported into your
favorite database or spreadsheet program and sorted, number-crunched,
manipulated, etc.  This data allows one to see precisely which areas
are included in each PCS and/or cellular market as well as to perform
calculations to determine the extent of overlap between cellular and
PCS markets.

The table below shows the frequencies allocated for Narroband PCS
channels 1 through 26 and Broadband PCS Blocks A through F, as well as
the geographic basis on which each license will be awareded.  The
channels marked with an asterisk are those for which special credits
are awareded to "designated entities" in any auction for the licenses.
Designated entities are small businesses, women or minority owned
businesses, and rural telephne companies.  The special benefits
availalbe to one or more of these, depending on the particular
license, may include bidding credits (in effect, a discount off the
amount of the winning bid), favorable installment payment provisions,
and (in the case of the rural telephone companies) the right to
subdivide geographic markets.

 Chnls    Frequencies (MHz)            Geographic Area
 -----    -----------------            ---------------
 NB-01    940.00-940.05/901.00-901.05        Nationwide
 NB-02    940.05-940.10/901.05-901.10        Nationwide
 NB-03    940.10-940.15/901.10-901.15        Nationwide
 NB-04    940.15-940.20/901.15-901.20        Nationwide
 NB-05*    940.20-940.25/901.20-901.25 MHz        Nationwide
 NB-06    930.40-930.45/901.7500-901.7625        Nationwide
 NB-07    930.45-930.50/901.7625-901.7750        Nationwide
 NB-08*    930.50-930.55/901.7750-901.7875        Nationwide
 NB-09    940.75-940.80                Nationwide
 NB-10    940.80-940.85                Nationwide
 NB-11*    940.85-940.90 MHz            Nationwide
 NB-12    940.25-940.30/901.25-901.30        Regional
 NB-13*    940.30-940.35/901.30-901.35 MHz        Regional
 NB-14    930.55-930.60/901.7875-901.8000        Regional
 NB-15    930.60-930.65/901.8000-901.8125        Regional
 NB-16    930.65-930.70/901.8125-901.8250        Regional
 NB-17*    930.70-930.75/901.8250-901.8375        MTA
 NB-18    940.35-940.40/901.35-901.40        MTA
 NB-19*    940.40-940.45/901.40-901.45        MTA
 NB-20    930.75-930.80/901.8375-901.8500        MTA
 NB-21    930.80-930.85/901.8500-901.8625        MTA
 NB-22*    930.85-930.90/901.8625-901.8750        MTA
 NB-23    940.90-940.95                MTA
 NB-24*    940.95-941.00                MTA
 NB-25    930.90-930.95/901.8750-901.8875        BTA
 NB-26*    930.95-931.00/901.8875-901.9000        BTA
 BB- A    1850-1865/1930-1945            MTA
 BB- B    1870-1885/1950-1965            MTA
 BB- C*    1895-1910/1975-1990            BTA
 BB- D    1865-1870/1945-1950            BTA
 BB- E    1885-1890/1965-1970            BTA
 BB- F*    1890-1895/1970-1975            BTA

The Commission has already completed auctions for the Nationwide and
Regional Narrowband PCS channels.  Licensing of the Nationwide winners
is already underway, and the regional licenses will be issued shortly.
The acution for the MTA-based Broadband PCS licenses (Blocks A and B)
is currently underway, with the auction for Block C scheduled to begin
in April (or 30 days after conclusion of the current auction).
Auctions for the remaining Broadband blocks and for the MTA and BTA
Narrowband channels have not yet been scheduled.


Bob Keller (KY3R)            Email: [e-mail]
Law Office of Robert J. Keller, P.C.    Telephone:  [phone]
Federal Telecommunications Law       Facsimile:  301.229.6875

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

From: [e-mail] (Bibb Cain)
Subject: "Dial & Save" Long Distance Service
Date: 18 Jan 1995 13:50:51 GMT
Organization: Advanced Technology Dept, Harris Corp, Melbourne, FL


I received a letter offering a long distance service from a company
called "Dial & Save." This offered savings relative to special plans
from ATT, MCI, and Sprint by simply dialing their special access code
before the area code. The billing shows up on your regular monthly
bill. I called their 800 number (1-800-787-3333) and their rates for
some calls seem good.  Are they legit and has anyone had experience
with them?  Any problems? I was thinking of testing it bytrying their
service for a couple of calls and seeing what shows up on the monthly
bill.


Bibb Cain        ARPA  : [e-mail]
Harris Corporation     AT&T  : [phone]
PO Box 37, MS 5W/1912    FAX   : [phone]
Melbourne, FL 32902

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 09:41:25 EST
From: [e-mail] (Chip Sharp)
Subject: Re: Bellcore Standards Question


Sorry, but I lost the original message so no quotes here.

 From the ANSI side of the house, T1.403 (DS1 Standard) does not
really define an IDLE code.

ANS T1.408 (PRI Layer 1 Standard) defines the Idle code in a B-channel
or H-channel as a "...pattern including at least 3 binary ones in an
octet..." that must be transmitted "...on every time slot that is not
assigned to a channel (e.g., time slots awaiting channel assignment on
a per-call basis, residual slots on an interface that is not fully
provisioned, etc.)..." (from Section 6.5 of ANS T1.408-1990).  Just
for further information, the idle pattern for the D-channel is HDLC
flags, NOT all 1's as in the BRI.

Note that this means that the B/H-channel idle code from the network
could be the HDLC flag pattern, since it satisfies the requirements.
That is why detection of HDLC flags on a PRI channel does not
necessarily mean that the channel is connected.

Other facts about T1: If you transmit inverted HDLC in every channel
across a T1 span using Super Frame you have a 75% chance of emulating
Yellow Alarm when transmitting flags.  If the HDLC is aligned with the
frame structure, the chance goes to 100%.


Hascall H. ("Chip") Sharp    Teleos Communications, Inc.
Sr. Systems Engineer        2 Meridian Road
                Eatontown, NJ  07724  USA
voice:  [phone]         fax:    [phone]
email:   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: McCaw/NACN Call Delivery Toll Charges
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 00:59:04 PST


Recently, [e-mail] (Jeffrey Rhodes) wrote:

> In some Cellular One markets, the 99 cent per minute roamer air time
> includes all necessary long distance charges (10 to 20 cents per
> minute) for automatic call delivery via the NACN.

> Unfortunately, this practise will have to change when markets are
> converted to Equal Access to support the McCaw-AT&T merger. McCaw is
> not permitted to be a long distance reseller, so Cellular One
> subscribers must pick an Equal Access long distance carrier. ACD long
> distance charges will be set by the PICked Equal Access carrier.

Hmmmm ...

How will this affect the Cell One/NY (00025) market where sections of
the Connecticut (00119) market and ComCast/NJ market are considered
"home" rates, even for toll calls?

Currently, CO/NY customers can roam into sections of the CT or
southern NJ systems and pay only "local" charges when calling a number
from these areas. They are also not billed toll charges for the
automatic call delivery toll component.

Will any of this change as a result of the AT&T acquisition?

Also, will redirects to voicemail (eg, if, when roaming, you don't
answer your phone and a call goes back to voicemail) be affected in
any way?  They don't work in many NACN markets, but will voicemail
redirects continue where they are currently offered?


Doug Reuben     [e-mail]/[e-mail]   (203) 499 - 5221
CID Technologies*Interpage(TM) E-Mail/Internet Paging and Fax Services

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

From: [e-mail] (CID Tech/INSG)
Subject: Re: ANI Information in Realtime
Organization: Interpage E-Mail/Telnet Gateway to Fax, Alpha and Numeric Pagers
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 10:26:19 GMT


Pat wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Even though ANI and Caller-ID are two
> separate things, the end result -- the number produced for your review --
> is as often as not the same. With this in mind, at least one carrier
> providing 800 service *does* display in realtime the ANI of the calling
> party via the Caller-ID display unit. I've forgotten which company it
> is ... someone remind me.

I know for sure that Cable & Wireless is passing ANI (not CID) to many
areas, and is doing so via Caller ID.

This is a really nice feature, yet they panic when you talk to them
about it, and deny it exists, etc.

It doesn't work from everywhere. For example, I was in LA a while
back, and it never worked from area code 909, but it worked fine from
213, 818, 310, and 714. (No, there is no Caller ID in CA, I called to
Boston and had my computer page the number back to me on my pager ...
awful hack; it would be very nice if there were Caller ID already in
CA!)

It also doesn't work to everywhere: I made a call from a payphone in
Concord, CA recently. I called to Boston, and it ID'ed fine, yet
calling from the same payphone to the saem C&W 800 number to a number
in Connecticut, I got "Out of Area". This is pretty consistent. It
seems to vary from local telco to local telco, and from LATA (or area
code?) to LATA.

Finally, it also isn't reliable: I can call from Vancouver, BC, and
usually get the ID, but about 30% of the time it just gets "Out of
Area". Some areas work more reliably than others, such as Vermont to
Boston, yet others, such as NYC to Boston are very unreliable.

> Maybe what AT&T is trying to tell you is that if you get Caller-ID
> from NYNEX you'll get the information you are seeking. Maybe ... I
> don't know. Maybe they are trying to say if you get a Caller-ID
> display unit from someone, they (AT&T) will be in a position to send
> you the information. Any other guesses on this, anyone?  PAT]

Hmmm ... I've NEVER received Caller ID info on ANY AT&T call, so
unless they are doing something different with their 800 service I
doubt it. I know the minute you mention Caller ID/ANI to Cable & Wireless,
they say "Oh, call your local telephone company about that, we don't
offer that."  (Which is foolish -- it's an excellent selling point. If
I worked for C&W I'd be actively trying to overcome whatever technical
difficulties which are preventing universal ANI->CID display and then
really go out and market the service!)


Doug Reuben     [e-mail]/[e-mail]   (203) 499 - 5221
CID Technologies*Interpage(TM) E-Mail/Internet Paging and Fax Services



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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel Winkowski)
Subject: Dial Modifiers and International Callback Service?
Organization: SHAPE Technical Centre, NL
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 11:09:00 GMT


Problems:

I subscribe to an international callback service to get lower rates
from the US to Europe. I need to fax and data connect to US numbers
vai my modem.  I dial a US number, let it ring once, hang up, get
called back and upon answering have a US dial tone.

I would like to automate this process using dialing modifiers for both
faxing and modem connections. If I do the callback part manually
including picking up the phone and then initiating the modem or fax
dial command I often time out on the callback connection (while the
fax is being prepared) since dailtone inactivity of ~20 seconds causes
my callback connection to terminate.

My timeout problem is with the callback service (if no activity takes
place once dial tone is established after ~20 seconds it disconnects
so - "Changing the S-Register S7" or other modem characteristics will
not have any affect.

I thought that some combination of "," "!", and "W" as part of the
dialing sequence might give me what I need but I have no experience
with these. I am not sure what "!" does - does it toggle the hang up
button or does it disconnect? I need to hang up after signaling (one
ring) for the US callback service to call me. I then need to answer
the phone (I can due this manually if need be), and then dial the true
number. If "!" hangs up and then reconnects to a dial tone I will not
be called back (reciever is off the hook). How do I hang up - can I
issue a +++ATH in the dial string?

Example ATDT00-1-123-456-7890, ! W 1-555-555-5555
        ^                    ^ ^ ^ ^Dial US phone number
        |Dial callback       | | | Wait for dial tone (manually answer)
                             | | Hang up (is this true?)
                             |Wait for X seconds to ring once

Does any one have experience with this? Please reply via mail. Thanks.

Configuration:

Software: Quick Link II Fax for DOS
Hardware: Viva Data/Fax Modem (computer peripherals)


Daniel Winkowski        Voice: [phone]
SHAPE Technical Center        Fax:   [phone]
P.O. Box 174            [e-mail]
2501 CD The Hague        When all else fails: 192.41.140.225
The Netherlands            [e-mail] (seldom read)

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Zeeff)
Subject: Small Business PBX/Fax Back Server Needed
Date: 18 Jan 1995 09:05:07 -0500
Organization: Branch Information Services, Ann Arbor, MI, USA


I'm looking for a PBX/Fax back/voice mail system that would do the
following:

Connect to approx 4 POTS lines for incoming calls and have various
facilities when you call in, for example:

    press 1 for a recording discussing our services
    press 2 to leave a message
    press 3 to enter your fax number for a faxback
    press 4 to ring someone's extension
    press 5 for a receptionist

The more flexible and programmable, the better.

Any ideas where to look and what I might have to pay?


Commercial Internet Advertising, Marketing and Consulting
Jon Zeeff       Branch Information Services     [e-mail]
[phone]  http://branch.com/              gopher branch.com

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 08:11:57 EST
From: [e-mail] (Navneet Patel)
Subject: Re: Call Waiting and Caller-ID Question


[e-mail] writes:

> I posted a message last week concering CALL-WAITING's CALLER ID, But
> got no responces ... so here I go again:

> I just my the lastest copy of the "HELLO DIRECT" Catalog and on page 24
> they adverise a Northern Telecom phone model# " PowerTouch 225 "

> The ad states :   CALLER ID, CALL WAITING MODULE
>       Comming in mid-1995, You'll see who's
>       on a CALL WAITING call, without inter-
>       rupting the call you're already on ...

> I never heard of any telcos offering this. The only way to achive this
> was by having an ISDN line.

> Also, they mention "ADSI" ????

> The ad states: Looking ahead to the future
> Coming in late-1995, is ADSI
> It will help you do your banking,
> pay bills, and such - by phone...

    BellSouth (Southern Bell) provides this service in Atlanta and
Savannah area NOW. Customer can see telephone number (Caller ID) or
name and number (Caller Id Deluxe) of a calling party or that of a
call waiting (Call Waiting Deluxe). If you subscribe Caller Id Deluxe
and Call Waiting Deluxe service, you will be able to see number and
name of calling party and waiting party.

ADSI:    Analog Display Services Interface.

    Customer needs to have equipment which supports ADSI interface
(like NT phone describe above) and just the POTS line (no ISDN
necessary).

    Deployment of this service in Alabama and Tennessee is
expected during 1995.


Navneet Patel   Science & Technology
BellSouth Telecommunications
[e-mail]     [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Andreas Junklewitz (DA Martin))
Subject: Looking For a CHILL Compiler
Date: 18 Jan 1995 13:12:18 GMT
Organization: RWTH Aachen
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I am looking desperately for a CHILL precompiler or compiler running
under any UNIX, LINUX, OS/2 or DOS.

I know very slow and big compilers for MVS or VMS, but this isn't what
I am looking for.

I would appreciate any clues.  Please respond by email.  I will post a
summary. Thank you in advance.


With best regards,

Andreas Junklewitz, Phone: ++49-241-806984, Telefax: ++49-241-8888186
Institute for Communication Systems and Data Processing
RWTH-Aachen (University of Technology)
Muffeter Weg 3, 52072 Aachen, Germany
E-Mail: [e-mail]        or      [e-mail]

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

From: Judith Oppenheimer <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 08:42:37 -0500
Subject: Freephone Forum vs. ITU Question


Someone (sorry don't remember who) had posted:

> This is the first I've heard of the "Freephone Forum."  I always
> thought call processing recommendations were issued by the International
> Telecommunications Union (ITU).

As explained to me, call processing recommendations are still done by
the ITU but many perceive the ITU as too slow so other agreements are
made in other forums and implemented on "bilateral agreement" basis.
The Freephone Forum is one of them.  The fourm is made up of (mostly)
marketing people from all the service providers who provide toll free
in their countries.  They discuss freephone and how to get more people
to use it, and share success stories etc.  They also, (like most
marketing groups) seem to "party" at these once a year things.

One of the things they did develop is "Plus Freephone".  That is a bilateral
agreement that if you make an international call to an other countries
800 number, (eg if you dial from London, 00 (their international
calling access) followed by 1 (the US country code), followed by 800
FLOWERS) ) the call will complete to 1-800-flowers in the US.  Also
the originating party (London) will suppress the billing to the caller
and create a billing record to charge to 1-800-flowers.  If this
agreement is in place between two countries 800 calls are possible to
the US and calling freephone numbers in other countries is possible.
If this agreement is not in place, then then (in this case, London)
would recognize 1 as USA and reject the call when it saw 800 because
this is not a valid NPA code.  (Remember, per the ITU all switches
must screen on 4 digits before routing.)  1-800 is invalid.  1-405
would route to maybe miami and 1-212 would route to NY.  1-213 (los
angeles) would probably route to NY or Maine.

The people who attend the forum are often the marketing manager or
service manager for the 800 (or freephone service) in their country.

I will address the phone pad question shortly.  (A good question - the
answer may surprise you.)

But a question asked on another list raised a good point.

Because the International Freephone numbers, and domestic freephone
numbers, will *co-exist* in the U.S., the U.S. Users Group has valid
concerns that there will be confusion among U.S. consumers.

More to come.


J. Oppenheimer, [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #43
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa20702;
          19 Jan 95 2:51 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14542; Wed, 18 Jan 95 22:23:28 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA14534; Wed, 18 Jan 95 22:23:26 CST
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 22:23:26 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #44

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 18 Jan 95 22:23:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 44

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die! (Mark Brader)
    Re: BC Tel, SaskTel, Internet (Elliot Schwartz)
    Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging? (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: Long Distance Caller ID (Glen L. Roberts)
    Re: "Dial & Save" Long Distance Service (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Re: Question on Call-Back Operators (Eric Tholome)
    Re: GSM Information Wanted (Eric Tholome)
    Re: Sonet SDH DCC Information Wanted (Daniel R. Oelke)
    Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia? (Michael Henry)
    Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System (John Lundgren)
    Re: New Alert - 911 Access (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: Small Business PBX/Fax Back Server Needed (Jon Zeeff)
    Re: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names (Ben Carter)
    Re: Where to Find Nice-Looking Phones? ([e-mail])
    Re: Wanted: Info on Fax/Modem Hookup For Motorola Lazer Cell (J Lundgren)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Mark Brader)
Subject: Re: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die!
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 00:11:12 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> Canada has 26 - 27 million people living mainly within 200 miles of
> the 49th latitude.  ....

Make that within 200 miles of the border with the contiguous US states.
That border is the 49th parallel where Raymond lives, but in the east it's
a good deal farther south.

ObTelecom:

    Two or three years ago, a large number of payphones around here
(Toronto) were replaced with the new Millennium model, which has an
LED display of the number being dialed, and accepts credit cards (in a
swiper) and $1 coins as well as the smaller denominations.  They were
introduced rapidaly enough that I thought it must mean that all pay
phones were being changed to this model, but that hasn't happened.
Anyone know what Bell's plans are for the older payphones?


Mark Brader               "It is considered a sign of great {winnitude}
[e-mail]                when your Obs are more interesting than other
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto    people's whole postings."      -- Eric Raymond

This article is in the public domain.

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

From: [e-mail] (Elliot Schwartz)
Subject: Re: BC Tel, SaskTel, Internet
Date: 19 Jan 1995 01:21:19 GMT
Organization: Massachvsetts Institvte of Technology


In article <[e-mail]>, Sarah Holland <70620.1425@
compuserve.com> wrote:

> Living as I do in a more remote area of British Columbia, where ALL
> Internet access is long-distance, I find this most frustrating. I plan
> to call BC Tel about this -- any bets as to how far I get? <G>

Probably not very far -- why should BCTel do something which won't be
profitable for them? Unlike Saskatchewan, most of the high density
areas in BC (Vancouver, Victoria, etc.) are already saturated with
Internet Service Providers. Furthermore, SaskTel has just taken over
responsibility for the Province's regional network, whereas BC*Net
operates seperately from BCTel.


elliot (a displaced Canadian)

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 18:12:15 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging?


> Anthony D'Auria <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Question: Does this floating point calculation bug affect system
>> performance? Is that why some Pentiums bottleneck? What and where
>> should a person contact to get the messed up chip replaced? Is it
>> actually worth it?

Whoops! What I meant to say, but somehow my news-posting software
"ate" it, was:

The Pentium bug affects only floating-point calculations, not overall
system performance. Whether you NEED to have it replaced depends on
what type of work you do. Spreadsheets and mathematical modeling, and
to a lesser extent CAD and design work, depend on the floating-point
processor. Network servers, word processing and databases tend NOT to
use floating-point math, so the Pentium bug doesn't affect these
applications.

IMHO, part of the implied warranty for any microprocessor with a
floating-point unit is that it should produce correct calculations
each and every time. For that reason, I would have the chip replaced
if I owned a Pentium.

Intel should be running ads in major trade publications in the next
couple of months, explaining the chip replacement procedure. If you're
comfortable opening the case, you should be able to replace it
yourself in seconds. If not, there will be service stations where you
can take your machine and have the chip swapped out, hopefully while
you wait.

Good luck!


Andrew Laurence, CNA  -->[e-mail]<--    Oakland, California, USA
Novell Certified NetWare Administrator        Pacific Standard Time (GMT-8)
Phone: [phone]       Fax: [phone]       Pager: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen L. Roberts)
Subject: Re: Long Distance Caller ID
Date: 18 Jan 1995 15:23:46 GMT
Organization: WorldWide Access - Chicago Area Internet 312-282-8605


Paul J Zawada ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I've had a couple of interesting conversations with the folks at
> Ameritech regarading the delivery of interstate Caller-ID information.
> I have a question or two regarding the availablity of the above service,
> so let me summarize and pose a question or two to the readers of TELECOM
> Digest.

> results on Caller-ID for awhile now. Lots of long distance calls are having
> their ID shown ... interestingly, even some recent calls from California
> in the 415 area code were displayed.  Of course all this is relevant to
> *where* most of your calls originate, and maybe I just lucked out but I
> would say about 90 - 95 percent of my incoming calls now show Caller-ID,
> or they show that the caller is blocking it, etc.  PAT]

It is all relevant to what long distance carrier processes your call. The
local switch will pass the Caller-ID to you, if it gets it with the call.
Wiltel is the only long distance company that has so far been identified
as providing Caller-ID from most places. So, if someone uses Wiltel Long
Distance, you'll get their number.


Glen L. Roberts, Editor, Full Disclosure
Host Full Disclosure Live (WWCR 5,065 khz - Sundays 7pm central)
email postal address to [e-mail] for catalog on privacy & surveillance.
Does 10555-1-708-356-9646 give you an "ANI" readback? With name?
Remember, fd _IS FOR_ Full Disclosure!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, your number read back the number and
name listed for the phone I called you from. Others should try it out, it
is sort of fun.  Then when I called you back with *67, your recording had
some comments on that also. Then when I called back from a number which I
knew would be 'out of area' you had nothing to say at all.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Judith Oppenheimer)
Subject: Re: "Dial & Save" Long Distance Service
Date: 18 Jan 1995 21:26:44 -0500
Organization: Interactive CallBrand(TM)


If you decide to test them, can you post your findings?  I've seen
their pitch too, wouldn't mind finding out of they're legit.


J. Oppenheimer, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Re: Question on Call-Back Operators
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 22:24:14 +0200
Organization: Private account


Pat,

You wrote:

> [...] The other thing to watch out for where callback systems are
> concerned are the *huge* number of misdialed calls (and/or telemarketer
> calls) to your 'callback number' which result in a call being made to
> you at all hours of the day and night (relative to your time of day)
> resulting in many cases in admin charges levied to your account for
> calls you did not make, to say nothing of the inconvenience of
> answering the phone at three in the morning your time to be greeted
> with callback dialtone you don't want merely because some fool in the
> USA accidentally dialed your callback number and let it ring a couple
> times before deciding he dialed in error.

I just wanted to point out that this is not always the case: I've been
using a callback service for all my personal international calls for
the past six months and I've never had any bogus call, for a good
reason: to get my callback dialtone, I dial a common number; then I
have to enter a six digit pin which tells my operator to call me (not
somebody else) back. I guess there is enough redundancy in the six
digit pin so that the probability of being called in error is very low.

Of course, I could see a drawback to this solution: if I want to store
this number in my phone, I need a phone which memory can hold 19
figures and several pauses instead of 13. Well, that is a problem, but
that's the only one I can think about. Personally, I've only stored
the access number, and I have to dial the pin myself.


Eric Tholome
23, avenue du Centre          [e-mail]
78180 Montigny le Bretonneux  phone: [phone]
                    France    fax: same number, call first!


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Another problem you did not mention is the
cost of your call to the callback center. That call has to supervise also,
you see, and that costs you some amount of money. Add that to whatever you
pay for the callback part of the connection and let me know how much less
expensive it *really* is.  Part of the gimmick that makes callback services
so inexpensive is that you usually do not have to pay for a call to the
USA. You dial your number and hang up without it answering; thus no charge
for that part of the call. Why do you think AT&T was so out of joint on
this for quite awhile?  Hey, if people think they can pay for a supervised
call to the USA (and enter a password, eliminating random ringbacks) and
still get by cheaper than via straight calling through their PTT, whoever
it is, then let me know ... I may start a callback service of my own. I
have objected to it thus far because I don't want automated callbacks with
all the trouble those have, and I cannot pencil in a bottom line I could
live with if I offered a supervised (both senses of the word, telco charge
for inbound call to set it up and a clerk to oversee it) system.  Maybe if
someone really cuts a deal with AT&T -- a very good deal -- they will be
able to accept inbound collect/800 from the distant PTT, establish a call-
back to the distant country and make an outgoing USA call ... and still
make money at it while being competitive. I could not figure out how.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Re: GSM Information Wanted
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 22:24:11 +0200


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Vincent
Erwig) wrote:

> Can anybody give me some information on where and how I can find
> information about GSM?  I'm interested in the development of the GSM
> network, and the specific features that GSM / GSM telephone has, what
> new technologies have been used, and the advantages / disadvantages
> compared to other cellular phone systems.

> I need this information for a study project.

I'm not sure which level of detail you need, but I would suggest the French
book (written in English) from Michel Mouly and Marie-Bernadette Pautet.
It is published by the authors themselves (phone: [phone]
18/fax: [phone]). It is already rather detailed and quite
expensive (get your Library to buy it!).

There is also a shorter version of this book (probably the ideal for
you) which is 160 page long and also published by the authors (it is
called "An introduction to GSM"). I think this version was done
especially for Nortel Matra Cellular (a joint venture from Northern
Telecom and Matra Communication which manufactures GSM systems) since
it has their name on it. I'm not sure whether you can get it or not.
Give it a try!


Eric Tholome
23, avenue du Centre          [e-mail]
78180 Montigny le Bretonneux  phone: [phone]
                    France    fax: same number, call first!

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel R. Oelke)
Subject: Re: Sonet SDH DCC Information Wanted
Date: 18 Jan 1995 19:59:20 GMT
Organization: Alcatel Network Systems Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article [e-mail], [e-mail] writes:

> In Sonet/SDH multiplexer and section overhead, there are the D1..D12
> bytes, reserved for "network management and supervision". Can anyone
> shed some light on the data transmission protocol which governs these
> DCC channels?  Is this (already?) standardized? If so which standard?

Both the Line and Section overhead data bytes -- or the DCC channels
are used with an OSI 7-layer stack.  There are Bellcore and ISO
standards galore to define this.

Of course, this isn't to say that all vendors use a 7-layer OSI stack
across these channels ... wouldn't like to make life simple you know. :-)
There is also the question of the 7-layer stack implementation, and all
of the user-definable parameters that might make two implementations
such that they won't talk to each other.

Disclaimer: I am a software developer on an OC48 product which does
have a full 7-layer stack and it does interoperate with other Alcatel
products.  I have no idea if it works with other vendors products.  Of
course none of this is Alcatel's official position.


Dan Oelke           Alcatel Network Systems
[e-mail]      Richardson, TX
http://spirit.aud.alcatel.com:8081/~droelke/

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Henry)
Subject: Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia?
Date: 18 Jan 1995 18:30:29 GMT
Organization: UC Berkeley


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dave
Rand) says:

> Their rates are very good.  *HOWEVER*

> Having read the fine print on the contract -- it claims that the
> contract term is for service only, and does not guarantee rates -- I
> added a notation on my contract that the Canada rates were to be as
> quoted.  This was a *very* good idea.

> Then the bill came. The calls are rated at 0.37/minute.  Customer
> service says "too bad".  My salesman says "oops -- the rates went up
> *the day after* we signed up, too bad.".  I said, "PUC, fraud,
> bait-and-switch, contracted amount!"  Long discussions followed.  The
> salesman wasn't allowed to change the contract, according to LDDS --
> their problem, not mine, I pointed out to them.  As of now, we are
> still fighting over credits, but they have agreed to give me the
> contracted rate, for the contracted period (one year).

Absolutely!  Carriers may not like it, but the big four WILL sign
contracts that limit rate increases to less than 4% per year.  It's
always a good idea to include rate stablization clauses that let you
bail with no penalty if the carrier increases rates.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System
Date: 18 Jan 1995 18:30:24 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Paul Hebert ([e-mail]) wrote:

> My company is doing research for selection of a voice mail system. We
> have presentations scheduled with Octel and Centigram. Would anyone
> have some technical or user related insight into these systems? We
> have an NEC 2400 switch. Any interface issues we should be aware of?

We purchased a system from Phoneby which was bought out by VMX.  The
system works, but has less features than Pacx Bells's system.  We
tried to upgrade it a year or so ago, but they wanted an arm and a leg
to put a larger hard disk in it.  The hard disk is a regular Maxtor
MFM disk drive, something like 170 MB.  They wanted thousands to
upgrade it.  The only thing special is that it's formatted in a
proprietary format.

Finally, what we did is have messages fall into the bit bucket in two
weeks if they're not erased.


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] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: New Alert - 911 Access
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 17:28:22 GMT


[e-mail] (Ben Burch) writes:

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

>> Recently I saw someone who appeared to be trying to steal a car, so,
>> being a good citizen, I ducked around the corner out of sight and
>> dialed 911 on my handheld cellular phone. Though I was standing on a
>> street three blocks from San Francisco City Hall, I was connected to
>> the California Highway Patrol. I waited several minutes for an operator
>> to come on the line, and finally gave up.

>> Good thing no one's life or safety was in danger.

> This bad result is because you did the wrong thing!  How many time do
> people have to be told to dial the cellular operator, and say;

> "Operator, this is an emergency, please connect me with the <location>
> police department emergency line."

> This takes a few seconds longer, but reaching help was the job here, not
> airtime minimization.

Well, I assume that airtime to 0 is free, as is airtime to 911, so I
wasn't concerned about the cost. However, my cellular carrier advises
me to call 911 in an emergency.


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] (Jon Zeeff)
Subject: Re: Small Business PBX/Fax Back Server Needed
Date: 18 Jan 1995 22:18:01 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept.


Music on hold would also be nice.  And ISDN instead of the POTS lines
would be ok too.

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin P. Carter)
Subject: Re: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 07:33:45 GMT


[TELECOM Digest Editor Noted:

>   ...  why don't you ask the telco serving the local calling
> area for a copy of their directory.  Most telcos will send it free of
> charge, or they may get some small handling/postage fee.  ...

I recently tried ordering some phone books from various cities.  I
found that the price depended a lot on where I wanted the phone books
sent.  One book would cost over $50 if sent to one house, but only a
few dollars if sent to another house about 1.5 miles away.


Ben Carter  internet address: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ophidian59)
Subject: Re: Where to Find Nice-Looking Phones?
Date: 18 Jan 1995 12:35:36 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


If you want an inexpensive high quailty phone, try buy a plain
telephone at the parts counter of your local Greybar, a telephony
supply house.

While on the subject of phones, I'd really like to find one of those
old yet very mod (e.g. 60's) British phones with the dial and the
hook-switch on the bottom. Anyone?

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Wanted: Info on Fax/Modem Hookup For Motorola Lazer Cell Phone
Date: 18 Jan 1995 17:32:14 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Mike Chapman ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I got a Motorola Lazer pocket cell phone hoping to use it with my
> notebook, but when I asked how much the device to do this costs, I was
> very shocked to find that it was almost $300!!

> Is this price ridiculous?  Is there a cheaper place to get the
> Motorola device?  Are there any other options?

Shocked?  Just walk down the aisle at your local computer store.
Anything that fits into a laptop, such as PCMCIA or proprietary buss
device, modem, NIC, whatever.  They all cost a couple hundred more
than the AT buss devices of the same type.  It's just because they are
smaller, they are newer, they are supplied in lower volume, and they
require the most up-to-date technology.  TANSTAAFL.

Motorola?  Anything with that name on it costs more.


John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
Rancho Santiago Community College District
17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
[e-mail]\[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #44
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22752;
          19 Jan 95 5:16 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA17196; Thu, 19 Jan 95 00:30:15 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA17189; Thu, 19 Jan 95 00:30:12 CST
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 00:30:12 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #45

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 18 Jan 95 00:29:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 45

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (John Lundgren)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (John David Galt)
    Re: Legal Problem due to modified radio ([e-mail])
    Re: New Area Codes Working From Toronto (Carl Moore)
    Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia? (Jack Pestaner)
    Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California (Michael Henry)
    Re: Horrible Earthquake in Japan (Ramesh Pillutla)
    Re: Horrible Earthquake in Japan (Jeremy Schertzinger)
    Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1? (Daniel R. Oelke)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: 18 Jan 1995 15:48:53 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Catching up with several recent comments in this thread:

I'm dealing with contractors that have cellular phones, the little
ones in their briefcases and toolboxes.  The older cell phones mounted
in the car are becoming less and less common nowadays.  I've noticed
that most of the conversations are on the go, from the conference room
or job site to the guy's car -- on foot!  This would, of course, still
be in the same cell.  And a lot of their conversations are short
because it costs money, so those blabbermouths that are on the phone
for long periods are rare.  So I don't believe that much conversation
is missed when someone monitors a cellular channel.

PB Emerton ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Tony Pelliccio ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> Actually the AOR-2500 comes through with the cell band intact. Or at
>> least it did until the FCC attempted to clamp down on it. The nice
>> thing is the AOR-2500 is considered a communications receiver and not
>> a scanner and last I heard the whole thing was still tied up in
>> hearings.

>> Of course if you really want to follow a cell call just get a DDI and
>> hook it up to your PC. The interesting thing is that the company that
>> sells the DDI will only release software with ESN capability to law
>> enforcement people. Makes you wonder doesn't it?

> What company is it?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Please see the referenced remarks of Tony
> Pelliccio above: 'FCC tried to clamp down ... still tied up in court'.
> A word to the wise: you don't want to mess with those people *too much*.
> A little maybe, but not too much.

> Like some people here who have disagreed with me over the past couple
> days on this, I seriously doubt the FCC is going to stage any massive
> actions to get cellular phone equipped scanners out of circulation, etc.

The reality is that the CB shops used to sell the GRE downconverters
that would convert the cellular band to freqs 400 MHz lower, and they
were about $70 or so.  THey're not very sophisticated and don't cost
much.  They work.  So even if you have a non-cellular scanner, it can
still pick up the cellular band.  But there is talk among some hams
that you can take an old UHF tuner and use it for downconverting, too.
But it would have to be the old 83 channel kind.  And then it might
not be stable enough.  But it might be something to experiment with.

> But what I can tell you is they can be a nasty bunch of buggers when
> they want to be. In the past they have gone into pirate radio stations
> and started pulling wires and fuses out of the control board while the
> station was on the air ... kicked the door down and walked in. They
> have spent hours driving around in a van through some neighborhood to
> triangulate or get a fix on some signal when they wanted the guy. Like
> all government agencies, they have loads of money and an infinite amount
> of time and resources to spend when they decide they will get their way.

I wish you would tell this th Steve Dunifer of FRB over on rec.radio.pirate.
ng.  He thinks he's going to break the FCC's back with micropower stations
on the air.  The FCC is already pursuing legal stuff against him, from what
I've read.

> As Tony points out, they are still fighting in court over the
> AOR-2500.  When the FCC gets a vendetta of some kind started, for
> whatever reason, they will do a number on all concerned.  Bureaucrats
> will be bureaucrats, and there is nothing worse than a bureaucrat
> scorned.  :)

There was some talk that the FCC wouldn't get so involved, but hand
over the prosecution to the Dept of Justice.

> Selective enforcement of their own code (the Communications Act) at times?
> Sure ... all government agencies selectively enforce the law ... so sue
> them.  But if a time comes for whatever reason that you are a big target
> the FCC would like to get under control and instead of just raiding your
> premises with a United States Marshall in tow costing you all kinds of
> grief and money -- the way another government agency did to Steve Jackson;
> remember him? -- if instead they contact your attorney and tell him to get
> you on the straight and narrow 'so we do not have to take this further' then
> you know what you do?  First you Praise Jesus ... then you think over very
> carefully how far you want to push it.      PAT]

 From the way Dunifer talks, that will never happen in his case.  He
sounds utterly righteous, and he also has an attorney.

There is a _whole_ lot of diffwerence between S Jackson Games, who never did
a thing to provoke the actions taken against him, and Dunifer, who keeps
acting like Kevorkian in that he's constantly challenging the laws.

David Moon ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Bill Sohl contributed a FAQ about scanners, and part of Pat's response
> was:

>> Illegal modification (i.e. modification by an unlicensed person) voids
>> your FCC authority to operate the radio. Furthermore, no *licensed*
>> person is going to make illegal modifications to a radio and risk having
>> such handiwork be traced back to his bench, at the possible risk of his
>> loss of his license.

> I'm sure this is true for radio transmitters, but for receivers? Are
> you saying I need FCC authority to operate a receiver? What kind of
> license are you talking about?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You don't need a printed license. Your
> 'authority' is granted by the FCC by default. The FCC claims absolute
> control over all radio devices and the airwaves, etc.  As discussed
> in an earlier message today, they claim in section 15.21 of their
> code that they can revoke your (default) authority.  Transmitter,
> receiver, cordless phone, baby monitor, whatever.   PAT]

So far I've been reading a lot and not getting any info from anyone
about what or if this has had anything decided in the courts.  The FCC
claiming absolute authority over the airwaves is, to, me, a lot like
the police claiming absolute authority over drug sales.  Hmmph.

I was reading some state supreme court rulings somewhere here, and
they are interesting.  The state Environmental Protection Admin
getting ruled against for overstepping their authority, or cities
getting told that they don't have the authority to do certain things.
Then I've seen what happened to our own college district when they
laid off all of our gardeners and hired a contractor to do the job.
Not a very bright move.  They got told by the courts that they can lay
off the gardeners if their positions have been eliminated, but they
just can't do it to save money, and then turn around and hire a
contractor to do the job.  They violated the law.  The lawns weren't
eliminated!  So they had to reinstate the gardeners with back pay and
benefits.  And this isn't the only dumb thing that they have done.  I
won't even get into Orange County's bankruptcy, another debacle.

Until I've seen some court ruling on this, I will treat it as just what
it is: opinions.

Bob Keller ([e-mail]) wrote:

> In TELECOM Digest V15 #32, Bill Sohl <[e-mail]> wrote:

>> I have no problem with this statement and I'll state unequivocally
>> that scanners and/or other types of radio receivers are not (if
>> designed properly) included in the catagory "intentional or
>> unintential radiator" and they are not, therefore, licensed.

> I did not realize this was such a heated matter or I never would have
> stuck my nose into it ... but, now that I'm here <G> ...

> A scanner most definitely is a "radiator".  If nothing else, the micro-
> processor circuitry that makes it scan constitutes an unintentional
> radiator within the meaning of the rules.

I have difficulty accepting this statement.  There are several
reasons.  The scanners are usually wide band receivers, capable of
receiving large parts of the spectrum.  Many of the scanners are
hand-held and operate off batteries.  The microprocessors in both
kinds are extremely low power ones because of at least a couple
reasons that I can think of.  One is to conserve pattery power.  They
are usually CMOS, and draw only microamps of current from the supply.
Another reason they draw little power is that they don't have to have
much calculating capability or MIPS because they do a simple job.
They also draw very little power because the less power they draw, the
less RF energy they radiate, and that means the less they might
interfere with their own receiver.  Since the receiver is very
sensitive, the RF radiated from the microprocessor must be very low
since it's only inches away from the receiver.

Another thing I get from the part 15 rules as far as intentional
radiation is concerned is that the FCC is basically saying that they
don't want anything to do with them.  In other words, in the
instructions where it says you must not interfere and you must
tolerate interference, they are saying that no one has any legal
recourse if they are getting interference.  The only recourse that the
user has is to either turn the interference off or move the
interference source or device receiving the interference farther apart
from each other.

The last paragraph about building or modifying has an explanation
that's more to my liking.

> I am _not_ saying that home-built devices and/or user-modified devices
> are therefore automatically unlawful.  In building or modifying a
> device, however, the user is responsible for keeping the technical
> parameters of the device within the radiation limits prescribed by
> Part 15 and, if those limits are exceeded, the user no-longer enjoys
> the right conferred by Part 15 to use the device without a license.
> With the possible exception of cellular scanners (which is an issue
> contaminated by political/industry pressures and other laws having
> nothing to do with the regulatory purposes of Part 15), I don't think
> there is any intent on the part of the government to prevent someone
> from building or modifying non-transmitter devices (on a
> non-commercial basis) in ways that do not cause interference, nor do I
> think there is any governmental interest in expending resources
> worrying it.


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]
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 01:39:41 PST


Maybe I'm misinterpreting this, but somewhere in the FCC regs that
were posted, it IS now illegal to manufacture a radio that receives
cellular frequencies.  I'll bet anything you like that building your
own, or modifying a scanner that didn't get cellular before you worked
on it, is "manufacturing" in the eyes of the law.

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 9:05:06 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio


Maybe someone already noticed this, but the officer involved has
provided sworn testimony indicating that he violated federal law.  He
used the radio out-of-band on a channel for which it is not licensed.
A copy of the court transcript might interest the FCC's Chicago Field
Engineer.

The FCC takes a very dim view of modified ham gear on the commercial
bands.  If the modified radio you own was capable of out of band
operation as the result of a receive, CAP or MARS mod, they probably
won't care.  If, however, specific modification was required to permit
out of band transmitting, you may be inviting scrutiny that you would
prefer to avoid.

They don't care a whit if you listen to the police on on your ham rig,
but if you intentionally transmit on frequencies you should not they
*WILL* make your life miserable.  They will do it more swiftly and
with greater impunity than the locals.


Just my opinion,

[e-mail]       (Rich Osman)         SwRI didn't say it, I did.
[phone] (w)                   [phone] (h;v/msg/fax)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thank you for that comparison between
local and federal law enforcement and justice systems. Indeed, most
state and local law enforcement agencies are almost like the Three
Stooges by comparison to the federal mechanism.

You've heard the joke I guess about the Catholic priest, the Jewish
rabbi, and assorted, sundry other preachers who die and go to heaven:
at the front desk they see one of these 'take a number and wait your
turn' dispensers.  They take their numbers and sit down in the waiting
room reading old copies of {Time Magazine} and whatever. They sit
there a long time while the angel in charge seems to ignore them all
as he works on his paperwork.  Suddenly an old lady walking with a
cane comes wobbling in and up to the counter. Sez the angel, "Oh, Mrs.
Brown ... we've all been waiting for you!  Come right in, we have your
accomodations ready for you now!" She wobbles right on past and into
the inner sanctum, where angels get their wings, and all that.

The various Men of God all see this, and become quite indignant that
they have been kept waiting and Mrs. Brown gets to walk right in. They
go up to the front desk and ask what's the idea?  Why did she go right
in and we are kept waiting all this time?

"Well," says the angel, "you see, Mrs. Brown was a federal probation/parole
officer for forty years in New York. In a single day's time, she scared
more hell out of people by threatening to unsatisfactorily terminate their
federal probation than you guys did with a lifetime of preaching!"   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 21:28:50 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: New Area Codes Working From Toronto


So you were able to get a Seattle number from 360 directory assistance.
Maybe 360-555-1212 is at least temporarily being routed identically to
206-555-1212.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Pestaner)
Subject: Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia?
Date: 19 Jan 1995 04:29:52 GMT
Organization: Oregon Grad. Inst. Computer Science and Eng., Beaverton


Stay away from LDDS if the ability to receive calls (inbound 800) is
essential to your business.  One of our customers, a major telemarketing
company, switched to LDDS.  Almost constantly, regions of the US could
not get through on the 800 number, and actually got disconnect messages
in some cases.

You see, LDDS is really an umbrella corporation that has taken over
many small regional LD companies.  As you can imagine, all the
networks are different, and SS7 is just a pipe dream in that
environment.  They really don't have a network like AT&T, MCI, and
Sprint.

If you just need cheap outgoing LD, and don't care if it works all the
time, LDDS is your company.  If you have inbound 800, stick with the
big three!!!


Good Luck,

Jack

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Henry)
Subject: Re: Inter-LATA Rates in California
Date: 18 Jan 1995 18:32:32 GMT
Organization: UC Berkeley


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Eric Paulak) says:

> Linc Madison asked:

>> Have the IXC's reduced their rates on calls between LATAs in
                               ^^^^^^^
>> California to be more in line with both the new intra-LATA and
>> interstate rates?

> The answers a resounding "yes." In fact, AT&T, MCI and Sprint have all
> undercut Pac Bell's rates.

I haven't seen any new tariffs or price changes from the carriers for
calls between LATA's.


Michael Henry  Analyst Telecommunications,
University of California, Berkeley

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

From: [e-mail] (Ramesh Pillutla)
Subject: Re: Horrible Earthquake in Japan
Date: 18 Jan 1995 14:14:08 GMT
Organization: Alcatel Network Systems Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Hi,

I am interested in any press reports/info regarding the state of the
terrestrial lines and cellular phone system in Kobe, Japan following
the earthquake. I have heard from some of my Japanese friends that the
cellular phone system is not fully operational but, roaming is out and
a few cells are still operational. Currently, all private phone users
have been asked not to use their phones and all available cellular
facilities have been commandeered by the emergency services.  Land
lines are completely out of the question with all major CO's out due
to lack of power. If anybody has any information, please post here.


Ramesh

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The last I heard today, the death toll
is now about 3000. Hospitals are turning people away because they have
no resources or supplies left for treatment. They have given up looking
for bodies. In many instances, people are simply sitting in front of
their (former) homes, protecting the piles of rubble which remain. As
one might expect, people are showing how *good* they can be with one
another. Several women who have given birth in the past couple days who
were unable to obtain service in a hospital have simply been assisted
by their neighbors when the time came ... won't they have a story to
tell that child in a few years!  As you point out, telecommunications
services still in operation have been seized by the government for
emergency use.

I am reminded of the scene here in Chicago the day of the great fire,
in October, 1871: people kept trudging along northward, assuming that
the fire would stop eventually. The fire jumped the river and proceeded
to consume much of the north side. By mid-afternoon that Monday, about
a hundred thousand people were milling around in Lincoln Park, homeless
with what possessions they could salvage sitting on the ground in front
of them. As the flames came closer and the smoke so dense they could
not breath, most of them simply walked out into Lake Michigan into
water up to their shoulders and stood there, facing away from the
fire, with their possessions held out of the water above their head.
In an editorial in the {Chicago Tribune}, October 9, 1871 entitled
"Chicago Will Rise Again" the writer told of a nine year old girl who
stood neck-deep in the lake with her one beloved possession, a parakeet
in a cage held in the air out of the water. The bird succombed to the
dense smoke and burning embers which were flying through the air, and
the little girl wept quietly as the bird lay dead on the bottom of its cage.

According to the {Tribune} that day (it had not published the day
before, having been burned out of its own quarters on Dearborn Street)
"Mayor Mason early Monday called an emergency meeting of the City Council
to instruct the aldermen in their duties. They were informed that the
city had seized the First Congregational Church to be used as the seat
of government pending rebuilding of City Hall, as well as seizing the
wires and telegraph facilities of the Western Union Company in Chicago
so that communications could continue unabated. Magistrates were charged
with the duty of 'taking control of railroad trains passing through the
city, seizing any food provisions contained therein for distribution to
our citizens'. But most important, the aldermen were instructed to
take their horses, ride out to the park and circulate among the citizens
to lessen their fears. 'Let the people know the government has been
re-instated, that they have not been abandoned and that everything we
can do will be done' ..."

And the {Tribune} account concluded by noting that later that night it
had begun to rain; not heavily but just a steady drizzle, enough to
finally extinquish what remained of the fire which had begun two days
before. "A hundred thousand of our citizens stayed there in Lincoln
Park all night; with no shelter they stood there in the rain with nothing
to eat for their supper, none the less with gratitude that their lives
and the lives of their families had been spared."

There are surely many people in Japan today feeling the same gratitude
despite the terrible losses of the past three days.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeremy Schertzinger)
Subject: Re: Horrible Eartquake in Japan
Organization: Eskimo North (206) For-Ever
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 01:14:57 GMT


I have collected about 25 images of the Kobe earthquake from the net
for viewing.  Many of them are from NHK Television.  All files are in
GIF or JPEG format.  Check them out at ftp.eskimo.com in /jeremyps/quake .

Please use these instead of the Japanese servers.  They are already
overloaded.


Thanks.

Jeremy Schertzinger            [e-mail]  --  [e-mail]
      http://www.eskimo.com/~jeremyps/           Happy New Year!

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel R. Oelke)
Subject: Re: How Can I Encrypt a T-1?
Date: 18 Jan 1995 20:08:19 GMT
Organization: Alcatel Network Systems Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Previously in this thread someone mentioned that Rockwell (through a
division that had previously been Collins Radio) had a T1 scrambler or
encrypter of some sort.  Well, that company is now owned by Alcatel
Network Systems (my employer).  You can call 1-800-Alcatel for your
local sales person.  Sorry, I work in the Sonet OC-48 area and don't
have any idea if we even have such a product anymore.


Dan Oelke            Alcatel Network Systems
[e-mail]       Richardson, TX
http://spirit.aud.alcatel.com:8081/~droelke/

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #45
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08847;
          19 Jan 95 15:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20864; Thu, 19 Jan 95 07:03:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20855; Thu, 19 Jan 95 07:03:02 CST
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 07:03:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #46

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 Jan 95 07:03:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 46

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles (Greg Straughn)
    Re: What is a T1 Line? (Wally Ritchie)
    Re: Ancient Party Lines (Scott Falke)
    Re: New Area Codes Working From Toronto (Dave Leibold)
    Re: ISDN Over Wireless (John Lundgren)
    Re: Cattle Call (John Rice)
    International Freephone Numbers and European Phone Dials (J. Oppenheimer)
    Re: Looking For a CHILL Compiler (Per Bothner)
    Mobile Comms Questionnaire (Simon J. Wallace)
    NEC 2000IVS Wanted: Highend (Out-of-Band) Voice Mail Integration (Neubert)
    Missed Listing - and Lawyers, Not Lawnmowers (Carl Moore)
    A Call From Guess Where (David Farber via Stanton McCandlish)
    Always Busy 800 Number? ([e-mail])
    ISDN in Florida (Evon Bent)
    Voice File Formats ([e-mail])
    Using U.S. Modem in Israel (Jeremie Kass)
    Can Caller ID Information Be Faked? (Chris Telesca)
    Telephone Vs. Cable TV as Data Carriers ([e-mail])
    Looking for 900-MHz Cordless Hands Free Headset (Martin Soques)
    Areas Covered by Phone Book? (Benjamin P. Carter)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (g straughn)
Subject: Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 20:55:01 -0800
Organization: BEST Internet [phone]


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark
Fletcher) wrote:

> I have been told that we can apply to the local municipality for a
> utility franchise, and then place our own cables on existing poles. At
> our current cost of $18,000.00 annually for special circuits, this
> possibility is very attractive to us.

> If anyone has information about the process, or could point me to any
> pertinant legal documents on the subject, I would be very greatful.

I believe in California you can rent "attachments" to utility poles
for something like $1.00 per pole per month -- perhaps your state
utilities have a similar product requirement.


Good luck,

Greg Straughn

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: What is a T1 Line?
Date: 19 Jan 1995 05:46:16 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Butch lcroan/
 .nameBalcroan Lilli) writes:

[pseudo technical babble deleted]

> ... but there is more to consider here. The " MU LAW " is not a linear
> scale it is more of a log function with more steps closer to the lower
> levels where the ear is more senstive. I really can't believe 2 DB;
> come on Jeff, 3 db is half power *and also the least amount the ear can
> detect*.

1. The impact on SQR (Signal to Quantitzation Noise Power Ratio) of bit
robbing is:

    10 log (6/(6+3r))

where r is the number of robbed bits. This ranges from -1.76db for a
single robbed bit to -6.02db if all 6 bits are robbed in the progress
of the digital signal between the two end terminals.

2. The primary effect of uLaw is to extend the dynamic range of the
channel. The SQR ratio for uLaw is not all that different from other
forms of PCM, particularly for typical high speed modem modulations
which have more or less uniform signal power. SQR's for PCM depend on
the type of PCM and the properties of the signals. For Modem signals
SQR's are on the order of 36db. However, THE EFFECT OF BIT ROBBING ON
THE SQR IS INDEPENDANT OF THE SQR ITSELF.

3. Robbing (eliminating) the low order bit has the effect of doubling
the average voltage quantization error which is the same as
quadrupling the quantization noise power. Robbing the LSB of any PCM
scheme will result in a 6db decrease in the SQR. If you only rob one
bit in six, you quandruple the noise power only 1/6th of the time
resulting in the equation above.

4. Jitter in digital transimission signals has nothing to do with the
Signal to Noise Ratio of the PCM stream unless a frame slip results.
Jitter at the codec would be of concern but in all equipment of
reasonable design the frequency components of such jitter are very low
and of no consequence to high speed modems (or speech).

5. The impact of bit robbing is not of alarming concern compared to
the other types of noise and errors involved with high speed modems.
By far, the worst transmission impairment involves continuous frame
slips on digital facilities due to unsynchronized clocks. While these
impairments cause only a minor (almost unnoticable) impact on voice,
they are disastrous to high speed modems because they cause a phase
shift that virtually guarantees an error and a loss of the absolute
carrier phase required to demodulate the signal. The effects persist
for many symbols until the transmitting carrier's phase can be
reacquired.


Wally Ritchie   Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 21:40:07 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Scott Falke)
Subject: Re: Ancient Party Lines
Organization: CSU Stanislaus


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

> In re your story about party-line entertainment:
> X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 15, Issue 11, Message 2 of 14

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The way you describe it was one way
> of doing the ringing; there were various methods.  What happened on
> your system if you wanted to call someone on your party line?

For 8-party, one dialed 119xy, where x was your line position (1-8)
and y was the called party (1-8).  The ring generator would alternate
between the two.  When the ring quit, you picked up the handset, cause
they had too.  If the ring didn't quit, you picked up the handset
anyway.  They weren't home.  If you shared the same relative polarity
with the called party (the gas tubes and tip/ting to gnd) you'd hear
one long (i.e., yours) and two shorts (theirs) in repetition.  THAT
was real cool.  Hey, a farming town, you know ...


Scott Falke    Turlock CA

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 00:40:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Re: New Area Codes Working From Toronto


Carl Moore <[e-mail]> wrote:

> So you were able to get a Seattle number from 360 directory assistance.
> Maybe 360-555-1212 is at least temporarily being routed identically to
> 206-555-1212.

Makes sense, considering 206 directory assistance centre would be set
up for the areas under 360 ... just a matter of keeping the area codes
straight.

Bell Canada is able to route phone calls to various operators across a
region for directory assistance purposes. In theory, an operator in
Thunder Bay (807) could wind up fielding information inquiries for
numbers in other Bell Canada area codes.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: ISDN Over Wireless
Date: 18 Jan 1995 17:47:16 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Hersh Jeff ([e-mail]) wrote:

> John Lundgren ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> Find out if the phone company has a newer 5ESS switch.

> To be fair to other companies, it should be noted that Northern
> Telecom, Siemens, and other switch vendors also offer ISDN switches
> that can act as central offices.

Here in Pac Bell land, the only one that I've ever heard installed in
the last few years have been 5ESS.  I didn't know what other switches
had the ISDN capability.  Sorry if I gave the impression that the 5ESS
was the only one that could do it, I didn't mean to.


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] (John Rice)
Subject: Re: Cattle Call
Date: 18 Jan 95 22:33:49 CST
Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division


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

> A local magazine (I think it was "Twin Cities Business") quoted an
> item from an investment newsletter saying that some dairy farmers now
> use pagers to call their cows.

> One person here who's family raises cattle asked whether it wouldn't
> be cheaper to keep a feeding a dog that herds the cattle instead of
> paying monthly charges and air time.

I can't feed my dog for $18/month, which is what I can get pager service
(tone only) for, around here. One page a day is well under most limits
for maximum pages/month.


John Rice        K9IJ
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A couple of questions for whoever knows
the answers ... is it hard to train a cow to respond to your call? Is
there some sort of protective covering for the pager to keep it out
of the rain and water, etc?  A cow sees no problem with standing out
in the field in the rain all day, or laying down on a muddy field to
rest. In the heat of the summer a herd of cows in a pasture with a
pond or lake will simply wander out into the pond and stand in water
up to their neck to stay cool and keep the flies away. How does the
pager withstand all this abuse?    PAT]

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

From: Judith Oppenheimer <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 21:35:35 -0500
Subject: International Freephone Numbers and European Phone Dials


European phone dials are being standardized and will include letters
that correlate with the U.S. version.

This took the ITU two years to decide, and is suppose to take effect
next year.


Judith
J. Oppenheimer, [e-mail]

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

From: Per Bothner <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 20:21:51 -0800
Subject: Re: Looking For a CHILL Compiler


> I am looking desperately for a CHILL precompiler or compiler running
> under any UNIX, LINUX, OS/2 or DOS.

A pre-release of the GNU Chill compiler is available by anonymous ftp
at ftp.cygnus.com, directory pub, file chill-1.4.tar.gz.

This is a dialect of Chill that Cygnus did for one customer.  It is
not complete Z200 (any version), but we have tried to follow the 1988
standard, with support for some features of the 1984 standard.  The
GNU debugger (gdb) already has (some) support for Chill.

GNU Chill is structured similarly as GNU C and C++ (gcc and g++): I.e.
a "back-end" that is language-independent, and a language-specific
"front-end."  Cygnus (that is me) and the Free Software Foundation are
working on cleaning up and merging in Chill-specific parts of the
back-end.  One that is done, GNU Chill will be officially released by
the FSF in conjunction with future gcc releases.

If you want GNU Chill to implement some feature that it doesn't yet,
you should contact me.  Cygnus can do the work for a fee, or you can
do it yourself (since it is free software).  If your changes are clean
and generally useful, I will merge them in (but you should talk with
me before doing anything substantial).

[Cygnus provides commercial support or negotiated (paid-for) enhancements
to some GNU and other "free" software ("sourceware" as our marketing
department calls it), including GNU Chill, C, and C++.]


Per Bothner    Cygnus Support     [e-mail]

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

From: Simon J Wallace <[e-mail]>
Subject: Mobile Comms Questionnaire
Organization: Edinburgh University
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 11:32:58 GMT


Hello there.

I wonder if you could help me with a questionnaire I am doing for my
Masters Degree.  I would appreciate some opinions on DATA communications
over mobile phones. It should only take a couple of minutes.

Could you please post the replies to me at [e-mail]. I shall
post my findings as soon as I have collated them.  Thanks in advance.


Simon #:-)

1) Do you have a Digital (D), Analog (A) or Dual Mode (DM) phone ?

2) Do you at present use your mobile phone to transmit data ?

3) Do you at any time in the future plan to use a mobile phone to transmit data ?
4) If so what factors would influence your decision
     i) ease of use
     ii) cost of equipment
     iii) cost of calls
     iv) reliability
     v) Other please state :

5) What be your MAIN use of mobile data comms?


Thanks again,

Simon   #8-)

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

From: [e-mail] (Douglas Neubert)
Subject: NEC 2000IVS Wanted: Highend (Out-of-Band) Voice Mail Integration
Date: 18 Jan 1995 12:47:54 GMT
Organization: Netcom


If anyone has a line on a highend (like the one they demo the switch
with at the shows) voice mail integration package for the NEC 2000IVS.
Will you please E-mail me. I am currently using Reparte DOS ver. 6.5;
their newest release (3 weeks old as of 01/18/95) setup up for the
1400 but the timing is way off and many calls get dropped if I am on
my phone and you call me (on my extension) from the outside world. NEC
boys have been o/s three day trying to fix/patch this up but are
having no success. We installed an attendant card in the switch in the
card last night so today we will see if this will be the fix. Please
if any one has any suggestions good or bad let me know.


Thanks,

Doug Neubert   Telsource Corp.   Cleveland

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 17:43:02 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Missed Listing - And Lawyers, Not Lawnmowers


My latest Bell Atlantic phone bill in Maryland has a little insert
which says:

FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE ... (here, the reader turns the insert over)

 ... Keep these listings we missed in your new Bell Atlantic telephone
book.

Our goal is to give you an error-free phone book.  We'll keep trying!

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

That reminds me, some law office many years ago wound up in the
Wilmington (Del.) yellow pages all right ... under lawnmowers.

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

From: [e-mail] (Stanton McCandlish)
Subject: A Call From Guess Where
Date: 18 Jan 1995 17:39:40 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


[Passed along FYI for a little tittilation for the readers.   PAT]

   Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 11:48:37 -0500
   From: [e-mail] (David Farber)
   Subject: a call from guess where

I got a call from DC from someone in the inside I know well who said:

1. The LD carriers have hired Howard Maker to lobby for them on the
"The planned Communications Act Re-write of the New(t) Congress";

2. That there are meetings Thursday and Friday on the hill between
staffers and industrial representatives -- not hearings;

3. The staffers have been told to make sure no plans, notes, etc. get to
the public;

4. This is on the fast track.

The person said that the "ravings" were aimed right and would remove
many of the restrictions and controls on the carriers.

As I said before -- stanger things have happened. Sounds like they may
be happening again.

And so much for a more open government!


Dave

                     ----------------
--
<A HREF="http://www.eff.org/~mech/">          Stanton McCandlish
</A><HR><A HREF="mailto:[e-mail]">        [e-mail]
</A><P><A HREF="http://www.eff.org/">         Electronic Frontier Foundation
</A><P><A HREF="http://www.eff.org/1.html">   Online Services Mgr.   </A>


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Do keep us posted. It sounds like some
changes may be in store for us again.   PAT]

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

From: Matt <[e-mail]>
Subject: Always Busy 800 Number?
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 01:07:30 GMT


What's an 800 number that is always busy? (and don't say Gateway 2000
Tech Support). Something that is guaranteed always busy.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: (Suspicious, squinting eyes) Why do you want
to know?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Evon Bent)
Subject: ISDN in Florida
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 14:19:41 GMT
Organization: Cybergate Inc.


Hey there,

    I was wondering if anyone has heard anything about Southern
Bell implementing ISDN in Florida? I've been considering it to get a
link to the net and a business line as well. I was also wondering if
anyone could give me an idea of the rates I might get charged. If no
one knows or isn't sure how about a number I might call to get this
info?  Barring that I was wondering if anyone was currently using ISDN
in Florida and what their experiences with it were.


TIA,

Evon   ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (TELEPHONETICS)
Subject: Voice File Formats
Date: 18 Jan 1995 19:56:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Can anyone give me information on the following formats for sound files:

VBase, Dialogic, Rhetorex and New Voice


Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeremie Kass)
Subject: Using U.S. Modem in Israel
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 16:00:09 EST


I am interested in using the modem I use in the U.S. while I am in
Israel.  Is there any technical and/or legal problem in doing this?
Also, what kind of telephone jacks are used there?  This will be
connected to a residential line, so will it be the same RJ-11 jack as
here?


Thanks,

Jeremie Kass * IS/IT Consultant * JPK Computer Consulting
           Huntington Woods, Michigan, U.S.A.
Internet : [e-mail] * [e-mail]
           [e-mail]  * [e-mail]
           [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Telesca)
Subject: Can Caller ID Information Be Faked?
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 21:25:15 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.


I recently got Caller-ID and *69 Call Return service beause a friend
and I have been getting prank and other strange phone calls over the
last few months.  Generally it works great, but several times I've
seen a few numbers displayed numerous times and used *69 to call the
number back, only to find that the people I've called back say they
never called me at all (sometimes these are elderly people, BTW).

So I was wondering if it possible to somehow fool Caller ID/Call Return
features into displaying and/or calling back the wrong/incorrect number?
Any ideas, thoughts, experiences?


Thanks!

Chris Telesca          Associate Photographer          [phone] x7489
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It cannot be spoofed where the transmission
coming from the central office is concerned. What we have discussed here
in the past is the possibility of the caller sending bogus information to
the Caller-ID box *after* the phone is answered, but in the first second
or so before the called party is likely to have examined the data very
carefully. You answer, and the caller shoves some other stuff to your
box at the instant the connection is made.

Two things you might want to do: Look at the incoming information very
carefully *before* answering; then as you answer the phone watch to see
if it changes almost immediatly to something else. In that case, flip
back through the entries -- if your display unit holds several entries,
you probably can page forward or backward through them to check the
time of the call, etc -- and look at the one received *just before* the
one presently in the display window .. or maybe the second one before
the present one. See if one of those matches what you recall seeing on
the display before you answered.

A second thing is try keeping a record of these calls by the number on
display and the number before it in the memory, etc. See if there is any
pattern or repetition. They may be feeding you false data, but if so
you should (by backing up one or two entries) see the same old number
on several occassions. Or, maybe they are not sending false data and
in fact the number you see displayed is where the call came from. The
person(s) who answer may deny making the calls, but if you see the same
entries time and again then its almost assured *someone* in that household
is making the calls, even if it isn't Grandma or Grandpa when they take
your return call.

Another possibility is the caller is putting his phone on forwarding to
some unsuspecting person, then calling you from some other line via the
forwarding link. He sets up call forwarding, dials your number and even
while it is ringing tears down the forwarding link. In many places your
Caller-ID box is going to show the number of the party who forwarded the
call to you, even if they are unwitting accomplices to the whole thing.
If you are using call return as provided by telco, then any spoofing of
your individual Caller-ID box should be only coincidental since regardless
of whatever data he funnelled over to you, the central office is not
likely decieved. Use *69 rather than any local 'repeat dial' or 'dial
number shown in window of ID unit' to return the call.

If he is using illicit call forwarding to get through to you then you
might try calling the number actually on your display, provided it is
not bogus -- see above -- and *nicely* asking the people there if *they*
happen to have Caller-ID also. If they do, maybe they would be so kind
to look at their unit and tell you who the last caller was shown to
them. If it is not someone they know, then chances are likely that is
your person.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telephone Vs. Cable TV as Data Carriers
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 18:11:09 GMT
Organization: UNB CSD


    I am currently collecting information, in order to make a
comparison between Telephone Companies vs. the cable TV companies as
Data Carriers.  I would appreciate it if anyone who knew of material
pertaining to this subject and where the material would is availble,
ie. a FTP site which may contain reports on similar subjects, could
either post or e-mail their findings.  It would be a great help!


Thanks for you time!

Jeff    [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 16:13:27 CST
From: [e-mail] (Martin Soques)
Subject: Looking For 900-MHz Cordless Handsfree Headset


Greetings!  Subject line says all; I'm looking for a 900-MHz digital
phone with a cordless headset rather than a cordless handset.  That
way, I don't have to crink my neck to hold a handset to have both
hands free.  A friend told me that he purchased one from a Sony
Industrial catalog in his previous job.  Any pointers to such a beast
would be appreciated.


Martin P. Soques   [e-mail]    Austin, Texas

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin P. Carter)
Subject: Areas Covered by Phone Book?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 06:27:00 GMT


A typical phone book with both white and yellow pages has a
map with a large white area surrounding a smaller yellow area.
What is this map trying to tell me?

Are all the listed numbers in the white area supposed to be in white
pages of the phone book?  They don't seem to be.

Is the phone book sent to all subscribers in the yellow area?  If not,
what does the yellow area stand for?  It clearly has little or nothing
to do with the locations of businesses that advertise in the yellow
pages.

The yellow areas of different phone books (ie, directories) fit
together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle.  The GTE phone books where I
live (near LA) show the parts of the puzzle covering their turf, but
the PacBell phone books don't.  Also, GTE has "neighborhood"
directories that invade PacBell's turf.  A "neighborhood" directory is
typically much thinner than a real directory.  Why?  What is going on?
I have a pile of phone books, and I seldom know which one to turn to
for a particular purpose.


Ben Carter    internet address: [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #46
*****************************

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa25822;
          21 Jan 95 2:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18476; Fri, 20 Jan 95 21:54:50 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18468; Fri, 20 Jan 95 21:54:48 CST
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 95 21:54:48 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: telecom
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #47


TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 Jan 95 08:01:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 47

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    CO/Boston Added to NACN (Doug Reuben)
    Canadian CIC Codes: (Chris Farrar)
    Questions About WAN Compression For Data Networks (Peter Granic)
    Re: DQDB and SMDS (Kristoff Bonne)
    ANSI Terminal Communications (David O. Laney)
    Internet Software Wanted (L.C. Clower)
    Re: T1BBS Gone? (Mark Fraser)
    Re: BC Tel, SaskTel, Internet (Mark Fraser)
    Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs? (Liron Lightwood)
    Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert) (Colum Mylod)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Ben Wright)
    Summary: Looking For a CHILL Compiler (Andreas Junklewitz)
    Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK (Carl Moore)
    Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (Alan Boritz)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Doug Reuben)
Subject: CO/Boston Added to NACN
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 03:37:13 EST


I just noticed that CO/Boston was added to the NACN today. Although a
bit late, it is a welcome improvement!

Prior to CO/Boston's (00007) addition to the NACN, there was a large
coverage "gap" for automatic call delivery from Rhode Island (which
Metro Mobile for some reason never hooked up with NY) all the way up
to southern New Hampshire. (Central/Northern Seacoast NH as well as
Vanguard Cellular in Maine were added last year.) CO/Boston also
"shares" a seemingly bizare system with Atlantic Cellular (CO/Vermont)
in the Lakes region of central New Hampshire, and it is possible that
on BOSTON-owned towers NACN customers will get automatic call delivery
there as well.

I tried my Boston account out, and all features work very nicely, even
to a limited extent redirects. In summary:

-Redirects: If your call is delivered to a visited NACN market from
Boston, redirects, or treatment of a call after no-answer to either
voicemail or some other no-answer-transfer number WILL work, although
to a very limited extent. Calls will NOT go back to voicemail, but
will no-answer-transfer (NAT) to other numbers.

 From only a few cursory tests, it looks like what they are doing is
allowing NAT to calls within the same local service area. That is, as
long as the call would NOT have to go over an IXC if it were placed by
the roamer in the visited market, then it will be allowed. Thus, for
example, a Boston customer who roams in CO/NY's (00025) system will
NOT be allowed to have redirects go back to his/her voicemail in
Boston, nor will redirects be allowed to a NAT# in Washington, DC.
However, NAT will be allowed to a number within the NY Metro LATA (but
not, it seems, the local "toll-free" area.)

Thus, if the NAT condition in effect for the Boston subscriber is
while the subscriber is visiting the CO/NY system is:

*71#555-1212 (the #555-1212 instructs the Boston switch to NAT to
voicemail, which is problematic at times, especially on other Motorola
switches linked to Boston [non-NACN]), the result is a "xx-20" switch
recording informing the caller that the roamer/visitor is unavailable,
generated by the visited (NY) switch.

*71-305-555-1212, OR *71-1-305-555-1212 results in an ERRONEOUS
"xx-44" recording, which is roughly "As a roamer, you must first dial
a 1 when calling this number. Please call 611 and reference message
[xx]-44."  Quite confusing to landline callers indeed!

*71-212-555-1212 or *71-800-555-1212: NAT works properly.

This seems to make sense: If the DOJ forbids SWBell/Boston to offer
redirects over an IXC (or from what I am told since SWBell is
potentially too lazy to get a waiver for VM purposes :( ), then as
long as the calls are NOT carried via an IXC, NAT can be offered
without a waiver.

The ANI from sample local redirects in the CO/NY system show a
516/Long Island number, and I suspect that these are coming from the
Woodbury Switch. Hence, as long as the calls can be processed by CO/NY
and/or do not cross LATA boundries (?), NAT will work.

Although it would be nice if NAT would work back to VM in Boston, the
ability to have some sort of local/800 redirect is a CERTAINLY better
than nothing.

-Call Forwarding: It's nice to see that Boston was not forced to
adhere to the McCaw feature codes, and that they are allowed to retain
their own codes for their own customers. *71 (NAT for Boston), *72
(Call Forwarding for Boston), *713 (NAT Cancel), *723 (CF Cancel), *73
(Global NAT/CF/Busy Transfer Cancel) all work fine, and receive a
prompt confirmation tone.

Moreover, CO/Boston customers who use NAT, *713, or *73 do NOT have to
lose voicemail as they do in Connecticut or other non-NACN markets
(I'm am no longer sure of CT's "non-NACN" status - they are doing
weird things with roaming from what I hear. I need to test a few
things out next time I am there to be sure...). If a CO/Boston
customer who roams on the NACN chooses to set NAT away from voicemail
to another destination (such as a "local" number as in the above
example), and subsequently wishes to re-establish NAT to VM in Boston,
entering *71#555-1212 WILL work, ie, it will set up the correct NAT
coding in the Boston switch.  Although as noted above a redirect will
not work back to Boston VM, if the subscriber chose to activate the Do
Not Disturb (*35) feature to turn off call delivery to the visited
market, an incoming call would be properly treated in Boston and sent
to voicemail.

The ability activate/deactivate voicemail remotely and establish
different NAT settings from anywhere within the NACN is a useful
feature, one which is seemingly not widely available on the B-side
auto call delivery network.

-Do Not Disturb: *350/*35 works perfectly. It's odd that Boston chose
to go with these codes, they use the more standard Motorola codes
*28/*29 for their auto call delivery in VT, Mass, and CT. Perhaps they
want to distinguish between the NACN and New England call delivery?
Why? Boston makes call-delivery difficult enough already with their
"call delivery home airtime sometimes" charges, why add an extra layer
of confusion?

-Call Waiting: Works perfectly, as do unanswered Call-Waiting redirects.

-Three-Way: Again, works perfectly- it is more "elegant" to the roamer
on the Ericsson than it is back at home on the Motorola!

Bugs:

1. As noted before, the "xx-44" codes seem to be in error. Perhaps
they are using the 1+ mechanism to determine if a redirect should
occur or not and if not for some reason the switch coughs up the 44
recording?

2. If a visiting roamer has no conditional forwarding (NAT, BT) set,
the call will ring in the visited market for an exceptionally long
period of time (over 1 minute!), which is unusual and wastes airtime
and handheld battery power. After about a minute or longer, the
calling party does not get a recording, but rather a fast busy.

3. Sort of a bug: CO/Boston customers must (unfairly, IMHO) pay
AIRTIME for call delivery, even though it is obvious to anyone that no
airtime is being used if the subscriber isn't even in Boston system.
(And the old excuse that "oh, you utilize a lot of trunk lines with
call delivery" is nonsense -- the visiting system's roaming charges are
enough to discourage flagrant overuse of CO/Boston's trunks).
CO/Boston always used to maintain that customers could avoid these
charges by having callers reach them by using the local roam ports.

However, traditionally, when a system is added to the NACN, its
customers are no longer accessible via the roam ports of another NACN
member's system, and thus, if the same holds true for Boston, there is
now NO WAY to receive calls without paying home airtime in Boston.

Since the entire idea behind the NACN is nearly seamless service, it
would be in SWBell's best interests to rid itself of this inane
money-grabbing policy. However, if they are too stingy to let it go,
then the roam ports need to be "open" for Boston subscribers who wish
to avoid these charges.

Overall, however, a very nice and smooth addition to the NACN, with
only a few minor problems to resolve.


Doug Reuben              [e-mail]              (203) 499 - 5221
Interpage Network Services -- E-Mail/Telnet to Alpha or Numeric Pagers & Fax

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Canadian CIC Codes
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 1995 21:26:54 GMT
Organization: CSRNet(Voice 1705-949-9275 Data 1705-942-5370)


To Pat and all those looking for the Canadian 10XXX codes, here is the
latest list I have, issued by Industry Canada (formerly Dept. of
Communications), and the address to write to for updates:

Stentor says that responsibility for 10xxx and 950-xxxx numbers has
been trasnferred from Stentor to Industry Canada, effective March 1,
1994. The new address for the Canadian Nmmbering Administrator (CNA)
is:

  Christiane Chasle
  Canadian Numbering Administrator (CNA)
  Industry Canada
  300 Slater Street, 18th Floor
  Ottawa, Ontario
  K1A 0C8
  Telephone [phone]

Stentor also sent me a list of the codes, as they were before
responsibility for numbering was assigned to Industry Canada.  CIC
stands for Carrier Identification Code, I think.

The table is confusing. A code of 869 identified as 3D FG B&D is a
three digit code used for both Feature Group B (950-xxxx) and Feature
Group D (10xxx), so it would expand to 950-0869 and 10869. A CIC
identified as 4D FGB expands to 950 followed by the four digits.

 Assigned Carrier       CIC Code        Feature Group
 Unitel                 869*            3D FG B&D
    *869 is U.S. CIC
 Unitel                 686             3D FG B&D
 Unitel                 858             3D FG B&D
 AGT                    424             3D FGD
 BC Tel                 323             3D FGD
 Bell Ontario           363             3D FGD
 Bell Quebec            484 (see note)  3D FGD
 Note: Bell Quebec CIC reclaimed 1993-11
 Island Tel, PEI        422             3D FGD
 Manitoba Tel System    783             3D FGD
 Maritime Tel & Tel     434             3D FGD
 NB Tel                 448             3D FGD
 Newfoundland Tel       445             3D FGD
 Sask Tel               242             3D FGD
 EdTel                  324             3D FGD
 Sprint Canada          5348            4D FGB
 Sprint Canada          348             3D FGD
 ACC                    1234            4D FGB
 ACC                    234             3D FGB
 Fonorola               507             3D FGD
 Fonorola               5507            4D FGB
 Westel                 5978            4D FGB
 Westel                 978             3D FGD
 STN                    773             3D FGD
 ATCI                   235             3D FGD
 TelRoute               318             3D FGD

I assume that Bell Quebec will be using the Bell Ontario code of 363.
After all, both Bell Quebec and Bell Ontario are simply divisions of
Bell Canada, not separate corporations.

A more up-to-date list of these codes may be available from Industry
Canada, at the above address.

Note: Not all carriers accept casual calling, and not all carriers are
available from each province.


Chris
  The Collosus Soo Resource Network - CSRNet - Gated InterNet Newsgroups
       40,000 + Files Online - 6 Lines - 1-705-942-5370 (16.8 USR DS)
            File Request CSRNET or FILES from 1:222/21 or 11:11/0
  Satellite Downlink - 5-10 Megs of New Files Daily 1-705-949-7224 (28.8)

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Granic)
Subject: Questions About WAN Compression For Data Networks
Date: 19 Jan 1995 08:09:29 -0500
Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-4151  Voice: 416-363-8676


I would appreciate it if someone could fill me in on how WAN
compression is developing as they see it.  Currently, we are only
using V.FAST Motorolla modems with synchronous data compression in
order to get throughputs of up to 30Kbs on a data-conditioned phone
line.  I was more interested in the use of compression in order to
improve leased line performance, and thus leased line costs.  By the
way, the V.Fast modems are used to give us some decent bandwidth to
"hick town" sites, where we can't get centrex or ISDN.

Now regarding compression on regular leased circuits:

As far as I can tell, the option is a no-brainer.  Most companies
advertise compression of 2.5-4 times, so that say 56K circuits can
give an effective bandwidth of 130-200Kbs.  So, for example, Cisco is
advertising that they will be bundling this capability with their
routers in order to help reduce customer's costs.

Question: Is most of the compression which bridge and router
manufactures use for WAN access implemented in software or hardware?

Question: Is most of this technology developed in-house using standard
compression algorithms?  Do they license compression
algorithms/technologies from other companies?

Question: Assuming compression is being done with a third party
vendor, i.e.  hypothetically, let's say a Wellfleet router is used in
combination with say some Motorolla equipment (I imagine they have it
for leased lines) to increase WAN bandwidth. Is adding the extra
vendor a major headache in terms of operating the network, as opposed
to bundling the components into one vendor's products?


Thanks,

Peter Granic

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 09:41:21 +0000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: DQDB AND SMDS


Greetings, Fred.

>> Can anybody explain to me what the difference and/or connection is
>> between DQDB (Distributed-Queue dual-bus) and SMDS (Switched
>> Multi-Megabit Data Service).

> Interesting topic, since the two are easily confused.

> DQDB is a "Metropolitan Area Network" defined by IEEE 802.6.  It
> provides for a cell-based (48-byte payload, similar to ATM) data
> transfer, shared media with arbitration (telco speeds, T1/E1/T3/E3/
> SONET/SDH as intended PMDs), and a novel combination of MAC services.

Right!

(BTW: How many bit/s are T1/E1/T3/E3. etc.?)

> SMDS is a connectionless packet-switched public network service
> developed by Bellcore.  It uses E.164 (ISDN/telephone numbers) for
> addresses, allows long (9KB?) packets, etc.

Sounds a lot like a OSI-variant of the IP Internet. (?)

> When SMDS was being invented, DQDB was hot, so Bellcore specified that
> the data link layer of SMDS would be the DQDB protocol.  This is "SIP
> layer 2" and part of "SIP layer 3".  Thus it is possible to implement
> SMDS using DQDB multiport bridges.  This is done in some places.  In
> effect, SMDS is a service that DQDB delivers using a subset of its
> capabilities.

Seames to be the situation here in Belgium.

> In American practice, most users do not accept DQDB's odd cell-based
> datalink, so SMDS now usually uses the "DXI" format, which maps SIP3
> packets into HDLC frames.  Some DQDB vestiges (packet header, trailer)
> remain but it's really just a packet service now.

I am more interested in the situation in Europe.

Anybody any info on MAN networks in Europe. (As far as I know, there
is -at least- a MAN in stockholm and one somewhere in the UK).

Technology? Number of users? Pricing? Interconnection?

Talking of interconnection: I've read some the 'grand plan' is to
build a number of high-speeds interconnection pockets (mainly using
DQDB, ...) and the interconnect them all using ATM-links.

Are there already such interconnections? Does there exists an
international numbering-sceme for all these networks?

For the record, this is the situation in Belgium:

BelgaCom (up to 1998 Belgium's sole operator) operates a MAN in two
cities: Brussels and Antwerp.  They use DQDB and operate at 140 Mbit/s
internally. The MANs are interconnected at 34 Mbit/s.  Connections to
the MAN are possible at speeds of 2 and 34 Mbit/s, using 802.3
ethernet, 802.5 token ring, 802.6 DQDB and G.703. (whatever that may
be ;-)) SMDS is supported.

Apart from that, there is a ATM-based network in the province of
Antwerp (called 'MANAP'), operated by the {city|province} of Antwerp.

Brussels also houses a switch of the (well known) pan-European ATM
pilot network. (of which I have no further information neither ;-)).


Cheerio!

Kristoff Bonne, BelgaCom IS/TeLaNet           netwerk planning en - beheer
(C=BE;A=RTT;P=RTTIPC;S=Bonne;G=Kristoff)      fax         :  [phone]
[e-mail]             Voice mail  :  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (David O. Laney)
Subject: ANSI Terminal Communications
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 13:12:32 GMT
Organization: Free-Net Erlangen Nuernberg, Germany


Hi Netters,

I am interested in getting the ANSI Terminal Standards (i.e. escape
sequences) to use to drive a communications package. I would like to
get the full set of sequences of which ansi.sys in the DOS world is
only a subset of.  If you know how to get a hold of the standards or
Ansi people. Please drop me a line at [e-mail].

Thanking you in advace.


From: David O. Laney         Internet: [e-mail]
Voice: [phone]     Fax: [phone]

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

From: L.C. Clower <[e-mail]>
Subject: Internet Software Wanted
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 02:09:29 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Somebody please drop me an email re: software packages to access
Internet. I have local access to Sprintnet but what do I need now?

Have PC.


Thanks,

L. C. Clower [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fraser)
Subject: Re: T1BBS Gone?
Date: 19 Jan 1995 07:32:22 GMT
Organization: Wimsey Information Services


I've answered my own question.  ftp ftp.t1.org ; telnet t1bbs.t1.org.
New phone numbers in Washington, DC. The site moved from California.
That explains why my problem.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fraser)
Subject: Re: BC Tel, SaskTel, Internet
Date: 19 Jan 1995 07:39:22 GMT
Organization: Wimsey Information Services


I shouldn't be so irreverent, but I interpret BCTel's response to mean
"Someone already has control of the urban centers at 1.60 an hour,
we're getting 9.00 or more an hour from the smaller places now, why
should we reduce it to the three bucks or so that Sask is charging
 ..."  I bet they don't say THAT when you call.  Earlier information
 -- New Brunswick.  NBTel went from free to 10.00 an hour last year,
so everyone went away.  Last I heard, only a few came back when they
reduced it back to five bucks.

And then we have Brent Sauder of the Advanced Systems Institute
[sorry, Brent ....] who was also quoted in the Sun as rejecting the
concept of "put it in place and they will find a use for it".  Set the
movement back ten years.  And the telcos are telling us that Rogers and
Shaw are arrogant.

Time for the revolt, folks ...


/Mark

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

From: Liron Lightwood <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs?
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 19:12:20 +1100


Regarding the question of people always having to dial an area code if
cellular phone numbers were moved to their own prefix.  This does not
have to be the case.

Here in Australia, we have the best of both worlds.  Our cellular
phones have their own area code like prefixes, e.g. 018, 015, 041.
However, when making a local call from a cellular phone, you only have
to dial the six or seven digit number, no area code required.

For example, if you're in Melbourne (03), to dial [phone], you
would dial 123 4567.  If you were in Sydney (02) and you wanted to
dial [phone] you would dial 123 4567.

To dial another cellular phone from a cellular phone, you would have
to dial the whole number, including the prefix.

Perhaps this sort of system could be implemented in the US, thus
solving the problems which the wireless CO's are concerned about.

The only problem is areacode splits.  Suppose you were near the
213/310 boundary.  How would the cellular phone base station know
which side you were on?  What about the customer?


Liron (Ronny) Lightwood - [e-mail]   <=== NEW ADDRESS
                   Insane Public Access, Melbourne Australia


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Unless I am misunderstanding something,
we do dial calls now as you suggest. If a cellular phone is in area 708
(that is, *based* in 708, or using that as its 'home') then we need to
merely dial the seven digit number. It does not matter where the phone
actually happens to be in at the moment; the phone could be in New York
for all anyone cares. If 'follow me roaming' is turned on, we still just
dial the seven digits if in the same 'area'.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Colum Mylod)
Subject: Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert)
Date: 19 Jan 1995 09:05:01 GMT
Organization: Oracle Corporation. Redwood Shores, CA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


[e-mail] wrote:

> Why would any European customer wish numbers like 800 THE CARD, unless
> they expect most of their traffic from the US?  [...]
> In Europe letters are *not* used.  And when they were used assignment
> was not identical to the US assignment.  See the telecom archives for
> an article were I gave some European assignments.

Ah but Dik, British Telecom intends to reintroduce letters in phone
numbers (they've been on various phone units for a long while --
imports mainly).  Even in non-English Europe you'll see them back if
for no other reason than introducing variety in freephone numbers.
Currently a lot of European (monopoly) telcos issue patterned numbers
like <code> 123456 or 876 876 etc. Having letters ups the 'saleable"
freephone number combinations.

According to a brief glimpse I got at uk.telecom (is this available
via listserv anyone?), BT will use the same letters-numbers pattern as
the Bell one but with Z added to the 9 key and Q on 0 (I think, going
from memory). The original British pattern had letter-O on number-0
(THAT's sensible IMHO).

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

From: [e-mail] (Ben Wright)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Date: 19 Jan 1995 12:16:42 GMT
Organization: Microplex Pty Ltd


Australia has three GSM networks, Telecom, Optus and Vodafone.

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

From: [e-mail] (Andreas Junklewitz)
Subject: Summary: Looking For a CHILL Compiler
Date: 19 Jan 1995 13:44:14 GMT
Organization: RWTH Aachen
Reply-To: [e-mail]


The solution for my problem seems to by the pre-release of the GNU
Chill compiler. It is available by anonymous ftp at ftp.cygnus.com:
pub/chill-1.4.tar.gz.

Thank you very much for your answers:

         Per Bothner <[e-mail]>
         Mike Stump  <[e-mail]>


With best regards,

Andreas Junklewitz, Phone: ++49-241-806984, Telefax: ++49-241-8888186
Institute for Communication Systems and Data Processing
RWTH-Aachen (University of Technology)
Muffeter Weg 3, 52072 Aachen, Germany
E-Mail: [e-mail]        or      [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 23:05:51 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: NANP 800 Numbers From the UK


Drat, I forgot to ask (or notice?) what happens when you dial that
North American 800-MY-ANI-IS from the UK.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Two or three people reporting on this said
MY-ANI-IS reported they were calling from something like 702-000-5555.
Someone else mentioned their belief that calls from Europe to 800 numbers
are being sent to somewhere in Nevada where they are then in turn being
sent out to the actual numbers, thus the 702 part of the ANI.   PAT]

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

Subject: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 07:42:46 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (Bill Garfield) writes:

> While the writer is correct in his statement that Amateur or Ham radio
> equipment is not 'type-accepted', equipment which -lawfully- operates
> on commercial frequencies (police frequencies) and is capable of
> TRANSMITTING thereon, _must be_ type accepted, approved and certified
> for such use.  The modifications therefore would constitute an equipment
> technical violation.

No, Bill, they wouldn't.  The transmitter wasn't operated on those
frequencies, therefore there was no "technical violation."

> Although the act of 'tampering' with non type-accepted equipment is
> allowable, the moment that equipment radiates energy on frequencies
> where type acceptance _is_ a requirement, then the modified equipment
> is in violation and as "property" it becomes contraband.

But the equipment described wasn't operated on non-amateur frequencies,
therefore it was never "in violation."

> While FCC regulations deal mainly with use and not possession, the
> writer may still be on shaky ground.  I certainly wouldn't want the
> local constabulary _aware_ that I possessed transmitting equipment
> capable of operating on their lawfully assigned frequencies.

Not shaky by any means, just not wise. <g>

> But the obvious question which remains unanswered is -why- was the
> person's room searched in the first place?  "Reasonable suspicion" is
> sufficient grounds in most jurisdictions, but suspicion of what?

Suspicion of ACTUALLY causing harmful interference doesn't seem to be
an issue, since it doesn't seem to have been raised.  It would appear
that the sole purpose of confiscating the radio was because it MIGHT
be used to transmit on local government frequencies.  There's a big
difference between MIGHT and DID.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, this is something the original
> writer did not explain to us, and as you suggest, it seems like a very
> important part of this whole mystery. If their 'reasonable suspicion'
> had to do with improper or inappropriate transmissions on the radio,
> then the defenses discussed to date may go topsy-turvy in court.

Not exactly.  I would expect that it would be just the opposite.  If the
officers were looking for a pirate transmitter that *caused* (in the past
tense) interference with their communications, they were CLEARLY outside of
their jurisdiction.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #47
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa13651;
          20 Jan 95 0:56 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19407; Thu, 19 Jan 95 20:17:04 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19400; Thu, 19 Jan 95 20:17:00 CST
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 20:17:00 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #48

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 Jan 95 20:17:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 48

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Dial Modifiers and International Callback Service? (Chuck Poole)
    Re: Areas Covered by Phone Book? ([e-mail])
    Re: BC Tel, SaskTel, Internet (Tim Curry)
    Re: PC-Based Voice Mail and AMIS (David Campbell)
    Re: GSM SIM Implementation (Eric Tholome)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Marcus Lee)
    Re: Voice File Formats (Les Reeves)
    Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs? (Phil Ritter)
    Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System (Al Niven)
    Re: Sonet SDH DCC Information Wanted (Jim Burkit)
    Re: Always Busy 800 Number? (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia? (Kyle Sloan)
    Re: FCC PCS Auction Information (Bob Keller)
    Re: Cattle Call (Andrew C. Green)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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] (Chuck Poole)
Subject: Re: Dial Modifiers and International Callback Service?
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 20:12:11
Organization: Voiceware Systems, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Daniel
Winkowski) writes:

> I subscribe to an international callback service to get lower rates
> from the US to Europe. I need to fax and data connect to US numbers
> vai my modem.  I dial a US number, let it ring once, hang up, get
> called back and upon answering have a US dial tone.

> My timeout problem is with the callback service (if no activity takes
> place once dial tone is established after ~20 seconds it disconnects
> so - "Changing the S-Register S7" or other modem characteristics will
> not have any affect.

Most callback companies have come up with a more simplistic soloution
to your problem.  The solution involves playing a dial tone recording
(400-440hz) after the callback has been answered and thus "fooling"
the modem.  This feature was origionally invented so that PBX/Hotel
users could make use of callback services.  In a Hotel application,
the callback system plays "Please connect me with room 1234."  You
want this message to play a dialtone upon connect.

The sequence of events would be something like this:

1.  Initiate Callback (manually)
2.  Prepare your modem to dial as if you were dialing a direct number.
3.  When the callback starts ringing your modem line, command your modem to go
offhook and dial (ATDT XXXXXXX, etc.)
4.  You modem will go offhook, hear the dialtone being played from the
callback provider, and be fooled into dialing the number.

Always make sure that ATS0=0, so your modem won't try and answer the phone
automatically.


Best Regards,

Chuck Poole   Voiceware Systems, Inc.
Manufacturers of Custom T1/E1 switching systems.  Including Debit Card,
Calling Card, 900 systems, and Protocol converters and routers.
407-655-1770 X14.

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

From: [e-mail] (BUBEYE!)
Subject: Re: Areas Covered by Phone Book?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 01:07:25 GMT


[e-mail] (Benjamin P. Carter) writes:

> A typical phone book with both white and yellow pages has a
> map with a large white area surrounding a smaller yellow area.
> What is this map trying to tell me?

If you read the caption, it says "Directory delivery area" or
"Directory Coverage Area."  In other words, the yellow area represents
the geographical area which the directory (white pages) covers.  This
is also the area where the directory is distributed for free to
telephone subscribers.  Also, every business in the yellow area is
entitled to a free straight-line listing in the Yellow Pages, although
many pay a premium for a larger listing or a display ad, and some
decline any listing in the Yellow Pages at all.

> Are all the listed numbers in the white area supposed to be in white
> pages of the phone book?  They don't seem to be.

No, The white (surrounding) area is just for reference so you can see
where the area being covered is located by reference to surrounding
communities, etc.

> Is the phone book sent to all subscribers in the yellow area?

Yes.

> what does the yellow area stand for?  It clearly has little or nothing
> to do with the locations of businesses that advertise in the yellow
> pages.

Every business telephone subscriber in the yellow area is entitled to
a free "straight-line" listing in the Yellow Pages.  Some businesses
run larger listings or even display ads instead, others opt out of
having any listing.  But any business, regardless of their location,
may purchase space in the Yellow Pages.  For example, some of my
businesses purchase Yellow Page space in directories nationwide even
though the business being advertised is in Seattle.

> GTE has "neighborhood" directories that invade PacBell's turf.

Some Bell Companies, like US West, are beginning to publish books for
distribution in independent areas, like GTE's, too.  Anyone who has
tried to deal with GTE directory sales people (or even find out how to
get a hold of them) finds this welcome news indeed!  Frequently,
though, "neighborhood" directories are published by independent
publishing companies who aren't tied to phone companies.

> A "neighborhood" directory is typically much thinner than a real
> directory.  Why?

Because they will print only paid listings and most businesses feel
that since they already have a listing in the "real" book, either for
free or that they've paid for, and that book is already universally
distributed, why bother?

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim Curry)
Subject: Re: BC Tel, SaskTel, Internet
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 20:30:35
Organization: NBTel


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

> -- New Brunswick.  NBTel went from free to 10.00 an hour last year,
> so everyone went away.  Last I heard, only a few came back when they
> reduced it back to five bucks.

Hi -- Perhaps I could update Mark's information on NBNet service in New
Brunswick.  Although it was preceded by an un-priced ("free") market
trial, commercial service was introduced at $9.60 per hour early last
year.  Prices were decreased about mid-year to their current levels,
which are:

 $6.00 per hour from 8AM to 6PM
 $4.80 per hour from 6PM to 11PM
 $3.00 per hour from 11PM to 8AM

Service is available via local seven-digit call from every location in New
Brunswick, at 28.8 Kpbs.  Other services are also available.

Our customers have not gone away, quite the contrary.  We're very pleased
with the growth rates.  Thanks for the chance to comment; hope this
helps.


Tim Curry   NBTel
506 658-7100, FAX [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Campbell)
Subject: Re: PC-Based Voice Mail and AMIS
Organization: CamTek Micro Systems, Inc., Vancouver Washington USA.
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 22:31:28 GMT


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

> I am researching a business opportunity that will require extensive
> use of the AMIS-Analog networkng protocol to send voice mail messages
> from system (Octel) to a different PC-based voice mail system.

> Any recommendations (or warnings) regarding PC based voice mail vendors?

Investigate CallWare Technologies NLM for voice and data integration
on LANS.  It should do what you may want to do. Their phone number is
801-496-9922.


Dave Campbell

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Re: GSM SIM Implementation
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 21:42:53 +0200


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Harri Kinnunen) wrote:

> Most of the hand-held GSM phones use a "punched-out" section of the
> Smartcard, being about 1cmx2cm in size. The punch-out dimensions are
> also standard, but I don't know if they are included in ISO-7816.

And this totally ruins one of the nice purposes of the SIM: being able
to have several phones (for instance, one nice vehicle mounted phone,
and a hand held terminal) and still using them with one SIM only. If
two of your phones use different types of SIM, you're out of luck!
I've been told that some companies were now selling adapters, but the
convenience of all this has yet to be seen.

Luckily, it seems that manufacturers have realized this and they now
offer small hand-held terminals that will take normal size SIM cards.
But of course, these models can't be really small, limited as they are
by the size of the card. Would could have guessed that credit cards
would finally happen to be too big? :-)


Eric Tholome
23, avenue du Centre          [e-mail]
78180 Montigny le Bretonneux  phone: [phone]
                    France    fax: same number, call first!

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

From: [e-mail] (Marcus Lee)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Date: 20 Jan 1995 00:34:34 GMT
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland


[e-mail] (Robert Lindh) writes:

> Australia    Optus
>              Vodafon

That's spelled Vodafone.  You also missed the largest carrier in
Australia, Telecom/Telstra.

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

From: [e-mail] (Les Reeves)
Subject: Re: Voice File Formats
Date: 19 Jan 1995 13:07:44 -0800
Organization: CR Labs


TELEPHONETICS ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Can anyone give me information on the following formats for sound files:

> VBase, Dialogic, Rhetorex and New Voice

Dialogic uses 4 bit ADPCM at 6 kHz based on an OKI chip.  That is what
the .VOX files are, although newer /D series can do mu-law at 64 kbps.
They are headerless, so just because you find a file with .VOX as the
extension does not prove it is Dialogic.

Rhetorex uses ADPCM, but the format is not disclosed.  It seems to be
something along the line of ITU G.721, or perhaps a bit better.  They
claim better S/N at lower sample rates than Dialogic, and their boards
were designed around more powerful DSP hardware.  My guess is that
they do something similar to Natural Microsystems VBX, which is to
first convert to mu-law or A-law per G.711, and then feed that into
the DSP ADPCM conversion.  Rhetorex also uses .VOX, but their files
have a header of sorts.  The data begins at about 80h, and I assume
index marks can go in the header although no file name or other info
appears to be there.

New Voice uses CVSD.  I can't remember whether it is the Motorola CVSD
or Harris CVSD.  New Voice is 24kbps.

I am not familiar with VBase.

Converting any of these files to something standard, like linear PCM
(WAV), is more involved than you might think.  Converting between two
different IVR formats can be quite involved.  Coverting offline
without one of the source or target systems installed generally uses
quite a lot of FPU MIPS.


Les     [e-mail]       Atlanta,GA      404.874.7806

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Ritter)
Subject: Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs?
Organization: AirTouch Cellular, Los Angeles
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 17:54:47 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Liron Lightwood <liron@insane.
apana.org.au> writes:

> Regarding the question of people always having to dial an area code if
> cellular phone numbers were moved to their own prefix.  This does not
> have to be the case.

> Here in Australia, we have the best of both worlds.  Our cellular
> phones have their own area code like prefixes, e.g. 018, 015, 041.
> However, when making a local call from a cellular phone, you only have
> to dial the six or seven digit number, no area code required.

> For example, if you're in Melbourne (03), to dial [phone], you
> would dial 123 4567.  If you were in Sydney (02) and you wanted to
> dial [phone] you would dial 123 4567.

While this may be interesting in areas like Australia, where the
numbering plan areas (or city codes) are large, it breaks down quickly
in the NANP [at least in the dense parts of it].

For example, in Los Angeles, the metropolitan area is served by six NPAs
(213, 310, 714, 805, 818, and 909).  There several points where, unless you
had an intimate knowlege of the area, you could be "in" any one of
three NPAs [in fact, there are at least two locations where movement
of only a few blocks can take you from 213 to 310 to 818!].  Which NPA
should the wireless carrier use to deliver calls in this area?  Is it
really fair to expect customers to know the intimate details of their
location and which NPA they are now in?  It is not at all uncommon for
a five minute drive on the freeway to pass through five NPAs (many
combinations are possible).

Also, in areas where the terrain is not flat and/or where there are
large bodies of water with irregular shorelines (e.g., the Pacific
ocean on the LA/Orange County coast), the "cellular honeycomb" is not
perfect - it is possbile for calls to set-up on quite unexpected cell
sites [this had interesting implications for delivery of emergency
calls (911) too].  The "caller" and the cell that their call originates
in may not be in the same NPA (in fact, near the NPA borders, the
calls and the serving cell are not even likely to be in the same NPA).
Using seven digit dialing based upon "caller location" rather than "the
NPA of the calling mobile MIN" will have quite unexpected results.


Phil Ritter    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Niven)
Subject: Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System
Date: 19 Jan 1995 11:31:01 -0500
Organization: The Pipeline


We have installed over 15 different brands of Interactive Voice
Response and Voicemail and Fax On Demand and Callback and Telephone
Answering Service Equipment over the past six years all over the
country on over 150 types of pbx's especially pbx's where the
manufacturer said it cannot be done and in circumstances where a
previous vendor had been ripped out.  If you would be so kind as to
provide your phone number we can discuss the info and references sent
via email.


Al Niven    Video, Voice, and Data, Inc.
292 Fifth Avenue, #201
NY NY 10001
212-714-3531 voice
212-714-3510 fax (attention Al Niven)

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

Date: 19 Jan 1995 09:58:09 GMT
From: JIM BURKIT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Sonet SDH DCC Information Wanted


Ton Engbersen asked:

> In Sonet/SDH multiplexer and section overhead, there are the D1..D12
> bytes, reserved for "network management and supervision". Can anyone
> shed some light on the data transmission protocol which governs these
> DCC channels?  Is this (already?) standardized? If so which standard?

The SONET DDC has been standardized.  It is a 7 layer OSI stack.  The
base standard in the US is T1.105 and in the ITU it is G.784.  These
base standards point to other documents.  In the ITU G.784 points to
Q.811 and Q.812.  I am not sure which standards the ANSI standard
points to as the US document is being being revised this week in T1X1.
As you are in Europe I hope the SDH information is enough.


Jim Burkitt

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 11:12:44 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Always Busy 800 Number?


In article <[e-mail]>, Matt <[e-mail]> says:

> What's an 800 number that is always busy? (and don't say Gateway 2000
> Tech Support). Something that is guaranteed always busy.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: (Suspicious, squinting eyes) Why do you want
> to know?  PAT]

Hey maybe it's a riddle?

Answer:

When the 800 number terminates on your POTS line and you have called
it from that line (assume no call-forwarding etc.)

I admit, not funny, but the best that I could do.  ;-)


Pete


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is a good one for you to figure out.
I have two 800 numbers. Even though I have call-waiting on the line where
the 800 numbers terminate, I expect to be unable to dial my own number and
get call-waiting. We all know when you dial your own number (from that
number) you just get a busy signal.  Okay?  ... well, when I use the phone
to dial the 800 numbers, one of them does in fact go off somewhere, set up
the call, come back to me and give me a call-waiting tone. Obviously it
leaves my switch and returns. Now the other 800 number on the other hand
is quite a mystery to me -- how it operates, that is. When I dial it the
call goes through *instantly* as though it were a local call, and if I
dial it from the phone it terminates on, I instantly get a busy signal.
I do NOT get the 800 number from Ameritech/IBT (from another carrier, a
little outfit actually), so I do not know how Ameritech can have such
umm, intimate familiarity with it. It would appear to not even leave
the switch at all. Any ideas?  The first 800 number seems to get to its
own switch somewhere and get outdialed back to me. What is the second
one doing, just getting translated locally somehow in my switch?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kyle Sloan)
Subject: Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia?
Date: 20 Jan 1995 00:36:13 GMT
Organization: Questar Network Services


chuck lukaszewski ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I received some information from LDDS/Metromedia yesterday about their
> long distance service. The rates seem entirely too good to be true,
> and I'm wondering if anyone here has experience (good or bad) that
> they would share.

> At the moment, I'm spending a lot of time on the telephone to NYC.
> After a pretty exhaustive evaluation of AT&T, Sprint and MCI we found
> the lowest we could get was 23.7 cents per minute peak on AT&T.  LDDS
> claims to charge 15 cents per minute with a one year commitment
> (includes a 90-day out clause). I talked to AT&T and they're pulling
> the "we're regulated and can't compete with those numbers" routine.

My company uses LDDS as our LD provider.  They helped us set up a T1
with a Newbridge channelbank.  Our average phone bill is over $3,000
for long distance only.  They are giving us the BEST prices of anyone
on the market.  Our representative is supremely easy to deal with
anytime I have questions about our service.  We are paying anywhere
between $0.075/min. to $0.145/min.  Forget the big three ... they just
can't come close.


kyle sloan  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 14:30:56 EST
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FCC PCS Auction Information


On Thu, 19 Jan 1995, Willis H. Ware wrote:

> Your discussion of PCS services in the recent T-COM Digest was very
> interesting.

Thank you.

> Your discussion of PCS services in the recent TELECOM Digest was very
> interesting.  Did I not understand correctly that the GATT legislation
> had some sweetheart deals in it apropos of the licenses issued for this
> service?

Yes and No.  See the discussion below.

> If this is correct, perhaps some clarifying discussion in the
> Digest would be of general interest.

Prior to the time Congress granted the FCC auction authority (at which
such time the FCC realized it was quite possible that mutually
exclusive PCS applications would have to processed via lotteries
and/or comparative hearings), the FCC had tentatively decided to award
"pioneer's preferences" to three companies: American Personal
Communications (APC), Cox Cable Communications, Inc. (Cox), Omnipoint
Communications, Inc.  (Omnipoint).  The pioneer's preference program
was an ill-conceived (IMHO) policy designed to reward companies that
expended resources developing and advancing new and innovative
services and technologies.  The pioneer's preferences in PCS were
awarded to APC for its development and demonstration of PCS/microwave
spectrum sharing technologies, to Cox for its development and
demonstration of PCS/cable plant interface technology, and to
Omnipoint for its development of 2 GHz PCS equipment.

As originally conceived, these pioneer's preferences awards would have
meant a "free" license for each of these companies, i.e., they would
not have had to take their chances in a lottery.  It was decided that
30 MHz licenses would be given to APC for the Washington/Baltimore
MTA, to Cox for the Los Angeles/San Diego MTA, and to Omnipoint for
the New York MTA.  That is why, even though their are 51 MTAs, there
are only 99 (rather than 102) licenses up for grabs in the Blocks A
and B auction currently underway.

But then came the legislation authorizing and (in the case of PCS)
requiring auctions.  The Commission decided to go back to the drawing
board to consider whether the awards made any sense in that context.
They eventually decided that the awards would stand, but that APC,
Cox, and Omnipoint would each have to pay an amount discounted from
the winning bid for comparable licenses in the auction.

YAWN ... yes, I am getting to GATT ... be patient <g>.

Almost no one was happy with this arrangement. Not potential PCS
players who saw three lucrative licenses slipping away with no
opportunity to bid on them, not the "pioneers" who were now going to
have to pay for licenses they thought they were getting for free, and
probably not even the FCC staff who had to listen to all the bitching
and moaning. Anyway, the whole mess got stuck into legislation
ratifying the Paraguay Rounds of GATT (Don't you just love the
Congressional process). Congress blessed the awards and promulgated a
formula for calculating how much the pioneers would have to pay.

In December of last year, after the GATT legislation, the Commission
finally granted the three Block A licenses to APC, Cox, and Omnipoint.
These license grants are subject to several conditions, including (1)
that each licensee construct a system in the specified MTA substantially
using the technology on which its pioneers' preference was based, (2)
that each licensee retain control for at least three years after initial
licensing or until it has met its five-year build-out requirement, and
(3) that each licensee pay to the US Treasury an amount equal to 85%
of the adjusted value of the license.  Payments will be made over a
five year period.

Essentially, the GATT legislation requires each of the three pioneers
to pay 85% of the adjusted value of its license. The adjusted value
will be calculated as follows: At the conclusion of the current
Broadband auctions, the FCC will determine the average per pop price
for the 20 largest MTAs other than the three in question, and then
apply that per pop average to the three MTAs. However, the Commission
is required to collect a minimum of $400 Million. If the amount
derived by applying the adjustment formula minus 85% is less than $400
Million, the difference is to be spread over the three markets in
question on the basis of their relative population.  FWIW, the total
high bids for the Block B licenses in these three markets currently
stands at approximately $760.4 Million.


Bob Keller (KY3R)            Email: [e-mail]
Law Office of Robert J. Keller, P.C.    Telephone:  [phone]
Federal Telecommunications Law       Facsimile:  301.229.6875

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 16:47:19 CST
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cattle Call


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A couple of questions for whoever knows
> the answers ... is it hard to train a cow to respond to your call? Is
> there some sort of protective covering for the pager to keep it out
> of the rain and water, etc?

Never mind that; I want to know how they push the little button!

Andy

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #48
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14240;
          20 Jan 95 2:29 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21307; Thu, 19 Jan 95 22:09:08 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21300; Thu, 19 Jan 95 22:09:03 CST
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 22:09:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #49

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 Jan 95 22:09:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 49

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    North Korea Holds US Representative Over $10K Phone Bill (Paul Robinson)
    Conference/Class/Training on Switching Technology? ([e-mail])
    Inslaw and the United States Justice Department (Paul Robinson)
    Remote Monitoring With Pagers (Cliff Scheller)
    Looking for Fax-Related URLs (George Pajari)
    Considering Purchasing an IVR System From InterVoice (Steve Samler)
    TNPP Standard Wanted (Marty Lawlor)
    CID Question (Stan Schwartz)
    Re: Programmable Touch-Tone Interpreter Needed (Paul A. Lee)
    Re: Small Business PBX/Fax Back Server Needed (Paul A. Lee)
    Flat Rate LD? (John McDermott)
    Information Needed on Cebit (Mat Watkins)
    Format of Telephone Number/Fax Numbers in Germany, France, UK (Tom Barrett)
    Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert) (Judith Oppenheimer)
    91x (was: 911 Providers: Watch For 912 Calls) (Carl Moore)
    Re: New Area Codes Working From Toronto (Michael King)
    Re: Looking up Addresses and Numbers From Just Names (Wes Leatherock)
    Re: T1BBS Gone? (Jim Burkitt)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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, 19 Jan 1995 14:46:30 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: North Korea Holds US Representative Over $10K Phone Bill


In Jack Anderson's column today, he reports that when Representative
Bill Richardson (D-New Mexico) tried to cross the DMZ (Demilitarized Zone)
between North and South Korea, with the casket carrying the remains of
Chief Warrant Officer David Hilemon, North Korean officials refused to let
him cross until the bill was paid.

In Cash.

"Although North Korea remains stauchly Communist, it showed a decidedly
capialistic streak when it came to the phone bill."  Anderson's column
reports.  The U.S. Military and State Department gathered money from
government funds to pay the bill.

Because American companies are prohibited from doing business there, no
telephone connections exist between the US and North Korea, so the 23
calls Richardson made to the State Department and to families of the two
pilots in the downed aircraft had to be relayed throgh Canada at
significant expense. It is known the calls had to be made on nonsecure
phone lines and were almost certainly recorded by the North Koreans.  New
trade agreements will allow phone links to be opened by the end of the
month.

Richardson's involvement in the incident was a fortunate coincidence
as he was there to discuss the issue of North Korean posession of
Nuclear Weapons.  His intervention is also credited in preventing
copilot Bobby Hill from suffering starvation, beating and torture, and
in helping to secure his release.

$10,000 is about eight times North Korea's per capita yearly income.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They don't need any collection agencies
over there do they?  Just keep the people there until they pay their
bills. Remind me not to go visit there anytime soon! I would never get
back home.   <g>   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Conference/Class/Training on Switching Technology?
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 14:26:02 PDT
Organization: Wandel & Goltermann Technologies


Folks,

I am looking for a training/conference/formal class on switching
technology.  If any of you know of some good place -- PLEASE let me
know directly as I don't read this newsgroup too often.

The main focus is on learning what/how/who/testing of the switching
technology.  This may involve either a general overview or specific to
Ethernet or Token Ring or ATM etc.


Thank you,

Ajay    ([e-mail])

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 20:39:05 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: Inslaw and the United States Justice Department


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This was sent to Paul, and he is
passing it along to us. Nothing new here, we discussed this a couple
years ago in the Digest.  PAT]


> I cought the end of an NPR story on Inslaw. I thought this would
> be the place to find out about it.  The story was a little shocking
> to say the least. Had Big-Bro stamped on it.

Inslaw was the name of a company that developed a computer program
called Promis, to manage caselaw for the Department of Justice until,
in the words of a Bankruptcy Court Judge, "The Department of Justice
used its ability to withhold payments in a deliberate effort to drive
Inslaw into bankruptcy, and to steal the Promis software from Inslaw."

Another court discarded the bankruptcy court's decision saying it
lacked the power to impose punitive damages for driving someone into
bankruptcy.

A reporter was investigating this issue, when he was found dead in a
motel room in West Virginia, under suspicious circumstances, which the
local police conveniently called 'suicide'.

This is the same organization that is supposed to investigate allegations
of unauthorized possession of copyrighted software, that is itself
believed to be the largest pirator of software in the government.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh sure, we knew this. The US Department
of Justice is one of the most corrupt organizations anywhere. Pirated
software, murders labeled 'suicide', bribery, its all routine for 'Justice',
an oddly named organization if there ever was one. We discussed the
Inslaw matter here about two years ago. Another of their gimmicks reminds
me of the late J. Edgar Hoover, for many years director of the FBI: A
closet homosexual, he found out which other top government executives were
the 'same way' and then he blackmailed them; threatened them with exposure
if they did not run things the way he liked. Today's Justice Department
is much the same. For instance, for how many ever years it was known in
certain circles that a federal judge -- a black judge in fact, but I won't
say his name, why bother now -- was a pedophile. One day investigators
snooping around in the judge's chambers found enough evidence to send the
judge away to prison for a long time; i.e. kiddy porn stuff. Instead a
'key Justice Department person' (at the time, several years ago) sat down
and had a chat with the judge. For years after that, anytime the department
had a pornography through the mail case or they wanted to prosecute on
interstate pornography charges, or violations of the Mann Act or similar,
guess which judge always somehow got the cases assigned to him. Guess how
he always ruled. The IRS operates the same way. They find a federal judge
who himself was -- to put it kindly -- lax and careless about properly
paying his own taxes. They have a little chat, and then they use that
judge for all their 'tax resistor' cases.  Not bad, huh!    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Cliff Scheller)
Subject: Remote Monitoring With Pagers
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 21:20:55 GMT


Did you know that a PBX can send text messages to any Alpha Pager?
( ...alot of your other equipment can, too!)

AlphaSense is a standalone electronic product which is easily connected to
many different types of equipment or machinery to provide an unattended
monitoring function. When user-specified conditions occur, it automatically
creates and delivers text messages to any alpha pager(s). A trusted
resource in many industries, it can also _selectively forward_ data
from your computerized or other automation devices to people's pagers.

Use it to monitor PBX's, CSU's, network servers, fire panels, HVAC
systems, water levels, machine operation, security systems, etc.
Internal "UPS" gives continued operation if power fails. Eight sensor
inputs, power fail/restore monitoring & self-test messages.

Plus, its RS-232 serial port connects to printers, computers and other
automation equipment. AlphaSense will monitor data streams, watching
for user-specified keywords. When received, they "trigger" AlphaSense,
and it can then forward data directly from your data source to Pagers!
Forward error messages, email, instructions, financial data, etc.
Dial-back mode for remote teleservice use, activity history log and
many other features!

For more info, send email to [e-mail] with
only these two lines as the message body:

SEND ASINFO

 ...or ftp to: ftp.netcom.com, in directory /ftp/pub/cl/cliffsch

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

From: [e-mail] (George Pajari)
Subject: Looking for Fax-Related URLs
Reply-To: [e-mail] (FAQ Comments)
Organization: Faximum Software, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 21:35:32 GMT


The FAQ for comp.dcom.fax is currently being rewritten in HTML and
will shortly be available for Web browsing.

To assist with this it would be appreciated if readers could forward to
[e-mail] any interesting fax or telco related URLs for inclusion
in the "hyperFAQ".

I am particularly interested in Home Pages and FTP sites for vendors
of modems, fax boards, fax equipment, and fax software.

Your assistance is much appreciated.

(Should you wish to browse the current, flat text version of the fax
FAQ, please see ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/fax-faq/part1
and part2.)


Regards,

[e-mail]   -*-   Editor of the comp.dcom.fax FAQ
George Pajari / Faximum Software / Tel: [phone] / Fax: ... [phone]
1497 Marine Drive, Suite 300 / West Vancouver, BC / Canada  V7T 1B8

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 12:17:01 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Considering Purchasing an IVR System From InterVoice


Does anyone have any experience with these people (good, bad or
indifferent)?

Has anyone negotiated a price with these folks recently?  How far can
I push them on price?

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

From: Marty Lawlor <[e-mail]>
Subject: TNPP Standard Wanted
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc., D&OS
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 15:35:23 GMT


I have been unsuccessful locating a copy of the Telocator Network
Paging Protocol (TNPP) standard or specification.  I believe it is
issued by POCSAG (Post Office Code Standards Advisory Group).  This
may be a British organization.

I've called several standards jobbers (e.g., IHS) to no avail, and my
calls to Telocator: The Personal Communications Industry Assn have
gone unanswered.

This appears to be an ubiquitous (and, at least, American) de facto
standard for sending and receiving paging messages.

Any help in locating this would be greatly appreciated.


Marty Lawlor         Northern Telecom
TEL:  [phone]   NET:  [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 12:58:40 EST
From: Stan Schwartz <[e-mail]>
Subject: CID Question


I have recently begun using TotalTel as a secondary LD carrier (by
signing up for secondary service and a calling card).

They had to add all the lines that I wanted to be able to access their
service (by using the 10081 prefix) before I was able to use them as a
secondary carrier.

One of the lines I added is in the 516-752 exchange, which has not been
upgraded for CLASS (NYNEX PhoneSmart) services.  Local (seven-digit)
calls from this number to CID-enabled areas of the LATA return "OUT OF
AREA" on the box on the receiving end.

HOWEVER ... if I dial 10081 + NPA + NXX + XXXX, the call is completed
with CID information provided at the receiving end!  Any ideas on what
they are doing here?

On their 800 service, TotalTel also seems to translate the ANI of the
calling party and delivers it as CID information on the receiving end.
When I use their 800-number-access calling card, they also transmit
the ANI of the phone I'm calling from to CID at the other end.  Kind
of neat, if you ask me!


Any thoughts on this?

Stan

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 12:27:47 -0500
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation
Subject: Re: Programmable Touch-Tone Interpreter Needed


In TELECOM Digest Volume 15 Issue 33, Jeffrey A. Porten <jporten@mail1.
sas.upenn.edu> wrote (in part):

> I need help in coming up with a solution for a client.  She wants to
> provide her incoming callers with a automated system that will allow
> them to schedule time with her by using a touch-tone phone, similar to
> the system that Amtrak uses to tell people about the trains closest to
> their selected travel time.

This is a description of 'classic' DTMF-driven interactive voice
response (IVR). Depending on the intricacy of the application(s), the
call volume to be handled, and the number of lines coming in, IVR can
run on anything from a $300 board in a PC up to large, proprietary,
multiprocessor boxes.

There are literally hundreds of manufacturers, integrators, software
developers, and VARs that do this for a living. Give some more details
on what call volume needs to be handled, what environment the system
must operate in, and what kind of budget you're working with, and I
should be able to point you in the right direction.


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*

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 12:28:22 -0500
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation
Subject: Re: Small Business PBX/Fax Back Server Needed


In TELECOM Digest Volume 14 Issue 43, Jon Zeeff <[e-mail]>
wrote (in part):

> I'm looking for a PBX/Fax back/voice mail system that would do the
> following:

> Connect to approx 4 POTS lines for incoming calls and have various
> facilities when you call in.

> The more flexible and programmable, the better.

Check out the Dash Open Phone System. Dash is in Lenexa, KS; voice
phone is 800-844-7620 and Faxback is 913 888-7902.


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] (John McDermott/J-K International Limited)
Subject: Flat Rate LD?
Date: 19 Jan 1995 12:23:07 -0700
Organization: Internet Express (800-592-1240 customer service)


In another newsgroup I recently saw an ad for US$149 for all the Long
Distance I could use in a month.  That could be a lot if I used it for
an Internet connection ... are such offers legit?  Does anyone use
such a service, particularly for modem calls?

I know that "If it sounds too good to be true ...", but I have seen
things like this before, so I thought I'd ask.


Thanks,

john    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That particular offer which you saw in
'another newsgroup' was very questionable. There were a number of eyebrows
raised partly because of things to do with how payment was to be tendered
each month, etc. You used to be able to get flat rate packages for WATS
and IN-WATS from AT&T a number of years ago. You bought a certain number
of hours per month at a set price, but it did not come in the range of
$149.00.  Maybe AT&T still sells WATS in blocks of time, I don't know.  PAT]

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

From: Mat Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Needed on Cebit
Date: 19 Jan 1995 19:47:30 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.


Hi all,

I am wanting to go to Cebit this year.  I have found out that it
starts on 8th March in Hanover but do not have any information on
registration etc.

Can anyboby help?  Thanks in advance.


Regards,

Matt   Victoria University of Wellington

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Barrett)
Subject: Format of Telephone Number/Fax Numbers in Germany, France, UK
Date: 19 Jan 1995 20:50:47 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell


I've been asked about the format of telephone numbers and fax numbers
in the three countries above ... specifically if fax numbers in these
countries have different numbers of digits than a phone number in the
same locale?

Thanks in advance for any assistance,


tjb

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

From: [e-mail] (Judith Oppenheimer)
Subject: Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert)
Date: 19 Jan 1995 11:49:22 -0500
Organization: Interactive CallBrand(TM)


[e-mail] (Colum Mylod) wrote:

> [e-mail] wrote:

>> Why would any European customer wish numbers like 800 THE CARD, unless
>> they expect most of their traffic from the US?

>> In Europe letters are *not* used.  And when they were used assignment
>> was not identical to the US assignment.  See the Telecom Archives for
>> an article were I gave some European assignments.

> Ah but Dik, British Telecom intends to reintroduce letters in phone
> numbers (they've been on various phone units for a long while --
> imports mainly).  Even in non-English Europe you'll see them back if
> for no other reason than introducing variety in freephone numbers.
> Currently a lot of European (monopoly) telcos issue patterned numbers
> like <code> 123456 or 876 876 etc. Having letters ups the 'saleable"
> freephone number combinations.

Remember, too, that international freephone numbers will *co-exist*
with domestic toll-free numbers in the U.S..

So there will be 1 800 FLOWERS, and 011 800 FLOWERS, both of which can
be called and advertised within the United States, but which may reach
competing companies!  (If not for European interest in these opportunities,
grandfathering of U.S. numbers would not even be an issue.)

If the U.S. position, and U.S. Users Group Position, of grandfathering
existing U.S. 800 numbers is not aggressively supported by U.S. 800
subscribers, these companies will find they have a 50-50 chance of
winning -- or losing -- their branded number to a lottery, and
competition for the same customers and marketshare in the U.S., and
abroad.

> According to a brief glimpse I got at uk.telecom (is this available
> via listserv anyone?), BT will use the same letters-numbers pattern as
> the Bell one but with Z added to the 9 key and Q on 0

The Q goes on the 7.  The Z goes on the 9.


Judith Oppenheimer, [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 23:19:09 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: 91x (was: 911 Providers: Watch For 912 Calls)


[e-mail] (Scot E. Wilcoxon) writes:

> As has been reported before, some older switches will connect to 911
> when "91x" is dialed.

What areas would have this?  Did this definition of 91x have to be
removed (except for 911) from some switches to accommodate N0X/N1X
prefixes?  From what you have given me, I take it this problem might
still have to be considered in some places, even with area codes now
generalized.

Also, some area codes used the now-obsolete method of "area code +
seven digits" (no leading 1) to make long distance calls, and I take
it the above-mentioned switches did not occur in such areas.  (For
example, 912-xxx-xxxx would have been used for calls to area 912 in
Georgia, and then 912 could not go to emergency services, barring some
messy timeout feature.)

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael King)
Subject: Re: New Area Codes Working From Toronto
Date: 20 Jan 1995 02:24:13 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Michael King)


In a previous article, [e-mail] (Carl Moore) says:

> So you were able to get a Seattle number from 360 directory assistance.
> Maybe 360-555-1212 is at least temporarily being routed identically to
> 206-555-1212.

As of this evening (Thursday 1/19), only AC 334 was dialable from both
metro Atlanta (western 'burbs) and within the city of Atlanta proper.
Neither 360 nor 630 is accessable -- I get a "you do not need an area
code" message from here for both area codes when trying to get directory
assistance.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 95 20:03:15
Subject: Re: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names


Quoting [e-mail] (Tim Bach):

> I have a bunch of names I need addresses and phone numbers to.
> They are all mostly in the same local calling area.  Is there a
> service or product I can buy that will allow me to take a ASCII
> file of names and have it try and lookup the addresses plus
> phone numbers?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know how many you think
> is a 'bunch', but unless it is really a lot, and you plan to do
> this on a frequent basis, why don't you ask the telco serving
> the local calling area for a copy of their directory.  Most
> telcos will send it free of charge, or they may get some small
> handling/postage fee. Then you would sit there and look them up.
> After you have found all you can, then call AC-555-1212 for the
> (hopefully) few remaining names.    PAT]

      I would respectfully suggest that most telephone companies will
NOT give or send a directory free of charge; they haven't usually done
so since divestiture.

      A biproduct, however, has been telephone directories on microfiche.
I believe these were probably started -- or at least became popular --
when telephone companies stopped providing directories at no charge to
libraries.

      The Oklahoma City Public Library used to have a very extensive
library of telephone directories from throughout the United States and
Canada, and pretty extensive coverage of the rest of the world.

      They don't have those now, of course, since they can't afford
what it would cost (many thousand of dollars a month keeping them up
to date).

       But they do have telephone directories from the United States
on microfiche, put out by a firm called University Microfilms, Inc.,
which I believe produces all kinds of useful microfiche.

       The telephone directories on microfiche are available to all
users of the library at no charge, just like other materials, and
cover most of the United States (with the exception of some GTE
exchanges like the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater area).

       Probably your library has those, too, and it would be quicker
and less hassle just to look them up there, unless your "bunch" is
really a huge number.


Wes Leatherock
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Chicago Public Library has over a
hundred years of telephone directories from Chicago on microfilm put
out by the company you mentioned, University Microfilms of Ann Arbor,
Michigan. I don't know what connection they have with the University
of Michigan, if any.  They also have the Haines Crisscross Directories
for Chicago going back about 40 years, and these can be very useful
tools when looking for people who were around long ago.  CPL has all
the suburban phone books going back about 50-60 years also, both from
Illinois Bell and its predecessor Chicago Telephone Company as well as
Centel (which long ago was known as Central States Telephone Company.)
There used to be a publication called the 'Chicago City Directory' and
they have quite a few of those also from the past. Unfortunatly the
City Directory ceased publication in 1921. They have the actual 1921
book, but the years prior to that are on microfilm.   PAT]

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

Date: 19 Jan 1995 15:26:15 GMT
From: JIM BURKIT <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: T1BBS Gone?


Mark Fraser asked:

> Pat:

> It's been a while since I last tried, but both of the net addresses
> 192.187.216.5 and ....3 don't return a ping, nor respond to telnet/ftp
> respectively.  Likewise, phone calls to the previously published modem
> numbers don't give much satisfaction.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, I'm afraid I cannot be much help
> on this personally. Maybe others have the answer.   PAT]

The Committee T1 BBS moved in October 1994.  I guess Pat doesn't
remember all the articles that he publishes as he did publish one
notice of the move.  When T1BBS was moved a number of improvements
were made.  The biggest one was upgrading from 9.6 Kb to 56 Kb
internet access.

T1BBS is a BBS that committee T1 uses to help it develop standards.
Anyone that has a interest in the Telecommunications standards that we
develop is allowed to use the system.  The primary system uses PCBoard
software with a mirrored unix ftp site.

You can access the system by:

        modem          [phone]

        telnet          telnet.t1.org

        ftp             ftp.t1.org

        www             www.t1.org (under construction)

The system operator can be reached at [e-mail].

Note in the above site names that the number 1 is used not the letter
l.

I hope this helps.


Jim Burkitt    T1X1 Chair



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No, unfortunatly I cannot nearly begin to
remember all the articles which are published here unless I use the index
to search through the titles, etc.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #49
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa15826;
          20 Jan 95 3:31 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22749; Thu, 19 Jan 95 23:31:10 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22737; Thu, 19 Jan 95 23:31:07 CST
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 23:31:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #50

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 19 Jan 95 23:31:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 50

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Updated Earthquake Report - Friday Morning (Stephen Anderson/Ando Eiichi)
    Re: Horrible Earthquake in Japan ([e-mail])
    Japanese Quake News (Steve Samler)
    Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles (Mark Fletcher)
    Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging? (Clifton T. Sharp)
    Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (Clifton T. Sharp)
    Re: Cattle Call (John Dearing)

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 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. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per
year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 95 12:45:45 JST
From: [e-mail] (Ando Eiichi)
Subject: Updated Earthquake Report - Friday Morning


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What follows was an awfully hard story
for me to publish ... I suspect it must be awfully hard for Stephen
Anderson and others to write about. The news simply gets worse and
worse and worse as each day passes. Those poor people ...  Thursday I
ran into an aquaintance of a short time, a Japanese student living in
Chicago. He knows people living in Kobe, and told me of his anxiety in
being unable to reach them by phone this week. He has no idea if they
survived or not. And there are many others like him here in the USA in
school. I felt such a sense of frustration and helplessness after
speaking with him. PAT]

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

Here is the updated report.
          ______________________________________________

Eiichi Ando
Salomon Brothers Asia Limited Tokyo Branch
Business Technology Organization - Production - Wide Area Network Group
Tel : [phone]  Fax: [phone]  E-mail : [e-mail]

      TOKYO, Japan - The Southern Hyogo Prefecture Earthquake in
western Japan struck at 5:46 AM JST on January 17, 1995.  The quake
was the worst such disaster in Japan since 1948 and caused unexpected
deaths and destruction.  The following summary on the emergency from
the Inforum Project at GLOCOM was first compiled after one day of
local reports in Tokyo, and updated on January 20 from journalist and
academic sources as well as local interviews.  The death toll of over
four thousand was worse than first reported and damage estimates range
from 3-8 trillion yen ($30-80 billion).

         The Tuesday quake measured 7.2 on the Richter scale and 6 on
the Japanese scale that peaks at 7.  The epicenter was 12.5 miles under
the island of Awaji in the Inland Sea off the coast from Kobe, but the
worst destruction ran along a northeastern fault on the coast up from
the Kobe port to the Takarazuka area closer to Osaka.  Osaka, as
Japan's second largest city, and Kyoto and Shiga, further to the
northeast with extensive museums and temples, also reported extensive
damage from the quake.

        In Japan, all observers are shocked by the death and
destruction.  The National Police Agency reported 4047 confirmed
deaths, and 727 missing along with 21,671 injury victims.  The total
dead and missing (about 4774) make this quake the worst since the June
28,1948 quake in Fukui Prefecture that killed 3895 according to the
Asahi Nenkan.  The total dead and missing is not as great as the 1923
Great Kanto Earthquake that killed over one hundred forty-two thousand
people, but the extent of damage is great.  Note that the wire
services carried glaring errors in their historical data on previous
quakes, but the point is correct that this is a major disaster.

 Within Japan, the media did not always agree on details, but overall
the journalists were highly professional as they covered uncontrolled
fires, derailed trains, and collapsed expressways in extra-edition
newspapers and during all night coverage on television.

        Among the media coverage, television was by far the leading
source for current information.  Public television on NHK was careful,
and tended to underestimate deaths and missing.  Yet the expert
commentary on NHK was frank, self-critical, and precise as much of the
material from Kobe including helicopter shots meant that NHK gave the
most comprehensive coverage.  However, private stations also broadcast
alternative coverage that gave images of utter destruction and scenes
resembling war zones.  A lasting image came from a local TV newscaster
who grew up in Kobe and walked among the downtown ruins that left him,
at one point, speechless and at the point of tears.

        Japanese citizens are especially distraught by the failures of
prevention and warning.  The wire services made Associated Press file
an accurate story about the population's loss of faith in technology.
Compared to Los Angeles in 1994 and San Francisco in 1989, Kobe and
its population of 1.4 million people suffered far more extensive
damage.  No block of city was spared some destruction with many
buildings leaning on their foundation.  Many professors of engineering
and construction experts are making statements to the press and on
television about their miscalculations.  The collapse of elevated
expressways and railway bridges will take much time to rebuild, and
the homeless in smaller wooden dwellings and larger high rises will
need immediate shelter from near-freezing temperatures.  Many local
people are bitter that the Tokyo area received attention and warnings,
but no such forecast was ever made for this southern Hyogo quake.

        Specialists have lost confidence in their forecasts about
location and construction for earthquakes.  Severe quakes have hit
northern Japan as well as Kobe, but none have occurred near Shizuoka
or Tokyo where quake experts predicted.  Also, engineers who looked at
Japanese standards as the highest in the world must now reassess their
ideas about bridges, roads, and buildings.  In the U.S., Los Angeles
and San Francisco officials emulated Japanese building standards said
to protect against 8.3 magnitude quakes of the 1923 Kanto scale, but
they must now reconsider the extent of damage to Kobe-area expressways
and railroads.  At the moment, Japanese officials are skeptical about
creating economically viable standards that can withstand a quake such
as yesterday.  Such standards allowed Kobe to create two large
developments on landfill, but these areas suffered broken surfaces,
flooding, and sludge or mud holes where their buildings sank into the
bay.

        Politicians and civil servants moved to reassure the
population.  The Prime Minister, Tomiichi Murayama, was quoted by wire
services as focusing on minimizing the damages, while waiting to blame
or to analyze all the causes.  Murayama visited the area of Awajishima
and Kobe on Thursday, January 19.  The Land Agency moved to provide
disaster relief and local governments lent supplies.  Local TV in
Tokyo area covered a fleet of Yokohama city water trucks as they left
to drive to the west.  Though preparations were extensive, an estimate
100,000 people spent the near-freezing (zero Celsius) night in parks,
automobiles, schools, or public buildings.

        The shaking and aftershocks continue.  The initial shaking of
about 20 seconds and several weaker quakes continue to hit the region.
Experts estimate that restoring the basic services of electricity (one
week), water (two weeks) and gas (one month) will keep life from
normal.  Construction of transportation and buildings will of course
take much longer.

        The financial damage is extensive but difficult to determine.
Economists note that the total impact is severe.  Estimates range from
$30 to $80 billion, but the exact estimates are unclear.  The Hyogo
governor has asked for four trillion yen (about $40 billion), Other
economic impacts are mixed.  In Tokyo, insurance company stocks are
down, but construction, concrete, and glass stocks are up.  Damage in
Osaka closed Japan's second-largest stock market and the Kansai area
will face major disruptions.  Of course, Kobe is a port, export-hub,
shipbuilding and steel-manufacturing center, as well as a historic
international city.  Kobe also handles 12 percent of Japan's exports.
The damages to this area, and its people, will likely leave a major
mark not just on the economy, but also on the future of Japanese
society as a whole.


by Stephen J. Anderson ([e-mail])

Inforum Project Director
The Center for Global Communications (GLOCOM)
Associate Professor
International University of Japan (IUJ)


For more information, write to:

Stephen J. Anderson ([e-mail])

Inforum Project Director
The Center for Global Communications (GLOCOM)
Associate Professor
International University of Japan (IUJ)
Fax:  [phone], Phone:  [phone]
1F, 6-15-21 Roppongi, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106 JAPAN

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

From: [e-mail] (Ramin)
Subject: Re: Horrible Earthquake in Japan
Date: 19 Jan 1995 16:42:13 GMT
Organization: Alcatel Network Systems Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


It is unfortunate that under such conditions even the new wireless
(Cellular) technology does not completely survive the distruction.

In both Anlog and Digital cellular applications only the user access
interface is wireless.  The connections from the cell sites (base
stations) to cell cite controllers and the wireless switch are usually
via regular trunks (ie. T1).  Based on my past experience, I don't
remember seeing much redundancy designed in Base station to Cell cite
controller links.


Ramin

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 12:11:31 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Japanese Quake News


NTT has repaired most of the switchboards.  Large number of customer
lines remain off.  AS of 2000 GMT 9,000 circuits in Chuo ward in Kobe
out.  Calls are being relayed from emergency phones using satellites.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 22:11:56 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?


I'm going to raise an issue here because I think it relates to the
issue of why nothing beyond lip service seems to be done by carriers
about cellular fraud.

Let me explain that I'm not condoning the idea of cellular fraud, what
I want to do is discover exactly where the numbers for the amount is
coming from and what relationship to reality those numbers represent.

I remember reading some seven years ago an article which someone had
gotten permission to reprint out of a magazine that stated that
because the ESN and MIN pairs are sent in clear the possibility for
fraud was virtually unlimited.

I got thinking about the issue and wondered: of the industry claimed
more than $1 million a day in fraud that occurs, how much of this is
real money, how much is it lost profits, and how much is sheer
imagination?

Let me give a brief example.  Perhaps ten years ago when you went to a
computer store and obtained a copy of a computer program, the price
for that program was list price, say $400.00.  Let say a legally
purchased copy of that program was illegally copied by ten people.

Let's take a wild guess and consider that perhaps two of these copies
would never have been sold if the person couldn't get it for free
because they would never have bought it at all.  Let's say four of the
copies might have been purchased at $200, and perhaps two of the
copies might have been purchased at full list price if they hadn't
gotten it for free.  The actual 'cash losses' to the software company
are zero.  The amount of income it could have collected in this
fictious example if their software hadn't been pirated is probably
$1600.  But in all probability the software company would claim that
they lost $4,000 in sales of that program.  Both of the $1600 and
$4000 numbers are fiction however, they are only estimates of what
_could_ have happened.  Actual cash losses to the company are zero.
If someone had stolen ten copies of the program off the shelf of the
store, the store is out the cost of those copies, and it has actual
cash losses.

Now, let's look at cellular calls.  For the purpose of this article,
I'm going to use 50c a minute as the cost per minute of a cellular
call, and 25c a minute additional as the long distance charge for long
distance calls. There are typically plans to give an allocation of
minutes to a customer and these reduce the cost to them.

First, if someone has a cellular phone, and someone using an automated
cellular MIN/ESN stealer puts ten minutes of fraudulent local call
time on fifty phones, chances are those fifty subscribers are probably
not going to notice they've been defrauded and end up paying for
fraudulent charges.  They have collectively been defrauded out of
$250.00.  Net loss to carrier: zero. If these users did not use up
their allocation even including ten minutes of fraud, then the net
loss to them is zero, too.

I am wondering how much of the claimed $1 million a day is actual,
real cash loss, how much is uncollected profit, how much is oppportunity
cost, and how much is an estimate of unreported fraud.

There are calls that someone might make over a cellular phone that
they would never have made if they had to pay for it, because they
couldn't afford it. There are calls that someone could have paid part
of the cost for but didn't, and there are those who could have paid
full retail price, but didn't want the calls to be traceable to them,
possibly because they are involved in the sale of unauthorized dried
vegetable extracts.

There are several parts to the numbers involved.  First is if a
carrier was defrauded of charges on a roamer, the carrier is out
actual cash it might have to pay the destination roam site for
fraudulent calls and perhaps long distance charges.  In such a case,
the loss is the amount paid to the destination carrier and long
distance company.

In the case of cellular <-> cellular calls, the actual out of pocket
cost to the company for such fraud is effectively nil.

In the case of local calls, if calls are made on the wireline company's
facilities, the amount lost might be the opportunity cost if it means
that some calls could not be processed on the system due to fraudulent
calls hogging channel space.  This is not real money and is a guess at
what might have been received.

If it's a local call from the non-wireline company, they are out the
individual cost per placed call (10c here because calls are untimed)
or the local per-minute rate for calls inside that area that are
timed.

There are some additional costs for the people who have to handle
cancellation of fraudulent charges and investigate this sort of thing,
but that is part of the overhead.

Some examples:

 - someone disputed 100 minutes of daytime mobile-mobile traffic on
the same cellular system as fraudulent.  The cellular company would
claim that they have been defrauded of $50.00, claiming the 50c rate
per minute for calls on their system.  In this case their actual out
of pocket loss is zero!

- someone disputes a ten minute call from a Washington DC cell phone
to Los Angeles.  If the carrier includes long distance in his rates:
he's out the cash price of the long distance call ($2.50), and the
cellular per minute charge the customer would have paid ($7.50), for a
loss of $10.00.  His actual out of pocket losses are $2.50.  If the
carrier doesn't provide long distance in the call and the customer is
billed directly, the carrier would claim to be out the per minute rate
for calls of $5.00.  His actual out of pocket losses are again, zero.

- someone disputes a twenty minute call from an Arlington Va cell
phone to a Washington, DC number.  The carrier can claim his loss is
the $10.00 in lost revenue plus the ten cent local termination charge.
The actual cash loss to the carrier is the ten cent local termination
charge he has to pay Bell Atlantic.

Note that in these cases the claimed losses are 'phantom' losses based
on lost revenue and / or lost profits and except as indicated do not
depict the actual cash losses.  There is some cost added due to fraud
and some additional losses due to having to generate paperwork and
account for the losses.

This is not meant to condone cellular fraud or lessen the seriousness
of preventing fraud against customers, but it is a point about looking
at how much is real money lost, how much is opportunity cost, and how
much is lost income.

So that's the question that I'm wondering: of the claimed losses due
to fraud of the cellular industry at some $1 million a day, how much
of it is actual cash losses of fraudulent traffic which generates an
accounts payable, and how much of it is lost profits and opportunity
costs which are phantom numbers?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does it matter, Paul?  Does it really
matter?  Should stealing someone's 'profits' be any less severe an
offense than stealing their actual cash? You may not be condoning cell-
ular phone fraud, but you sure know how to speak the language of the
phreaks and hackers. If I develop a concept or invent a device or
otherwise devise something you could not possibly do on your own, and
then I have the audacity to ask to be paid if you wish to benefit from
my work, how can you say your refusal to pay me is any less wrong than
taking a gun, holding it to my head and demanding my purse?  It is not
my duty to feed you; it is not the phone company's duty to provide you
with an artificial speaking mechanism which allows your voice to carry
further than it ever possibly could on its own; it is not the duty of
the software publisher to do your thinking for you and provide you with
answers. You say, 'but no one would have purchased it anyway, so there
is no real loss if someone steals it ...'. That is baloney. Your payment
of a fee for the services rendered is your recognition of the labor of
others. If you cannot afford to buy software, then write your own. If
you cannot afford a phone call, then send a letter, or go in person to
communicate your message in your own voice. What others may or may not
have purchased is of no consequence whatsoever. Don't ask for my labor
and my brains and resourcefulness if you can't afford or don't wish to
pay. Or better still, why not try being intellectually honest about
the way you feel (I don't mean you personally, Paul) and just take a gun
and go rob a 7/Eleven or a Quik-Mart on the way home. Then you will have
money in your pocket you can use to purchase the kinds of things they
were planning to purchase with the money. You'll even be able to pay for
your own software and cellular phone calls.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 19:09:32 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Mark Fletcher)
Subject: Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles


Glenn Foote [e-mail] wrote:

> When I was a practicing consultant (now retired) I faced the same
> problems with client applications.  We were able to attach to the
> existing poles for a minimum fee (about $1.50 per quarter, per
> attachment [cable]).

> There was no requirement for us (the client) to become a "utility". The
> pole connection tariffs were published and/or negotiated as required.
> (Some of the poles belonged to the municipality itself, and no tariffs
> were filed for these.)

> We installed fiber.  To the best of my knowledge, the installation
> is still working after 10+ years with NO outages save one, an airplane
> crashed and took out a section of the cable.  It was replaced within 24
> hours, without further incident.

This seems to be the normal situation. $1.00 to $1.50 per month per
attachment.

Can any one point me in the proper direction to start? Where do we
file the paperwork? I'm hesitant to let the RBOC know too much right
away because they are about to lose $18,000 in income a year for
about $1300 in attachment fees!

Also many have asked if I can get dry circuits from the RBOC. It so
happens that all of my circuits are direct point to point hard cut dry
pairs.

Other questions are how close am I to the central office or remote? I'm
237 ft. (I measured it, ha ha) from the ESS IV remote that services our
area.

Thanks so far for all of your help! Especially Jim at Halcyon!


Mark Fletcher     Communications Manager  << The Great Gorge Resort >>
201 827-2000 Ext. 404

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

From: [e-mail] (Clifton T. Sharp)
Subject: Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging?
Organization: as little as possible
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 18:58:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Andrew
Laurence) writes:

> The Pentium bug affects only floating-point calculations, not overall
> system performance. Whether you NEED to have it replaced depends on
> what type of work you do. Spreadsheets and mathematical modeling, and

I disagree.  Which application do you run on a computer from which you
would accept an incorrect result?  If the answer is "all of them",
then you don't need your Pentium replaced.  Otherwise ...

Personally, I want a computer at least as consistently accurate as my
$6 pocket calculator.


Cliff Sharp  WA9PDM   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Clifton T. Sharp)
Subject: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio
Organization: as little as possible
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 1995 19:51:46 GMT


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

> Maybe someone already noticed this, but the officer involved has
> provided sworn testimony indicating that he violated federal law.  He
> used the radio out-of-band on a channel for which it is not licensed.

Very true!

> A copy of the court transcript might interest the FCC's Chicago Field
> Engineer.

Uh, probably not.  Chicago seems to take a "leave me alone" attitude,
despite the promise of possibly very high assessments for Notices of
Apparent Violation.


Cliff Sharp     WA9PDM   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Dearing)
Subject: Re: Cattle Call
Date: 20 Jan 1995 02:54:50 GMT
Organization: Netaxs Internet BBS and Shell Accounts


Thus spaketh our esteemed Moderator:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A couple of questions for whoever knows
> the answers ... is it hard to train a cow to respond to your call? Is
> there some sort of protective covering for the pager to keep it out
> of the rain and water, etc?  A cow sees no problem with standing out
> in the field in the rain all day, or laying down on a muddy field to
> rest. In the heat of the summer a herd of cows in a pasture with a
> pond or lake will simply wander out into the pond and stand in water
> up to their neck to stay cool and keep the flies away. How does the
> pager withstand all this abuse?    PAT]

I saw the article (wish I'd saved it). They train *one* cow. Once one
cow starts back to the barn, the rest follow. I guess they figure that
this one must know something they don't! 8-)

The pager (I don't think it is a garden variety pager but a special
model) is in a special ruggedized case that protects it from the
elements. The case is on some kind of chain/whatever around the cow's
neck. This keeps the pager near their ears so they can clearly hear
the page.

When I read the article, I got a chuckle from it but also thought "What a
neat way to apply technology!".


John Dearing    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #50
*****************************