Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/1995.volume.15/vol15.iss051-100

Text File | 1995-02-16 | 1MB | 31,997 lines

Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa27732;
          21 Jan 95 3:49 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20047; Fri, 20 Jan 95 23:40:12 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20039; Fri, 20 Jan 95 23:40:07 CST
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 95 23:40:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #51

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 20 Jan 95 23:40:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 51

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging? (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: LD ISDN Service (Martin Carroll)
    Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio (Bill Tighe)
    Re: Long Distance Caller ID/Cellphones? (Don Skidmore)
    Re: Format of Telephone Number/Fax Numbers in Germany, France (L. Madison)
    Re: Long Distance Blocking, was Re: Old Rotary Service Question (J. Galt)
    Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging? (Linc Madison)
    Re: North Korea Holds US Representative Over $10K Phone Bill (Dan Kahn)
    Re: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names (Linc Madison)
    Re: Always Busy 800 Number? ([e-mail])
    Re: FCC PCS Auction Information (Bob Keller)
    Re: Cattle Call (Andrew Laurence)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Larry Schwarcz)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Michael P. Deignan)

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] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 02:11:10 GMT


[e-mail] (Clifton T. Sharp) writes:

> 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.

Yes, but unless you perform floating point calculations, you will not
RECEIVE incorrect results, so whether they are acceptable or not (of
course they aren't) is irrelevant.

I do concede, however, that some users may not always be aware of
whether they perform floating point calculations or not.


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]

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jan 95 16:33 EST
From: Martin Carroll <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: LD ISDN Service


John Schmerold ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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?

MCI will be more than happy to meet your long distance ISDN needs.
MCI offers ubiquitous ISDN PRI service nationwide and ISDN BRI service
in connection with the local provider.

For more information, contact MCI's local sales office in St. Louis
at the numbers below:

     Joe Rodriguez, Sales Manager              314-342-8568
         ([e-mail])
     Jim Brann, Manager Technical Consultant   314-342-7422
         ([e-mail])

In other areas, contact the local MCI sales office listed in your
telephone directory.


Martin Carroll ** Richardson, TX ** [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Tighe)
Subject: Re: Legal Problem Due to Modified Radio
Date: 20 Jan 95 16:39:48 GMT


[e-mail] (David A. Webb @ Educational Computing Network)
once wrote:

> 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].

Try contacting the radio manufacturer.  They have a large interest in
maintaining the legality and saleability of their product.  They
should have plenty of information to back up your case and perhaps
even a lobbyist in Washington to give support.

Its people like you who maintain our freedom.


Good Luck,

Bill Tighe    Email:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Don Skidmore)
Subject: Re: Long Distance Caller ID/Cellphones?
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 95 17:02:34 PST
Organization: The Lone Net-Surfer :-) !


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

> 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 ...

My recollection is that the effective date is mid April 1995 - providing
the various carriers use any SS7 services--doesn't appear to be any
dead-line to start doing so.  However, I thought I heard somewhere
that most enhanced services were SS7 dependent and that billing data
was going SS7 -- is that wrong?

> 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?

If not, a lot of us are going to be out of luck.  I am counting on the
new rule to improve my experience re your next question -- hope it's
not in vain.

> 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.

> [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]

I am in the Seattle area.  I checked my last 99 calls -- 21 were blocked,
50 were "out of area" and 28 had the calling number or the number and
name.  This is not particularly great from my perspective.  One problem
is that GTE serves part of the local calling area, but apparently
declines to pass CID to USWest customers.  I was hoping the new rules
would have a positive influence even though they are about long
distance -- hassle factor if nothing else.

Can anyone address how the new rules affect cellphone calls?  All
cellphone calls report "out of area" around here.  Presumably this is
because the cellphone customer has to pay air charges for all calls.
Will they have to pass CID info under the new rules?


Don

[e-mail]    [e-mail]   Bellevue, Washington  USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Format of Telephone Number/Fax Numbers in Germany, France, UK
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 01:04:46 GMT


Tom Barrett ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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?

Telephone numbers in France are always eight digits for the local
number, whether it's a voice line or a fax.  The UK is in the process
of standardizing the length of phone numbers so that all numbers in
any given city will have the same number of digits.  This is already
true in all the major cities (anything with city code 01x1 or 011x),
which have seven-digit numbers.

In Germany, they still use a "decimal tree" system.  For example, the
main switchboard at a hotel where I stayed was XXXX1, but you could
dial directly to my room phone by calling XXXX375.  Most local numbers
in this town were six digits.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Long Distance Blocking, was Re: Old Rotary Service Question
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 95 15:36:10 PST


This reminds me of a prank I saw done in my college dorm, in the 70s.

The two guys in the room next to mine lived about two hours' drive
away, and would often go home on the weekends.  They also used the
phone a lot, and on weekend nights it would ring and ring, so that I
and their other neighbors couldn't get much sleep.  The dorm had the
standard, wall-mounted dial phones.

After several months of this, the guys on the far side of these two
got fed up.  So one night, when they left the room for a minute, we
stuck a one inch square chunk of pencil eraser under the offending
phone's switch-hook, then hung up the phone.  Result: the phone was
off-hook but it didn't show.

A few minutes later, one of the phone's owners comes back in, tries to make a
call, and gets no dial tone and nothing happens.  He tries three or four times.
Then he proceeds to take the handset and beat the living s__t out of the phone!
It was down for about ten days, and guess who got stuck with the bill!


John David Galt

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

From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 23:40:06 GMT


Clifton T. Sharp ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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 ...

The question is not that simple.  Your question should be something more
like "which application do you run on a computer *that uses floating
point* *and* from which you would accept a result that is only reliable
to 0.001?"  The worst error in the Pentium floating-point divide is in
the fourth decimal place.  There are plenty of applications in which
that is adequate precision for everyday use.

I'm not saying that anyone with a Pentium should consider keeping the
defective chip, only that some people don't need to RUSH OUT to get
the replacement RIGHT THIS MINUTE.

> Personally, I want a computer at least as consistently accurate as my
> $6 pocket calculator.

My, my.  Demanding, aren't we?  ( ;-P for the humor-impaired)


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Kahn)
Subject: Re: North Korea Holds US Representative Over $10K Phone Bill
Date: 20 Jan 1995 23:06:52 GMT
Organization: UNC Dept. of Physics and Astronomy


> 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.

[stuff deleted]

> [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]

Several years ago the Honduran government confiscated the passports of
(mostly US) residents of Honduras because they had really big phone
bills.  The government wanted to be sure they got their money in case
the callers had time to leave the country.

At least one debtor claimed the calls had been made when she was not
at home (or in the country).  Some of the calls were international
which makes me think that the phone company discovered the fraud
themselves but didn't want to take the loss by paying fees for the
other end of the connection so they called in the army.

Just food for thought the next time you have to contest a long
distance call with AT&T or MCI:)


dan

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

From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Looking up Addresses and Phone Number From Just Names
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 19:14:43 GMT


Tim Bach ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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?

The phone books on CD products I have seen will do this.  If you only
need to go from name (with or without partial address) to phone number,
the entire US fits on a single CD-ROM.  Of course, the quality and current-
ness of the listings may vary.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:
> ...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.

This has been covered somewhat, but to clarify, the policy here in
Pac*Bell land is that you get white pages within your LATA for free.
If the white pages and yellow pages are in the same book, the yellow
pages are free.  If the yellow pages are separate, you pay a per-book
fee.  Thus, the San Francisco YP (2 books) costs twice as much as the
Oakland YP (a single book), even though the Oakland YP is almost as
large as the combined SF books.  As a point of reference, I believe
that the only cities in the San Francisco LATA with separate YP's are
S.F., Oakland, and San Jose (two books).

Of course, all this may change soon with the advances in deregulation,
but don't expect the change to favor the consumer in this area.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (BUBEYE!)
Subject: Re: Always Busy 800 Number?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 06:54:27 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Here is a good one for you to figure out.
> I have two 800 numbers ... 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.

    That's right.  Your line is in the "not able to get call waiting"
state and will return the busy signal to anyone who calls until your
call, completed or not, leaves your switch.

> 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.

That's because this line happens to terminate on a switch that they are
also using as a LATA tandem.  The translation happens on the same switch.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 05:33:08 EST
From: Bob Keller <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FCC PCS Auction Information


In an earlier post I gave a pointer to the file:

    ftp://ftp.clark.net/pub/rjk/pcs_mkts.txt.Z

It has come to my attention that the file that was there was an older
version that had some sorting errors, glitches, and inaccuracies.  It
has since been replaced.  Anyone who ftp'd the file prior to
approximately 5:30 am EST on Jan 20, 1995 should delete the file and
get it again.  I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.


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] (Andrew Laurence)
Subject: Re: Cattle Call
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 02:12:24 GMT


[e-mail] (John Rice) writes:

> 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.

Wow! I get numeric paging, unlimited airtime, for $8.50 per month on a six-
month contract.


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]

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 15:24:59 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?


Paul Barnett wrote me in response to my message:

> Paul Robinson said:

>> 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.

> I think you made some good points about the impact of cellular fraud,
> but I think you missed an important one (I didn't read real carefully,
> so the omission may be mine):

> Unlike software piracy, cellular bandwidth is a limited commodity.
> Every fraudulent call has the opportunity to block a legitimate call
> that would have resulted in some additional revenue.

I did make that point in part.  Additionally, and if a particular
system is saturated, then some additional fraudulent unpaid traffic
might cause legitimate, paid traffic to not get through.

> Furthermore, there is the capital investment required to build and
> maintain the facilities to provide the additional increment of bandwidth
> used by fraudulent calls, in order to provide a satisfactory level of
> service to the legitimate subscribers.

Yes, but again, how much of the claimed losses are real chargebacks
and out of pocket costs, and how much of it is illusory lost profits
(some of which might never have occurred).

If someone who can't afford cellular service places fraudulent calls,
certainly the cellular company loses revenue and perhaps has out of
pocket costs, but those calls would never have been made, so the company
would never have received the revenue from it.

About the only place where lost revenue might be a valid issue is for
people who use fraudulent time, not because they can't afford to use the
service, but because they cannot afford to have a particular call tracked
to a phone issued in their name, again typically because they are involved
in the manufacture and sale of unauthorized dried plant residues, and
referred to by police and prosecutors as drug dealers.

This was the point I probably should have made: that if the cellular
companies were actually getting hit for $1 million a day in settlements,
I find it likely that they would have pushed for encryption a long time
ago.  What the $1 million figure probably represents is imaginary lost
profits from unbilled fraud, which is a whole different matter
altogether.  It means that their overall profit margin is less, it does
not mean they are actually *out* any money.

And this may be the reason cellular companies have essentially either
made customers eat most of the fraud, or barely done anything beyond lip
service to stop it.

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

Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 95 16:49:54 -0800
From: Larry Schwarcz <[e-mail]>


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> says:

> 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.

> 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?

> And then Patrick Townson <[e-mail]> says:

> [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.

Well, I don't know Paul's motives, but, one good reason for asking
this is in relation to my cellular bill.

It's my understanding that cellular carriers can bill back 100% of
their fraud losses to subscribers.  So, if joe-hacker steals a MIN/ESN
and starts making calls (lets assume all local and no LD carrier is
involved), the carrier may claim $100 in losses.  That $100 is paid
for by all of the other subscribers via higher rates.  Now, if, as
Paul suggests, those losses are just "paper" losses, the carrier is
now ahead by $100 and I'm out a bit by higher rates.

So, my interest is in how much higher my rates are due to my cellular
carrier inflating their losses.  How much lower would my rates be if
the carrier could only claim their actual cash (as Paul defined)
losses?

Keep in mind that I'm in the San Francisco/Bay Area and my rates are:
$30/month with 5 free minutes; $0.85/min peak and $0.20/off- peak.
So, the carriers out here are making a KILLING to start with!

Just my $0.02 worth (+/-),


Lawrence R. Schwarcz, Software Design Engr/IND      Internet:  [e-mail]
Hewlett Packard Company                               Direct:  [phone]
19420 Homestead Road MS 43UK                            Main:  [phone]
Cupertino, CA 95014                                      Fax:  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: 21 Jan 1995 04:23:36 GMT
Organization: Population Studies & Training Center


> [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?

I think Paul raises an interesting point, and I believe that you
trivialize it.

Nobody denies that cellular fraud happens. I believe, though, that the
cellular industry's dollar figures are overinflated, just as the SPA's
estimates of software piracy are overinflated, purposely so in a self-
serving interest.

The key issue is cost versus selling price. The per-minute selling
price of a cell call may be, in Paul's case, $.50. But, what is the
actual cost of providing that minute to Paul, including depreciation
of network infrastructure construction, salaries, software development
depreciation, research and development, etc? $.35?

Can you really say when a fradulent call is placed that the loss is
$.50?  Not really. Loss implies that you're depriving the company of
something that they otherwise couldn't sell. In a cell call case, its
bandwidth.  Unless bandwidth is saturated, the "fraudulent" cell call
is simply using unoccupied bandwidth that would simply be assigned to
a legit call. In this case, the only real "loss" to the carrier is the
cost of providing the service (with those depreciated costs, etc.),
not the loss of profit from being unable to make a profit by selling
that amount of bandwidth.

Now, if the network were saturated, and by placing a fradulent cell
call you permanently deprived the company of the ability to make a
profit off that bandwidth, then you might be able to say the cost of
fraud is $.50.

I believe that the real reasons industries overstate losses from fraud
is to make the problem appear larger than it really is. For example,
the recent case of the guy who stole calling card numbers by
collecting them through MCI's network software -- they estimated the
fraud at what? 25 MILLION dollars? At $1 per minute, that requires 25
million minutes worth of long distance -- or 250,000 people making a
100 minute phone call.

Unfortunately, the issue is really techy, and not many people are in a
position to question the numbers -- even though, with a little high-school
mathematics, running the numbers sometimes makes you stand up and
scratch your head with a "wait a minute, something here doesn't juve."

And, when people do raise a question, they're critized in the same
manner that you address Paul. But, I guess telcos are just honest,
trustworthy companies that we shouldn't question at all -- sort of
like the attitude we should take with our government too, huh?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I never said the telcos are always honest
and I certainly do not believe the government is always honest. But even
theives have property rights. You and Paul both bring up the same point
about how 'it would not have been sold anyway' ... and while that may or
may not be true, my response would be that whether or not it gets sold
is my business, not yours. I have some commodity, whatever it is, maybe
its capacity on a cellular switch; maybe its a cable television system.
I make the statement, 'this is worth X dollars, and that is what you
will pay me if you wish to have/use it.' The owner of a product or service
is the sole person with the authority to decide what his product or service
is 'worth'. If all you and Paul are saying is that people or companies who
have things stolen from them occassionally inflate the value of what was
stolen for reasons of their own, i.e. insurance payoff, then I would agree
with you. Yes, they do that that. If they report what they sold as worth
one dollar and what was stolen as worth two dollars (for the same quantity
or product, etc) then that is wrong. If they report what was stolen as
worth the same amount as that which was sold, then I don't think that is
wrong.

If you are attempting to trivialize the theft because 'it was not worth as
much as they claim' or because 'they would not have sold it anyway' then
I contend both those reasons are invalid, simply because what the other
person claims is none of your business nor is what he manages to sell or
not sell.  You cannot trivialize theft based on how out of whack the
property owner's ideas about his property's values are with reality. It
is still his property.

To put it another way, consider a large supermarket in a city like Chicago.
Jewel Food Stores tosses a huge amount of perishable stuff out in the
dumpster each week when their new stock comes in. Milk with an expiration
date only two or three days away. Loaves of bread which have been around
awhile or which got banged up and the wrapping slightly sliced open by
accident in transit. Entire cartons of eggs where one egg got broken. Boxes
of breakfast cereal smashed up in transit. In other words, perfectly
good food, but American consumers are picky people. Homeless or other poor
people with sophistication or 'street-smarts' know exactly what day, or
rather night of the week each Jewel store in the area gets its deliveries
and within minutes or maybe an hour what time to go hit those dumpsters
and clean them out. Granted, you can't be too picky about variety; you
can have a dozen boxes of corn flakes because they threw out the whole
carton when the box on top got sliced open accidently by the stock clerk
opening the carton, but don't look for any Raisin Bran this week. And in
the middle of winter, all those gallon jugs of milk are just fine, but
in the middle of the summer if they've been out there in the dumpster more
than an hour or so, you don't want them ... otherwise, everything is fine.

So since a grocery store is going to toss out all of its perishables when
a new order comes in, and since they never manage to sell it all, and
since the price tag for the item is probably five times higher than what
they paid for it, what real problem is there if someone wants to shoplift
a little right from the store?  Right?  Now substitute cellular carriers
and/or telcos and/or software writers. If sneaking something out without
paying is cool, then fine. If 'shoplifting' is wrong, then it is wrong.  PAT]

------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V15 #51
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29071;
          21 Jan 95 9:32 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23906; Sat, 21 Jan 95 05:34:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23899; Sat, 21 Jan 95 05:34:02 CST
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 95 05:34:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #52

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 21 Jan 95 05:34:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 52

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    DOJ Computer Siezure Guide (Dave Banisar)
    T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference (Alan Jackson)
    In the Matter of Callback Services (Paul Robinson)
    Worldwide Area Code Listing Available via ftp (Paul Robinson)
    New York A-Carrier Roaming Ban Lifted (Greg Monti)
    Cellular Phone Information (Lokesh Kalpa)
    LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Pete Norloff)
    Looking for SS7 / CCS7 Spec Information (George E. Cabanas)
    Looking for Autodialers For Callback (Hadi Fakhoury)
    Canadian Carrier TelRoute in Receivership (Dave Leibold)
    American Literature on Multimedia (Toyoaki Kondo)
    MCI Won't Bill For Calls Already Made to 1-800-CALL-INFO (bkron.netcom.com)

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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Organization: Electronic Privacy Information Center
From: Dave Banisar <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 21:08:18 EST
Subject: DOJ Computer Siezure Guidel


EPIC Analysis of New Justice Department Draft Guidelines on Searching
and Seizing Computers

Dave Banisar
Electronic Privacy Information Center


The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has obtained the
Department of Justice's recently issued draft "Federal Guidelines for
Searching and Seizing Computers."  EPIC obtained the document under
the Freedom of Information Act.  The guidelines provide an overview of
the law surrounding searches, seizures and uses of computer systems
and electronic information in criminal and civil cases.  They discuss
current law and suggest how it may apply to situations involving
computers.  The draft guidelines were developed by the Justice
Department's Computer Crime Division and an informal group of federal
agencies known as the Computer Search and Seizure Working Group.

Seizing Computers

A major portion of the document deals with the seizure of computers.
The draft recommends the use of the "independent component doctrine"
to determine if a reason can be articulated to seize each separate
piece of hardware.  Prosecutors are urged to "seize only those pieces
of equipment necessary for basic input/output so that the government
can successfully execute the warrant."  The guidelines reject the
theory that because a device is connected to a target computer, it
should be seized, stating that "[i]n an era of increased networking,
this kind of approach can lead to absurd results."

However, the guidelines also note that computers and accessories are
frequently incompatible or booby trapped, thus recommending that
equipment generally should be seized to ensure that it will work.
They recommend that irrelevant material should be returned quickly.
"[O]nce the analyst has examined the computer system and data and
decided that some items or information need not be kept, the
government should return this property as soon as possible."  The
guidelines suggest that it may be possible to make exact copies of the
information on the storage devices and return the computers and data
to the suspects if they sign waivers stating that the copy is an exact
replica of the original data.

On the issue of warrantless seizure and "no-knock warrants," the
guidelines note the ease of destroying data.  If a suspect is observed
destroying data, a warrantless seizure may occur, provided that a
warrant is obtained before an actual search can proceed.  For "no-knock"
warrants, the guidelines caution that more than the mere fact that the
evidence can be easily destroyed is required before such a warrant can
be issued.  "These problems ... are not, standing alone, sufficient
to justify dispensing with the knock-and-announce rule."


Searching Computers:

Generally, warrants are required for searches of computers unless
there is a recognized exception to the warrant requirement.  The
guidelines recommend that law enforcement agents use utility programs
to conduct limited searches for specific information, both because the
law prefers warrants that are narrowly tailored and for reasons of
economy.  "The power of the computer allows analysts to design a
limited search in other ways as well ... by specific name, words,
places ..."

For computer systems used by more than one person, the guidelines
state that the consent of one user is enough to authorize a search of
the entire system, even if each user has a different directory.
However, if users have taken "special steps" to protect their privacy,
such as using passwords or encryption, a search warrant is necessary.
The guidelines suggest that users do not have an expectation of
privacy on commercial services and large mainframe systems because
users should know that system operators have the technical ability to
read all files on such systems.  They recommend that the most prudent
course is to obtain a warrant, but suggest that in the absence of a
warrant prosecutors should argue that "reasonable users will also
expect system administrators to be able to access all data on the
system."  Employees may also have an expectation of privacy in their
computers that would prohibit employers from consenting to police
searches.  Public employees are protected by the Fourth Amendment and
searches of their computers are prohibited except for "non-investigatory,
work related intrusions" and "investigatory searches for evidence of
suspected work-related employee misfeasance."

The guidelines discuss the Privacy Protection Act of 1980, which was
successfully used in the Steve Jackson Games case against federal
agents.  They recommend that "before searching any BBS, agents must
carefully consider the restrictions of the PPA."  Citing the Jackson
case, they leave open the question of whether BBS's by themselves are
subject to the PPA and state that "the scope of the PPA has been
greatly expanded as a practical consequence of the revolution in
information technology -- a result which was probably not envisioned
by the Act's drafters."  Under several DOJ memos issued in 1993, all
applications for warrants under the Privacy Protection Act must be
approved by a Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal
Division or the supervising DOJ attorney.

For computers that contain private electronic mail protected by the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, prosecutors are advised
to inform the judge that private email may be present and avoid
reading communications not covered in the warrant.  Under the ECPA, a
warrant is required for email on a public system that is stored for
less than 180 days.  If the mail is stored for more than 180 days, law
enforcement agents can obtain it either by using a subpoena (if they
inform the target beforehand) or by using a warrant without notice.

For computers that contain confidential information, the guidelines
recommend that forensic experts minimize their examination of
irrelevant files.  It may also be possible to appoint a special master
to search systems containing privileged information.

One important section deals with issues relating to encryption and the
Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination.  The guidelines
caution that a grant of limited immunity may be necessary before investi-
gators can compel disclosure of an encryption key from a suspect. This
suggestion is significant given recent debates over the Clipper Chip
and the possibility of mandatory key escrow.


Computer Evidence:

The draft guidelines also address issues relating to the use of
computerized information as evidence.  The guidelines note that "this
area may become a new battleground for technical experts."  They
recognize the unique problems of electronic evidence: "it can be
created, altered, stored, copied, and moved with unprecedented ease,
which creates both problems and opportunities for advocates."  The
guidelines discuss scenarios where digital photographs can be easily
altered without a trace and the potential use of digital signatures to
create electronic seals.  They also raise questions about the use of
computer generated evidence, such as the results of a search failing
to locate an electronic tax return in a computer system.  An evaluation
of the technical processes used will be necessary: "proponents must be
prepared to show that the process is reliable."


Experts:

The DOJ guidelines recommend that experts be used in all computer
seizures and searches -- "when in doubt, rely on experts."  They
provide a list of experts from within government agencies, such as the
Electronic Crimes Special Agent program in the Secret Service (with 12
agents at the time of the writing of the guidelines), the Computer
Analysis and Response Team of the FBI, and the seized recovery
specialists (SERC) in the IRS.  The guidelines reveal that "[m]any
companies such as IBM and Data General employ some experts solely to
assist various law enforcement agencies on search warrants."  Other
potential experts include local universities and the victims of crimes
themselves, although the guidelines caution that there may be potential
problems of bias when victims act as experts.


Obtaining a Copy of the Guidelines:

EPIC, with the cooperation of the Bureau of National Affairs, is
making the guidelines available electronically.  The document is
available via FTP/Gopher/WAIS/listserv from the EPIC online archive at
cpsr.org /cpsr/privacy/epic/fed_computer_siezure_guidelines.txt. A
printed version appears in the Bureau of National Affairs publication,
Criminal Law Reporter, Vol. 56, No. 12 (December 21 1994).

About EPIC:

The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest
research center in Washington, DC.  It was established in 1994 to
focus public attention on emerging privacy issues relating to the
National Information Infrastructure, such as the Clipper Chip, the
Digital Telephony proposal, medical record privacy, and the sale of
consumer data.  EPIC is sponsored by the Fund for Constitutional
Government and Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility.  EPIC
publishes the EPIC Alert and EPIC Reports, pursues Freedom of
Information Act litigation, and conducts policy research on emerging
privacy issues.  For more information email [e-mail], or write
EPIC, 666 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E., Suite 301, Washington, DC 20003. +1
202 544 9240 (tel), [phone] (fax).

The Fund for Constitutional Government is a non-profit organization
established in 1974 to protect civil liberties and constitutional
rights.  Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility is a
national membership organization of people concerned about the impact
of technology on society. For information contact: [e-mail].

Tax-deductible contributions to support the work of EPIC should be
made payable to the Fund for Constitutional Government.


David Banisar ([e-mail])       * 202-544-9240 (tel)
Electronic Privacy Information Center * 202-547-5482 (fax)
666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, Suite 301  * ftp/gopher/wais cpsr.org
Washington, DC 20003                * HTTP://epic.digicash.com/epic

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

From: Alan Jackson <[e-mail]>
Subject: T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference?
Date: 20 Jan 1995 18:42:47 GMT
Organization: South Coast Computer Services (sccsi.com)


What's the difference between the two as far as the user is concerned?

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 13:42:18 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: In the Matter of Callback Services


> 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").

The simplest way would be if the service provider knew what carrier
was delivering the call, then they could make arrangements with these
carriers to both save them some money and perhaps make some arrangement
with them to share the calls coming back.

You set up the system so that the carrier sends only a single line
from their switch for international calls, and all it has to do is
pass down the destination number; they don't even need to supply a
voice channel.  Calls that come from U.S. Destinations through the
carrier are given answer supervision and a message either that the
customer is refusing calls from US numbers or that they called an
outgoing trunk like.  This would then charge the caller the minimum
10c for connecting to the number.  Caller ID could be put on the trunk
lines; callers that are marked as blocked or local either get a busy
signal, an announcement that it's an outgoing only trunk, or just get
spiked with an immediate answer and disconnect, causing them to pay
for a message unit.

If you know which carriers provide overseas service from the countries
in question, you can get the major carriers to go along with it in
exchange for saving them money since they now no longer pay the 2c
termination charge to the local telephone company, and would get
outgoing business from the service being generated.

But, the point being except where phone rates are still very high,
these services aren't of much use because the phone rates for most
direct-dial calls have been reduced as a result of the mere existence
of arbitrage service resellers.  What they would still be good for is
bypassing dial restrictions, e.g. from an Arab country to Israel, or
other places where direct dial calls are not permitted due to local
regulations.  And also for making long distance calls that the local
authorities have no means to discover the termination number, e.g. a
U.S. company without local presence there can tell a southeast asian
government to get lost when it demands toll records of someone over
there since that government's orders have no validity here, as has
been the practice where local banks were typically ordered to provide
all credit card transactions of locals.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 14:00:13 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: Worldwide Area Code Listing Available via FTP


I am in the final stages of updating my list of US and international
area code, telex code, datagram numbers and country codes.  I would
like comments from anyone who is interested in the information in the
document to take a look and check for any errors or additional related
information I could squeeze into this before it is submitted for
publication as an Internet RFC to replace my current RFC 1394.

I am interested in making sure I have all of the currently proposed
new format US area codes as well as any city or province codes of
major large international cities.  Also of any related information I
could have included which is not part of this document.

The document's name is:

/internet-draft/draft-robinson-newtelex-01.txt

It is 154,911 bytes in size.  I would like to receive any final
comments by February 1.  If you cannot FTP you can obtain the document
by E-Mail.

The FTP sites having the document are:

Africa:        ftp.is.co.za    (196.4.160.2)
Europe:        nic.nordu.net   (192.36.148.17)
Pacific Rim:   munnari.oz.au   (128.250.1.21)
US East Coast: ds.internic.net (198.49.45.10)
US West Coast: ftp.isi.edu     (128.9.0.32)

To obtain the document by E-mail, send a message to:
<[e-mail]> In the body (the subject is ignored) type:

FILE /internet-drafts/draft-robinson-newtelex-01.txt

Thank you for any assistance, and I hope this document will be of use
to some people.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: International country codes and related
files are also available in the Telecom Archives at lcs.mit.edu.   PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 11:56:59 EST
From: Greg Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: New York A-Carrier Roaming Ban Lifted


According to a story in the January 20, 1995, issue of {Communications
Daily}, Cellular One Baltimore/Washington's ban on automatic roaming
(and on billed-to-your-cell-phone roaming) in the New York City area
"A" system existed only from November 30 to January 9.  This is the
first word I have heard that the service is back.

The story says that C1-Wash-Balt blocked customer calls from New York
"while installing antipiracy equipment."

This was mentioned at the bottom of a story noting that New York City
police have accused a 28-year-old Uruguayan native of forgery,
computer tampering and other charges in cloning of several hundred
cellular numbers.


Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    [phone]
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      [phone]
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: LOKESH KALRA <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Phone Information Wanted
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 12:16:22 EST


Hello,

Is there a place other than the January 93 issue of {Consumer Reports}
(probably quite out of date now) that discusses the Cellular/Mobile
phone technology, kinds of plans offered, and the various models and
how they are rated?

Would appreaciate any info at [e-mail]


Regards,

Lokesh

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

From: [e-mail] (Pete Norloff)
Subject: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: 20 Jan 1995 17:29:51 GMT
Organization: LC Technologies, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


I'm looking for some information on the sharing of long distance fees
between long distance carriers and the RBOCs.  I've found casual
references which indicate that the long distance carriers pay the
RBOCs approximately 25% each of the fees collected for long distance
calls and keep 50% for themselves.  This 25% was referred to as
something like "line termination charges".  It's the payment to the
local carrier for connecting one end of the call.

I'm hoping to find an authoritative reference to help me in an
argument with a Bell Atlantic engineer.  This engineer believes that
Bell Atlantic is providing the terminating end of long distance calls
to the long distance carriers for free.

Anyone have any information on this topic?


Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (George E. Cabanas)
Subject: Looking For SS7 / CCS7 Spec Information
Date: 20 Jan 1995 12:58:36 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Hello all,

I'm looking for an archive site that has documents detailing the SS7 /
CCS7 specs.  I'm interested in the control and alarm messages
produced.  Any information would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks,

George E. Cabanas    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hadi Fakhoury)
Subject: Looking For Autodialers For Callback
Date: 20 Jan 1995 18:20:03 GMT
Organization: Project GLUE, University of Maryland, College Park


I am looking for autodialers to be used in conjunction with a callback
service, for both single line and PBX usage. The dialer in effect
renders the service transparent to me.

Any information would be appreciated. Please post response or email to
[e-mail].


Thanks,

Hadi

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 00:24:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Canadian Carrier TelRoute in Receivership


{The Toronto Star}, among other Canadian media outlets, reports that
TelRoute Communications, one of the major new competitive Canadian
long distance carriers, is in receivership. TelRoute owed $15-16
million to various companies, including Teleglobe, Fonorola, and Bell
Canada to which $3.5 million is owed. TelRoute's specialty was to be
its microwave network, and there are reported debts with their
Toronto-Buffalo link.

Last weekend, Bell Canada switched many of TelRoute's 40 000 customers
off equal access, mostly to default to Bell (or in one case I'm
familiar with, the line was defaulted to Unitel). After some legal
wrangling, Bell is to return TelRoute customers default status back to
its customers for now.  TelRoute will operate for another three weeks
while receiver Peat Marwick Thorne attempts to sell the assets,
according to reported terms of agreement between Bell and TelRoute.

The TelRoute failure, along with the recent bankruptcy of smaller
carrier Northquest Ventures (whose assets were sold to Fonorola),
marks a definitive beginning of a shake-out in the Canadian long
distance industry, where a surprisingly large number of companies took
advantage of the 1992 CRTC decision to open long distance competition.

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

From: [e-mail] (Toyoaki Kondo)
Subject: American Literature on Multimedia
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 00:30:17 -0600
Organization: Northwestern University


Does anyone know of any good books or information on how technologies,
especially multimedia, will change economic activities of consumers
and producers, life styles, political participations, culture,
perceptions, and international economic relations.

   I'm doing a comperative study of Japanese literature and American
literature on multimedia. I am having a hard time finding American
literature. If somebody knows any relevant resource, I would appreciate
your help.


Thank you,

Toyo

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

From: [e-mail] (BUBEYE!)
Subject: MCI Won't Bill For Calls Already Made to 1-800-CALL-INFO
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 06:57:59 GMT


I saw a wire story which said that MCI reached an agreement with 17 states
whereby they will not bill customers for calls they have already made
to their 1-800-CALL-INFO service.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #52
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa10563;
          21 Jan 95 10:48 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA24598; Sat, 21 Jan 95 06:43:10 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA24591; Sat, 21 Jan 95 06:43:07 CST
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 95 06:43:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #53

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 21 Jan 95 06:43:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 53

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Mobility Canada Views on 2 GHz Spectrum (Dave Leibold)
    ATT True Voice Patents (Monty Solomon)
    Which Countries Have Competition (For FAQ Update)? (Dave Leibold)
    800 and Caller ID (Comments) (Glenn Foote)
    Teleworking Stories (Marc Schaefer)
    Corporate Creativity, was Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much? (Danny Burstein)
    Canadian Universal Internet Access (Sarah Holland)
    Glossary Wanted (S. Cantor)
    Internet Mail With Half the Address? (Jane McMahon)

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: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 00:23:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Mobility Canada Views on 2 GHz Spectrum


[a news release via CNW - content is Bell Mobility's]

MOBILITY CANADA READY TO BUILD THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY

OTTAWA, Jan. 16 /CNW/ - Mobility Canada, the country's leading
supplier of personal communication services (PCS), today submitted to
Industry Canada its position on the federal governments' pending
licensing of spectrum at 2 GHz.  The 2 GHz spectrum will open up a new
realm of personal communications possibilities, bringing Canadians one
step closer to accessing the Information Highway.

"Canada is on the brink of a new age in personal communications," said
Dave Wells, President and Chief Executive Officer, Mobility Canada.
"Whether it's using a video phone to call home to the family, or
transmitting an X-ray image from an ambulance to a hospital, the 2 GHz
spectrum will facilitate the introduction of radical new technology
and services that demand considerable bandwidth and are unavailable in
today's cellular environment. Essentially, we're going to see a
fundamental shift from communication between places, to communication
between people, and Mobility Canada is ideally placed to help make
that shift happen."

Mobility Canada intends to apply for a national license with a minimum
capacity of 30 MHz to offer service at 2 GHz so that its growing base
of 1.5 million customers across the country can benefit from the range
of innovative and complementary services that the additional
capability of 2 GHz will make possible. Mobility Canada is also
developing a suite of services called Customer First, to ensure that
it can meet the changing needs of its customers over time.

In preparation for this opportunity Mobility Canada recently launched
a comprehensive testing program of potential new PCS technologies --
code Division Multiple Access (CDMA), PCS 1900 and PACS. The trial,
which is the only one in the world to include all three major
contending technologies, will determine the merits of each and ensure
that Mobility Canada can provide the best possible communications
solutions.

The federal government is scheduled to award licenses for the use of 2
GHz spectrum later this year. If successful, Mobility Canada expects
that approximately $1 billion will be invested in developing and
implementing new technology and services in the next five years. As a
result, up to 1,000 direct new jobs would be created, mostly in the
high-skill areas of radio and network engineering and computer
software design. A further 2,000 jobs could be created indirectly
through an anticipated economic spin-off of up to $2 billion.

Mobility Canada recommends that the federal government takes into
account the proven track record, business plans and technical and
operational abilities of all license applicants, believing preference
should be given to those capable of developing and delivering
innovative and competent services at this new frequency range. As
well, Mobility Canada hopes to see Canadian companies taking the lead
in charting this new

[news release omitted a line or two here, unfortunately]

To date, competition has played a major role in positioning Canada as
a world leader in cellular communications. "The provision of PCS at 2
GHz will maintain competition in this emerging telecommunications
sector, which is good news for the consumer," said Wells. "And we're
confident the federal government will recognize that Mobility Canada
is ideally situated to help bring Canadians into the next realm of
telecommunications services, and are looking forward to the call for
applications."

Personal communications services at 2 GHz should offer more than just
portable voice communications. While voice will be a key basic
service, the spectrum will also enable the transmission of enhanced
voice, facsimile data and video services. Some of the possibilities
include: mobile medical imaging, mobile video phone, mobile
classrooms, virtual field trips, intelligent vehicles and wireless
e-mail. PCS will provide a "network of networks" enabling customers to
choose services that best meet their individual communications needs.

Mobility Canada, a corporation established to deliver quality mobile
communications operates Canada's largest cellular and paging networks.
Together, Mobility Canada shareholders have invested a record $1.3
billion in wireless technology products and services and directly
employ over 3,500 Canadians.

For further information: or a copy of Mobility Canada's submission:
Suzzanne Ricard [phone]; Angela Hislop [phone].

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 01:53:38 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: ATT True Voice Patents
Reply-To: [e-mail]


FYI.

  Date: Fri, 13 Jan 1995 09:57:57 -0500
  From: [e-mail] (Gregory Aharonian)
  To: [e-mail]
  Subject: PATNEWS: Re-examination filed for ATT's True Voice technology

19940113  Re-examination filed for ATT's True Voice patent

   It seems that someone is filing a reexamination with the Patent
Office challenging ATT's patent on its true voice technology.  There
are a series of files posted to misc.int-property containing documents
filed.  Here is one of the declarations filed.  Should be interesting
to see what happens.

Greg Aharonian
Internet Patent News Service
(for subscription info, send 'help' to   [e-mail] )
(for prior art search services info, send 'prior' to [e-mail] )
(for WWW patent searching, try  http://sunsite.unc.edu/patents/intropat.html )

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

IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

In re:      U.S. Patent No. 5,195,132

                        DECLARATION OF LEONARD R. KAHN

I, Leonard R. Kahn, declare as follows:

1.  I am the President of Kahn Communications, Inc. located at Carle
Place, New York.

2.  I am the same Leonard R. Kahn who co-authored an article entitled
"Enhancement of Telephone Line Performance", which was presented at
the National Association of Broadcasters' Engineering Conference held
on March 23-26, 1969, in Washington D.C. (hereinafter the NAB article).
I am also the same Leonard R. Kahn who is listed as a sole or joint
inventor in U.S. Patents Nos. 4,217,661; 3,684,838; and 3,696,298.

3.  In addition to the patents set forth in paragraph 2, I am also the
sole or joint inventor of over 80 other U.S. patents in the field of
electronics and telecommunications.  My professional qualifications
and achievements are set forth in Attachment A.

4.  My above-referenced NAB article was directed to the problem of
obtaining high quality speech in the standard telephone network as it
was available in 1969.  The explicit intention of my 1969 article was
to discuss the desirability of restoring, in a telephonic communication
system, certain frequencies that were normally attenuated. Specifically,
I suggested in my NAB article that the frequencies between 100 Hz and
300 Hz are desirable frequencies to be restored in a telephonic
communication system.

In the NAB article, I also discussed various devices that could be
employed in restoring low frequencies (those between 100 Hz and 300
Hz) in a telephone communication network.

5.  Frequencies in the range of between 100 Hz to 300 Hz frequencies
are normally attenuated in telephone systems.

6.  My NAB article suggested, among other solutions, using an
equalizer in a telephone network as a device to accomplish restoration
of low frequency speech signals in telephone communication.

7.  My NAB article specifically mentions the speech signal associated
with a telephone set as the signal to be selectively amplified for
more natural speech communication.

8.  It was well known, in 1969, when my NAB article was published,
that equalization, as referenced in paragraph 6 above, could be
accomplished with any of a number of electronic devices known as
equalizers or filters.

9.  The telephone network was, in 1969, controlled by American
Telephone and Telegraph Inc. (AT&T) in a manner which prevented using
an equalizer in the straightforward way as suggested in my NAB
article.  Consequently, it was necessary for me and others to develop
complex systems for restoring low frequency signals in the telephone
network.

10.  The disclosure in U.S Patent No. 5,195,132 relative to the use of
an equalizer to restore low frequency speech signals in a telephone
network merely reflects the ability of AT&T to arrange their telephone
network in accordance with the teaching of my NAB article.  In other
words, AT&T has modified its network in order to take advantage of the
equalizer arrangement suggested in my NAB article.

11.  I believe that the disclosure of my NAB article appears to
constitute the stated invention in U.S. Patent No. 5,195,132, which
provides truer voice transmission of low frequencies.

      I declare under penalty of perjury, pursuant to the laws of the
United States of America, that the foregoing is true and correct.

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

John Berryhill
1601 Market St., Suite 720
Philadelphia, PA  19103

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 00:32:00 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Which Countries Have Competition (for FAQ Update)?


As the FAQ update is under way, one section dealt with the various
countries that have introduced telecom competition in some form or
other. I've heard of a European Community directive to the effect that
its member countries are to open up telecom markets by a given date.
Competing local networks are also emerging (including UK, US
developments).

Information on which countries have introduced, or are about to introduce,
competition is welcome, in order to keep the Telecom FAQ comments on
this up to date.

The current FAQ excerpt on the matter follows:

Competition

Q: Which countries have competitive long distance service?

A: Most countries have a single monopoly telephone company for their
   local and long distance services. Yet, deregulation of telephone
   companies and telecommunications in general is a worldwide trend.
   For better or worse, the international marketplace is demanding
   more innovation and competition in telecom markets in such areas
   as electronic mail, fax and data services as well as the long
   distance, satellite and other network services.

   The United States has competition in terms of long distance services
   (i.e. a choice of carriers such as AT&T, MCI, Sprint, Metromedia/ITT,
   Allnet, ATC). This was established in the early 1980s with the
   court-ordered dissolution of the Bell System into such pieces as
   regional local telephone providers, AT&T (long distance) and
   Bellcore (research, administration of telephone standards, etc.).

   The UK has a duopoly long distance situation: British Telecom
   and Mercury can provide long distance services but that could
   be challenged as other companies wish to provide long distance
   services.

   Canada permitted public long distance competition in June 1992.
   Prior to that, there was limited competition in terms of such things
   as fax communication services and various long distance/local service
   resellers, aimed at business interests. Unitel and BCRL/Call-Net
   were successful in their application to compete. A subsequent appeal
   of certain aspects of this decision was made by Bell Canada and other
   existing telephone companies. The result of the appeal was that
   the decision could stand, and that long distance competition may
   proceed.

   New Zealand recently allowed Clear Communications to compete in long
   distance. Australia now has Optus as a long distance competitor. Japan
   has competition in international public long distance services.

   There are initial signs competition in the "local loop", or local
   exchange services, also. Reports from the UK indicate that there is
   significant growth in alternative local services, besides the Mercury/BT
   long distance duopoly (competition of two). Cable companies are touted
   as alternative local phone companies because of the available capacity
   on cable feeds, plus the cable industry's conversion to fibre optic and
   digital technologies. A choice of "dial tone" providers may eventually
   be available to match the availability of competition in long distance
   services.

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn Foote)
Subject: 800 and Caller ID (Comments)
Date: 21 Jan 1995 05:23:07 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet


> [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.

> 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]

     Well, Pat, maybe those who pay for the calls do have a "right" to
see the data.  But, this "right" does, or at least did, not exist in
the tariff for 800 service. And, if it does exist now, you can bet the
house, the barn, and the dog, that it is restricted by the words "...
where facilities allow".  For that matter, only AT&T actually files
tariffs with the FCC, the others "publish rates" by choice, not by
requirement. Even for AT&T this may end soon.  The other companies,
who started giving out the calling telephone number, did so (and
probably continue) for "marketing" reasons.

     The "contract(s)" at the local level are different depending on
the state and the local telephone company. Also, some (many) phone
companies have no provisions for making the tariffs available to the
public.  For example, although the various PUC's usually require
copies of the tariff to be available in "public offices", there is no
provision that the Telco must actually have a "public office".  So
some (many?) the Telco's just did away with "public offices", in favor
of "service locations".  Everything else is just the same, except no
tariff availability.  Therefore, if access to the tariff is restricted,
by design of the Telcos, the "public" must rely on the assertions of
the Telco.  Neat, for the Telcos; for the public, it's a problem, and
not just in the area of Caller ID.

     In response to your question/comment: "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.

     Yes, I am stating that you get this information because you paid
to get it.  (Incidently, the "you" here refers to anyone who is using
a 800 number and gets the caller data, not you personally, Pat.).
This data has been made a large part of the marketing effort, and the
aftermarket IS software and hardware product area for some time. To
claim that you are not paying for the data, as an integral part of the
call, is naive. For some time, there was, and still may be, an extra
charge for this data when small companies (light traffic) are/is
involved.  I can point to major companies who have switched carriers
just to get this data when it was not available from AT&T.

     As to "who owns a telephone call", the various courts are in
disagreement on that issue as we speak.  It may be that a call is
"owned" by both parties.  There is a lot of history that supports that
contention.

     About "entitled to know": Yes, you are!  The right, and ability,
to audit Telco bills was a hard won battle. I would be among the first
to fight against giving up that right or ability.  However, the
ability to audit the bill is not as important as the individual
privacy/security right of the consumer, nor are they incompatible.
The existing technology is more than adequate to provide both.

     It is very easy to say "pay for it yourself, bozo.".  Speaking
for myself, and my clients, and I think many others as well, (none of
whom are "prima-donnas") paying for it is NOT a problem. Unfortunately,
many companies do not allow calls except to 800 numbers, and/or will
only "give out" 800 numbers.  Increasingly, the reasons for this seem
to be the intent to penetrate the privacy/security of the caller,
while "hiding" behind a 800 number front which itself cannot be readily
identified as to location, company, or purpose.

     At the risk of repeating myself, 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]

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jan 95 07:25 MET
From: [e-mail] (Marc SCHAEFER)
Subject: Teleworking Stories
Organization: ALPHANET NF - Research and information - Not for profit


Hi,

Do you happen to know a teleworking story?  Especially in the aspect
of worker-firm interaction/conflicts. Do you know about court cases
(featuring piracy, privacy/non privacy of mails in commercial
environment, snooping of mails from employees, successful examples,
etc).

This would be for a thesis.


Thank you!

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

From: [e-mail] (danny burstein)
Subject: Corporate Creativity, was Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much is Real?
Date: 21 Jan 1995 01:43:59 -0500


[Summary until now: The points raised basically question how much of the
claimed cellular phone losses to fraud are "real" versus fiction. i.e.,
when they claim $20 million in losses, is that actual cost to them, or is
based on, say, 20 million minutes at their full retail price of $1/minute].

This overstating of losses is common by Big Business, and by numerous
other groups, for the following reasons:

a) It gets a lot more publicity;

b) It can be used to justify rate increases;

c) It can boost insurance payments;

d) It can reduce taxes.

Let's take a couple or so examples, not necessarily telecom:

Police grab 100 pounds of cocaine. Well, umm, maybe they grabbed a bit
more, but they show off 100 pounds. They state: "This was worth
$1,000/pound on the street, so we just kicked ORGANIZED CRIME for one
hundred thousand dollars."

However, the actual and replacement cost to the Bad Guys is only $25 plus
shipping and handling ... but that wouldn't be newsworthy.

Or, let's say you are Mega-tele-sleaze, Inc. You're about to make $100
million in profits. But the IRS will take $50 million of it. So what
do you do? Well, for starters, you give $100,000 to the local "take-a-buck
political club", but in addition, you tell your accountants to come up
with "losses" to offset your profits.

Aha!, they say. Let's see ... hmm, there were 10 million minutes of
FAKE CALLS!. So we can claim $10 million in losses. Poof, there go $5
million in IRS payments!

Or even better ... These calls "would have been" at the Roaming Rate
of $5/minute. Wow!.

(It's not quite that simple to claim tax losses, but at these figures,
it's worth having the tax lawyers work out creative charts).

BTW, if I might give an analogy that shows how absurd this can become:

Let's say you're a former felon who was given a pardon by an "uindicted
co-conspirator", and, in addition to owning a shipyard, you're also the
principal shareholder of a major league baseball (remember them?) franchise.

You sell tickets to your stadium at $25-$1,000 dollars (depending on
location).

Lo and behold your security staff finds a dozen kids climbing a tree and
watching the game from the outside. You've just had a $1,200 loss ...

And, since your payments to the City are based on your profits ...

(Now Corporate America would never use logic like that, would they???)


[e-mail] (or [e-mail])

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

Date: 21 Jan 95 02:51:54 EST
From: Sarah Holland <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canadian Universal Internet Access


My last message to TELECOM Digest was about how SaskTel was offering
universal Internet access, and BC Tel was reported as saying that it
wouldn't. I'd like to take credit for their change of heart ...


{Vancouver Sun}, January 20, 1995, Bits & Bytes Column

Canadian phone companies are joining forces to offer access to the
Internet from anywhere in the country, especially rural areas.
[Sarah's comment -- yippee!!]

Executives from the Stentor alliance, which includes BC Tel, are
working on a plan to allow Canada's estimated one million Internet
users to dial into the computer network from anywhere in Canada
without having to phone long distance.  ***


Sarah Holland    [e-mail]
Fort St. James, BC, Canada - "Historic Capital of New Caledonia"


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Good for you! I hope the connection
gets turned on soon, and it works out well for everyone.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (S Cantor)
Subject: Glossary Wanted
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 09:11:14 -0500
Organization: The Internet Access Company


I'm looking for a good laymen's type glossary of common data
communications and telecommunications terms.

E.g. how would you define "internetworking"?

How would you describe "physical plant" to non-techie?

Any suggestions?  Is the FAQ of this sort floating around?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes it is. The Telecom Archives has several
glossary files available. There are various ways to access them. You can
use anonymous ftp lcs.mit.edu. When connected, 'cd telecom-archives' and
then 'cd glossaries'. The glossary files can also be searched interactively
using the Telecom Archives Email Information Service. To do this you send
mail to the Archives ([e-mail]) in the usual way -- see the
help file for assistance), using the command GLOSSARY <argument> where the
argument is the word or phrase or abbreviation being searched. You will
receive back in email the appropriate excerpts from the various files.  PAT]

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 09:06:00 +1000
From: /I=C/G=JANE/S=MCMAHON/O=DEMO.SALES.NSW/@telememo.au
Subject: Internet Mail With Half the Address?


Pat,

I know this looks like a lonely hearts type message, but the answers
might be interesting to other readers. Thanks for your help. Here goes:

How do find someone using Internet?

Is it possible to send a mail message to someone knowing only half
their Internet address? I'm trying to track down a Jesuit priest by
the name of Bill Roach (broach@ I assume), who's last known physical
address was a Jesuit seminary in Menlo Park California.

Is there a directory of addresses or some way to get a message to all the
"broach"s on the Internet?

I've tried American telephone directory assistance - no luck.
Couldn't even find Menlo Park.  Excuse my ignorance - We Australians
are reasonably new at this Internet stuff -- bloody crocs keep chewing
up the phone lines!


Thanks in anticipation.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps it is about time for someone to
write an article describing the Internet 'white pages' and how to use
them. I think searching those would be a good way for you to start.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #53
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa11962;
          21 Jan 95 11:08 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25244; Sat, 21 Jan 95 07:27:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25237; Sat, 21 Jan 95 07:27:03 CST
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 95 07:27:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #54

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 21 Jan 95 07:27:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 54

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Pending ATT Videoconferencing Patent With C++ Source Code (Greg Aharonian)
    Programmable Touch-Tone Interpreter Needed (Paul Robinson)
    Re: CallerID and ANI (Scott Falke)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Michael D. Sullivan)
    Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert) (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: Looking For TDM Box (Paul A. Lee)
    800-MY-ANI-IS and Car Phone Redialers (Tom Ward)
    Cellular Exchanges Wanted (Tom Ward)
    Re: Can Caller ID Information Be Faked? (Chris Telesca)
    Re: Where to Get Text of the ECPA? (Wilson Mohr)
    Where: T1 Information/FAQ? ([e-mail])
    Re: ISDN in Florida ([e-mail])
    Telephony Card/Software Needed (Paul Garfield)

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] (Gregory Aharonian)
Subject: Pending ATT Videoconferencing Patent With C++ Source Code
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 18:40:11 GMT


19941019  ATT Videoconferencing patent with C++ source code

    ATT has a patent pending at the US Patent and Trademark Office
dealing with multimedia conferencing.  While not overly notable for
novel ideas, it does list 12,000 lines of C++ source code, if you are
interested in learning more about how ATT does software.

    The patent is titled "Multimedia Communications Network" and filed
April 1993.  The abstract starts: "A circuit configuration in a multimedia
network simulates an actual meeting room where the conferences between
two or more people may be held."

    To order a copy of the patent application, contact your local
supplier of patent hardcopy and ask for PCT application WO 94/24807
filed on April 15,1994.

    Of interest to telecommunications investors is which countries ATT
designated that it might be filing national applications (PCT
applications only protect your filing date and is not a standalone
patent application).  ATT lists most but not all of the European/EPO
countries (United Kingdom, France, Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Italy,
Netherlands and Sweden), Japan, Canada, Australia, Brazil, China,
Korea and New Zealand.  I guess that is where all of the telecom money
is at.


Greg Aharonian   Internet Patent News Service
(for subscription info, send 'help' to   [e-mail] )
(for prior art search services info, send 'prior' to [e-mail] )
(for WWW patent searching, try  http://sunsite.unc.edu/patents/intropat.html )

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 14:17:14 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: Programmable Touch-Tone Interpreter Needed


Jeffrey A. Porten <[e-mail]>, writes:

> a client.. 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

Sounds like what she wants is an automated scheduling system.

> 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."

Eh?  I wonder if he has a license to spread cow manure, because he's
doing a pretty good job.  The gonoph should have his license lifted.

> Anyone with suggestions on how to do this?  Proposals from vendors
> also cheerfully accepted.

I can supply a product to do this, including the computer to run it
on, for about $500.  If the customer has an extra 286 they're not
using, then the price would be less.  This isn't rocket science, it's
mainly getting the parts and putting together the stuff to do what is
desired.

You can give me a call at 1-800-TDARCOS if you're interested.

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 95 21:45:17 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Scott Falke)
Subject: Re: CallerID and ANI
Organization: CSU Stanislaus


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

> 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

> 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.

At least PCConnx honestly advertises this feature.  They *will* disable
the link to your account at your request.  Other 800 sleazeball outfits
take the oppposite appraoch and *lie* about it, even when directly
questioned.  I was charged 6-bucks+ using a flip-phone in rural Idaho
once.  Knowing ANI was linked to US-Whores roamer custserv 800 number,
I *still* called 'em up and suggested a new name that more accurately
described their true corporate motives; i.e.; the rep heard the term
"Total Bastard Cellular" from my lips in a most close-up and personal
manner.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael D. Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: 21 Jan 1995 01:10:07 -0500
Organization: Wilkinson, Barker, Knauer & Quinn (Washington, DC, USA)


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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?

When a phone is cloned, it is typically used not by Joe Devious to
call his office, family, and friends, or to call other mobiles.  It is
typically used for a day or two by a criminal enterprise to sell
long-distance calls, and particularly international calls.  The phone
gets used for a few days or even hours to sell immigrants the ability
to call home in India, Taiwan, Somalia, etc. for say $10 for 10-15
minutes.  The airtime costs involved are minimal compared with the
long-distance charges.  The call-shop operator pockets the cash, then
either trashes the phone or re-clones it to a different number.  The
cellular system incurs actual cash losses equal to the long-distance
charges; this may be picked up by the home system, if the cloned
number is from a roamer.  Whether the serving system or the home
system pays, the cellular industry loses big-time cash.

Even if a cloned phone is used for local landline calls, there are big
losses.  If the cloned number is a roamer, the home system picks up
losses for the airtime and local connection charge.  Many cellular
systems charge both per-minute rates for airtime and a local landline
charge of 10 cents or so to cover landline interconnection.  Whether
there's a markup in these or not, the home system that has to pay is
socked big-time.  Plus there is the cost of doing the roamer verification
and record transfer.  Roamer verification database administration is
expensive; that's why there is typically a premium price paid to roam.
These are actual cash losses.

The only time there are not actual cash losses is when the cloned phone
is used to call only mobile numbers in the same area and neither the
cloned number nor the called number is a roamer.  It's pretty unlikely
that this is a significant proportion of cellular fraud.

If a local phone is cloned and only local calls are made, the cellular
operator is out of pocket for local interconnection costs and operational
overhead costs.  If one assumes, as some have asserted, that cellular
companies have a 40% profit ratio, then their out-of-pocket costs are 60%
of the charges.

Think of it this way:  If someone broke into your home or tapped into
your phone line and made $2000 of calls, your loss would be $2000.  If
the phone company decided to eat that cost, its loss would be $2000.  If
the long-distance company decided to eat that cost, its loss would be
$2000.  Stealing $2000 in phone calls results in $2000 in losses.  The
same facilities are used to make fraudulent calls as would be used for
legitimate calls.  The costs are the same, the profits are the same; if
the bill isn't paid, those costs are lost and so are the profits.  It's
not quite the same as software copying, where there are no direct costs
to the software company if a kid copies his dad's Autocad.


Michael D. Sullivan | INTERNET E-MAIL TO:  [e-mail]
Bethesda, Md., USA  | also [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jan 1995 14:30:13 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Attention: 800 Number Subscribers (News Alert)


[e-mail] (Judith Oppenheimer) writes:

> 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!

This seems to imply that the +800 country code will contain numbers
with only seven digits, yielding a total of no more than ten million
international free-phone numbers for the entire world!  Given that the
North American Numbering Plan alone is already close to running out of
seven-digit intra-NANP free-phone numbers, isn't this +800-XXX-XXXX
arrangement a bit short-sighted?

> 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.

Many countries besides the US have intra-national free-phone services.
Some even use the same 800 area code!  I believe that Ireland, for
example, even uses 1-800 as the full prefix, just like the NANP (although
I understand that the number that follows is only six, not seven, digits).
So why should owners of US 800 numbers (or even NANP 800 numbers --
don't forget Canada and the islands!) be singled out for the privilege
of "grandfathering" their existing numbers into the worldwide +800
number space?  That doesn't sound very fair to the rest of the world.

I think that better schemes are available that could address both
these issues (number scarcity and number collision).  One simple idea
would be to use the format +800-<country-code>-<number>.  For example,
the US number 1-800-FLOWERS would also be available internationally
(assuming the company was willing to pay for incoming international
calls) as +800-1-FLOWERS, and a hypothetical Irish number 1-800-FLOWER
could be dialed internationally as +800-353-FLOWER.  Since each
country code would have its own domain within the overall +800 number
space, no collisions would be possible.

Of course, even this simple scheme could still run into the number
scarcity problem, since it presumes only a single free-phone area code
for each country (a presumption that will soon break in the NANP, as
the 800 NPA fills up and additional free-phone NPAs are allocated).
So perhaps the only fool-proof plan is to just use +800-<country-code>
as a prefix to the entire national toll free number, area code and
all.  Under this method, the US and Irish examples above would become
+800 1 800 FLOWERS and [phone] FLOWER, respectively.  There are
disadvantages with this idea too, of course.  One is that all national
free-phone numbers that can be mapped transparently into the +800
space must be no longer than <Limit> - 3 digits, where <Limit> is the
ITU limit on the number of digits that can follow the "+" sign.
Fortunately, <Limit> itself will soon change (or has just recently
changed) from 12 to 15 anyway, so this might not be a problem.  But
the sheer length of the resulting +800 numbers would be unattractive.


Bob Goudreau        Data General Corporation
[e-mail]    62 Alexander Drive
[phone]        Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 02:28:13 -0500
Subject: Re: Looking for TDM Box
From: Paul A. Lee </DD.ID=JES2CAOF.UEDCM09/@SMX.sprint.com>
Organization: Woolworth Corporation


In {TELECOM Digest), Volume 14 Issue 33, Andrew P. Dinsdale <aa293@detroit.
freenet.org> wrote (in part):

> 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.

MICOM in Simi Valley, CA, is somewhat of a specialist in such devices. Call
them at 800-642-6687 or 805 583-8600.


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] (Tom Ward)
Subject: 800-MY-ANI-IS and Car Phone Redialers
Date: 20 Jan 1995 04:57:10 GMT
Organization: Pinnacle Online - Internet access for Hampton Roads, Virginia


I recently called 800-MY-ANI-IS from my Contel Cellular telephone.
Instead of reading back my cellular number of 804/635-XXXX the number
was translated as 804/623-9110.  When I tried calling this number
directly, it said that the number was being checked for trouble.

My question is: Do cellular switches use landline telephone lines with
DIDs of their own to put calls through?


Tom Ward, President & CEO   AirPage Communications of Va
email: [e-mail]    pager: 804/326-PAGE


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Something like this is common. I do know
that cellular phones here in the Chicago area return very odd numbers
when tested against Caller-ID and ANI. Often as not, Caller-ID boxes
show the cellular phone as 'out of area', but at least in the case of
my cellular phone, the ANI given was cross-referenced to a 'subscriber'
given as 'IBT Company', at an address which turned out to be a central
office in one of the western suburbs -- with a 312 area code yet, even
though the suburbs are 708.  When I tried to dial that number, it was
intercepted saying the number was not in service for incoming calls.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tom Ward)
Subject: Cellular Exchanges Wanted
Date: 21 Jan 1995 05:05:41 GMT
Organization: Pinnacle Online - Internet access for Hampton Roads, Virginia


I am working on a project to develope a shareware database of NPA/NXX
data.  Included in this database will be NPA/NXX location data, state,
type of number (land line, pager, cellular, pcs, etc.), and responsible
carrier.  Each exchange is broken down into "billable" sections: for
example, some paging companies by blocks of numbers from an exchange
but not the entire exchange.

If anyone has any information on pager and/or cellular NPA/NXX-XXXX
data, please email me with the information.  If you do not with to
give me your cellular or pager number, I completely understand. (I
wouldn't either.)  Just email me with the area code, exchange and
first digit of the four remaining numbers along with the city, state
and carrier.

Thank you all for your assistance.

NOTE: All those who perticipate in "donating" information shall have their
names and email addresses listed in the "Special Thanks" documentation of
the program.


Tom Ward, President & CEO      AirPage Communications of Va
email: [e-mail]       pager: 804/326-PAGE

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Telesca)
Subject: Re: Can Caller ID Information Be Faked?
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 10:09:45 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Chris
Telesca) writes:

> 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 to the Editor and others who have responded so far.  While I
have both Caller-ID and *69 phone features, my friend (who lives
elsewhere) only has *69.  She can only trace back the last number that
called her.  I get a number of ANONYMOUS CALLER calls on my Caller-ID
box.  If I'm not home when these calls come in, or I've turned the
ringer off at night and miss a number of calls, then I can't use *69
to trace these calls.  I also can't check to see if the info on the
screen changes.

A number of these ANNONYMOUS calls are coming from pay phones where
someone can press *67 and block their phone number.  *69 will not call
back these numbers, according to my experience and according to
Southern Bell.

Raleigh is also ringed by many small towns and several different phone
companies: GTE, Centel, Contel, Carolina Telephone/Sprint, etc.  Calls
made from some of these companies show up as OUT OF AREA calls.  Some
show the phone number, but will not let you use *69 to redial, so I
presume that some of my ANONYMOUS calls that I can't use *69 to call
back might be from these phones as well as from some local pay phones.

I've back-tracked many of the calls using a 1-900 number and/or
various Cross Reference phone directories (at local libraries).  99%
of the calls I can trace are coming from individual homes as opposed
to apartment complexes, so I don't know how someone could tap or
splice into someone else's line in the open out on the street.

Thanks for the info so far.


Chris Telesca          Associate Photographer          [phone] x7489
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / [e-mail]

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 12:58:19 GMT
From: Wilson Mohr <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Where to Get Text of the ECPA?


PAT ([e-mail]) wrote:

> [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]

Yes, it is rather intimidating. It was 42 pages when I formatted it
out to the printer. I do not have to worry about being able to get to
sleep for awhile. One, maybe three pages and I'm out like a light!

Many thanks to all for their replies.


Wilson Mohr          [e-mail]
Strategic Quality - Motorola Cellular Infrastructure Group


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is installed in the TELECOM Archives.
Anyone who wants a full copy of the text can pull it from there.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] ([e-mail])
Subject: Where: T1 Information/FAQ?
Date: 21 Jan 1995 03:07:25 -0500
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


Would some one please pass on any sites/addresses where information or
FAQs on T1 service might be found.  Looking for general technical
overview of the service.

Thanks in advance.


Bruce

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

From: [e-mail] (BH0386)
Subject: Re: ISDN in Florida
Date: 21 Jan 1995 06:05:13 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)


Southern Bell has ISDN in Florida. You can call 1-800-858-9413
(BellSouth Data Customer Support Center) and they can determine
avaliability in your area and give you the price for both residential
and business service.

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Garfield)
Subject: Telephony Card/Software Needed
Date: Sat, 21 Jan 1995 07:10:06 GMT


I've seen a couple similar questions posted but haven't seen an
answer.  Please post the answer.  I'm looking for cards for IBM PCs
that can handle phone calls.  I need to be able to program how the
call is handled (when and what to play and record, what to do with
touch tone presses, etc).  All I've seen is things for one line.  I
want to start with about four lines but have the ability to upgrade to
perhaps 24, so I need multiple (four or eight) lines per card.  What
are good vendors for this and where can I go for information?  Thanks.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #54
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08771;
          24 Jan 95 8:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21830; Tue, 24 Jan 95 01:28:14 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21822; Tue, 24 Jan 95 01:28:10 CST
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 01:28:10 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #55

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 Jan 95 01:28:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 55

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Wireless and Mobile Computing Presentation (David Scott Lewis)
    U.S. 800 Subscribers and Freephone Issue (Judith Oppenheimer)
    MCI Digital 800 Information ([e-mail])
    Nynex-Prodigy News Conference (Barry M. Brooks)
    Markets for 220 vs. 800 vs. 900 MHz Communications? (Will Estes)
    Faxing Through a PABX (Doug Pickering)
    Questionnaire Reposting - Datacom Over Mobile Phones (Simon J. Wallace)
    Tonetalk / TTS (Erwin Lubbers)
    Does Anybody Need an ATM 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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (David Scott Lewis)
Subject: Wireless and Mobile Computing Presentation
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 18:29:31 GMT


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This message only arrived on Monday here
so it is not going to be of much value for people outside the southern
California area, but perhaps some of them will want to attend. In the
future, please try to get meeting notices to the Digest at least two or
three weeks before they occur if possible.   PAT]

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

A presentation providing an overview and forecast on wireless and
mobile computing, and the overall activities of Cellsys Inc., will be
held on Tuesday evening, Jan. 24, at the Los Angeles office of JETRO,
the Japan External Trade Organization.

David Scott Lewis, president and chief operating officer of Cellsys,
will discuss emerging industry trends, including remote access and
teleporting, third-generation electronic messaging, wireless LANs and
`RoomLANs,' home automation and home LANs, computer-based iconic
communication and agent-oriented software, palmtop and handheld
communication and computing devices such as PDAs and PICs, and the
role of wireless communications in interactive entertainment and
virtual reality.

Lewis, a graduate of the Stanford University Executive Institute,
served for the past several years as the head of business development
with a leading systems integrator.  He is the editor and publisher of
the largest-circulation Internet-based trade publication, the editor
of IEEE's `hands-on' journal for engineering managers and technology
executives, and a member of AEA's national `Infobahn' and
`Information Superhighway' committee.

The meeting will be held from 6 to 8 p.m. in the Conference Room of
JETRO Los Angeles.  Pizza and refreshments will be served.  The
meetings of the 4th Tuesday Group are fully sponsored and funded by
JETRO Los Angeles.

JETRO is located in the Citicorp building above the Seventh Street
Market Place, between Seventh and Eighth streets on Figueroa Street.
Coming from the Harbor Freeway, take the Ninth Street exit (East) from
either direction.  The eight-story parking-structure entrances are
located on either side: Eighth Street or Seventh Street.

There is no cost to attend the meeting, but reservations are
requested.  For reservations, contact Susana Herman by fax at
213/629-8127.

CONTACT:  Cellsys Inc.
          David Scott Lewis
          Telephone:  [phone]
          Fax:        [phone]
          E-mail:     [e-mail]  or
                      [e-mail]

(after March 1, 1995, use `[e-mail]' without the quotation
marks).


David Scott Lewis, Editor and Publisher
HOTT (Hot Off The Tree) Internet-based electronic magazine
E-Mail: [e-mail]      Telephone: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Judith Oppenheimer)
Subject: U.S. 800 Subscribers and Freephone Issue
Date: 23 Jan 1995 17:18:56 -0500
Organization: Interactive CallBrand(TM)
As you read the following, remember:

If the ITU is not forced to consider alternatives ...

IF THE DOCUMENT THAT IS NOW ON THE TABLE PASSES UNOPPOSED ...

The 1 800 FLOWERS vs. 011 800 FLOWERS scenario as I've outlined
it, will become reality.

THIS COULD HAPPEN AS EARLY AS THIS APRIL.

That said, I've tried to answer Bob Goudreau's posting as logically as
possible.  It gets involved -- I've tried to keep it theaded.

I'd written,

> 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!

And I'd like to add,

What is worse is that the 1-800-AIRWAYS which is British Airways
terminates in London now, and 011-800-AIRWAYS could go to American
Airlines and terminate in Tulsa.

**** For every 800 number dialed the customer will have to determine
if it is international or domestic, and understand that "international"
doesn't mean it terminates internationally, just that the number
belongs to the international number pool. ****

Bob went on,

> This seems to imply that the +800 country code will contain numbers
> with only seven digits, yielding a total of no more than ten million
> international free-phone numbers for the entire world! Given that the
> North American Numbering Plan alone is already close to running out of
> seven-digit intra-NANP free-phone numbers, isn't this +800-XXX-XXXX
> arrangement a bit short-sighted?

Back to me,

Seven or eight digits has not yet been decided.  Also there are many
options.  You can have seven and eight digit.  There is a proposal for
variable format seven to nine digits.  The majority want eight fixed
right now so the US could have 1-800-0-xxxxxxx and the rest of the
world could have what ever they want.

I'd also said,

> 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.

I'd like to add here,

There could be dozens of people who want your number.  Having the
number now will give you 50/50 chance, but others can obtain the
numbers today or next year in other countries (say five other
countries) and have a five to one chance better than you even though
you have had the number for years.  Based on what's currently on the
table, it doesn't matter if you've had the number 30 years or 30
minutes to qualify for priority.

So, Bob responded,

> Many countries besides the US have intra-national free-phone
> services.  Some even use the same 800 area code!  I believe that
> Ireland, for example, even uses 1-800 as the full prefix, just like
> the NANP (although I understand that the number that follows is only
> six, not seven, digits).  So why should owners of US 800 numbers (or
> even NANP 800 numbers -- don't forget Canada and the islands!) be
> singled out for the privilege of "grandfathering" their existing
> numbers into the worldwide +800 number space?  That doesn't sound very
> fair to the rest of the world.

> I think that better schemes are available that could address both
> these issues (number scarcity and number collision).

My response:

There are approximately four million U.S. toll-free subscribers, and
150,000 freephone subscribers outside of the U.S.  (Some of the
150,000 also are U.S. marketers' international freephone numbers.)

U.S. marketers, large and small, corporate and entreprenurial, have
invested in, developed and designed the infrastructure for, and
nurtured the 800 industry into the marketing powerhouse it is today.

Now, I'm a marketing person, and this is important to me.  But I don't
want to be unfair, or impractical, either.

Bob's 100% right here.  The question is, why won't the ITU allow
alternatives to be discussed?

Remember, random numbers mean there's no way to translate from the
domestic to international.  Bob's scheme is good:
+800-<country-code>-<number>.

As Bob discusses, the US number 1-800-FLOWERS would also be available
internationally (assuming the company was willing to pay for incoming
international calls) as +800-1-FLOWERS, and a hypothetical Irish
number 1-800-FLOWERS could be dialed internationally as +800-353-FLOWERS.
Since each country code would have its own domain within the overall
+800 number space, no collisions would be possible.

Of course, even this simple scheme could still run into the number
scarcity problem, since it presumes only a single free-phone area code
for each country. So perhaps the only fool-proof plan is to just use
+800-<country-code> as a prefix to the entire national toll free
number, area code and all.

Under this method, the US and Irish examples above would become +800 1
800 FLOWERS and [phone] FLOWERS, respectively.

There are disadvantages with this idea too, of course.  One is that
all national free-phone numbers that can be mapped transparently into
the +800 space must be no longer than <Limit> - 3 digits, where
<Limit> is the ITU limit on the number of digits that can follow the
"+" sign.  Fortunately, <Limit> itself will soon change (or has just
recently changed) from 12 to 15 anyway, so this might not be a problem.
But the sheer length of the resulting +800 numbers would be unattractive.

Bottom line, we agree that there are better options that merit serious
consideration.

So the question for U.S. 800 Subscribers to ask their U.S. carriers
at the ITU is, why isn't this being discussed?!!!


J. Oppenheimer, [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 14:46:00 EST
From: Hardwire <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Digital 800 Information


Contact: David Sutton
         MCI Business Markets
         404/644-NEWS

       MCI LAUNCHES TOLL-FREE ALTERNATIVE FOR MULTIMEDIA ACCESS

    First-Ever 800 Digital Service Integrates Voice, Data and Video
       Redefines the Way Businesses Service and Sell to Customers

        WASHINGTON, DC, January 23, 1995 -- In its latest extension of
the Information Superhighway, MCI today announced at ComNet the
first-ever tariffed and commercially available 800 digital service.
MCI 800 Digital Service enables users to send and receive simultaneous
voice, data and video communications through a single 800 number.

        Available immediately, MCI 800 Digital Service is ideal for
high-speed applications including on-line shopping, remote access to
corporate database libraries, customer service, technical support,
videoconferencing, document sharing and software distribution. MCI's
new service differs from existing data services by transferring
connection costs to the service provider, thus encouraging customer
access and increasing the likelihood that applications will succeed
commercially.

        "We believe MCI 800 Digital Service will revolutionize the way
companies do business," says Brian Brewer, vice president of marketing
for MCI Business Markets. "For example, this service will easily allow
consumers to call an 800 number to not only order software but also
have it simultaneously delivered to their PC. In this same scenario,
technical support could then conveniently follow via on-line
screen-sharing."

                         Wide Range of Applications

        By combining the ease of toll-free dialing with the power of
high-speed switched data services, MCI is providing users with a
highly effective, cost efficient communications link to businesses,
consumers and suppliers. Typical applications might include:

        * On-line Interactive Catalogs -- By dialing a toll-free
          number, customers can view and purchase a company's products
          and services directly, dramatically reducing sales cycles.

        * File Sharing and Collaborative Computing -- Companies
          can work faster and smarter by enabling workers in
          different locations to use toll-free desktop
          videoconferencing and document sharing to edit
          documents simultaneously.

        * Toll-Free Access to Corporate Systems -- Companies can
          connect telecommuters and other office locations to corporate
          systems, data libraries and LANs.

        * Multimedia -- Users can combine voice, data and video at
          speeds of up to 64 Kbps, toll-free.


             Represents Evolution of Switched Data Services

        More and more of today's data applications require greater
transmission bandwidth and, as a result, are tightly coupled to the
underlying technology used to connect to end users. Traditional
transmission rates achievable with modems, even high-speed modems, are
in many cases unacceptable and degrade an application's quality until
it is no longer a viable commercial product. MCI 800 Digital Service
offers a solution to this problem by supporting switched data at up to
64 Kbps speeds, six times the speed of a 9.6 modem, toll-free.

        Digital 800 can originate through a local telephone company's
ISDN basic rate interface (BRI) connection or via switched data
access. Consumers can call the local phone company to order a BRI
line. For consumers already using ISDN BRI or switched data access
technology, connecting to a digital 800 application is as simple as
dialing an 800 number. Service providers interested in developing
digital 800 applications have the option of providing terminating
access to their application through a choice of local exchange carrier
(LEC) provided switched data, primary rate interface (PRI), BRI or MCI
provided PRI terminating access methods.

        MCI 800 Digital Service is an integral component of MCI's
portfolio of 800 services and can be used along with all existing
Vision 800 and MCI 800 features. For example, time-of-day routing or
percent-allocation routing can be used to ensure that every incoming
call is routed to the correct location on the first attempt. MCI
reporting tools, Perspective and TrafficView analysis, are also
compatible with MCI 800 Digital Service.

        Pricing for MCI 800 Digital Service will initially reflect
standard MCI Vision 800 or MCI 800 voice rates based on the type
product platform selected. As with standard voice rates, 800 Digital
Service rates will differ based on selection of switched BRI or
dedicated PRI termination. All usage will contribute to overall 800
discounts and term commitments.

        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: BARRY M. BROOKS <[e-mail]>
Subject: Nynex-Prodigy News Conference
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 08:53:01 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Again unfortunatly, this arrived on
Monday, with little chance for anyone to plan it into their schedule.
Meetings should be announced here two or three weeks prior if not
sooner!  Thank you.  PAT]

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

Mat Stover, president and CEO of NYNEX Information Resources Company
and Ross Glatzer, president of Prodigy Services Company will announce
the nations first advertiser-supported, online, interactive Yellow
Pages, on the information superhighway, Tuesday, Jan. 24, 1995.

You are invited to participate in the interactive press briefing and
live demonstration of the new interactive, online service, with Mr.
Stover and Mr. Glatzer:

Subject:    Announcement of the NYNEX Interactive Yellow Pages
            Live, on PRODIGY

Date:       Tuesday, Jan. 24, 1995

Time:       10 a.m. (EST)

            Place:  Lincoln Center, Rose Building
                   (Corner West 65 and Amsterdam)

        Location:   The Kaplan Penthouse, 9th floor

You are welcome to remain in the Kaplan Penthouse after the press
briefing to be among the first in the nation to JUMP NYNEX on PRODIGY.

To attend the press briefing, please arrive at the Kaplan Penthouse
approximately 15 minutes prior to the scheduled start of the briefing
(9:45 a.m. EST).  Refreshments will be served.

For more information, please contact Phil Santoro, NYNEX, at [phone].

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

From: [e-mail] (Will Estes)
Subject: Markets for 220 vs. 800 vs. 900 MHz Communications?
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: U.S. Computer
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 06:45:14 GMT


Can someone briefly go over what are the markets for different
frequencies of the various spectrums for personal communication
markets?  I am familiar enough to know that 220, 800, and 900 MHz are
the common frequencies that people seem to be using.  I gather that
220 is use for Specialized Mobile Radio (SMR) applications, which
appear to be one-to-many broadcast applications, like information
being sent to delivery vehicles.  900 MHz seems to be reserved for
high-end digital personal communication services.

What are the other parts of the spectrum that are being used?  What
are the principle applications at each part of the spectrum?  Where
does current analog and digital cellular telephone fall in this
spectrum?


Will Estes    Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: Doug Pickering <[e-mail]>
Subject: Faxing Through a PABX
Date: 23 Jan 1995 07:16:42 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


Hi,

I have just gotten a PABX.  Everything seems to be working OK, except
I cannot fax out through it (I haven't tried receiving yet).  Modem
connections are fine all the way up to 14400 (all my modem supports).
Without the PABX, faxing is fine, but with it, the modem dials the
number get connected then never gets beyond 'Connecting'.  I am using
WinFAX Pro 4.  Picking up an extension proves that connection has been
made to the other fax.  I have a Rockwell based Voice/Fax/Modem.

Any ideas?


Doug Pickering

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

From: Simon J Wallace <[e-mail]>
Subject: Questionnaire Repost - Datacom Over Mobile Phones
Organization: Edinburgh University
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 10:10:23 GMT


May I first thank all respondant to my questionnaire (14).  I was
hoping for 20 so I'll repost to see if I can get a few more.  I will
of course post all results next week.

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] (Erwin Lubbers)
Subject: Tonetalk / TTS
Organization: NLnet
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 10:26:53 GMT


I need information about the Tonetalk/TTS voicemail card for the PC.
Does someone have this info or do you know where to get it?


Thanks,

Erwin

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

From: [e-mail] (Alex Zacharov)
Subject: Does Anybody Need an ATM PBX?
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 11:33:34 GMT
Organization: Telrad Ltd.


    I would like to make a little referendum:

    If somebody had offered an ATM PBX in a form of small N-ISDN servers
interconnected by ATM, supporting N-ISDN basic and supplementary services
with interfaces to global ATM and PSTN, who would have bought it NOW?


Regards,

Alex   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #55
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09368;
          24 Jan 95 8:51 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22917; Tue, 24 Jan 95 02:46:42 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA22910; Tue, 24 Jan 95 02:46:39 CST
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 02:46:39 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #56

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 Jan 95 02:46:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 56

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Changes to 411 Directory Assistance Service in Atlanta (Nigel Allen)
    BellSouth ISDN Rates (Was ISDN in Florida) (Ed Goldgehn)
    Belgacom and Greek Panaphone (Juha Veijalainen)
    LD Provider Juggling (Justin T. Leavens)
    Sub-Lease 900 Number Possible? (Clint Scott)
    GAO's Information Superhighway Report (Mike Dolak)
    Voice Over Frame Relay and ISDN (Dino Sims)
    Spokane Service Outage (Ry Jones)
    Jobs Available in San Diego: ATM/SONET/OC48 (Shaun Maki)
    FAX Group 3 and Group 4 Standard Information Wanted (Elron Adar)
    Help Needed Locating Retailer For MicroTac Ultralite (Steve Chinatti)
    Help Needed With Procomm ([e-mail])
    PC Telcom Equipment Wanted (Tom Lempicke)
    Re: Where to Find Nice-Looking Phones? (Alan Boritz)
    Re: Where to Find Nice-Looking Phones? (Wes Leatherock)
    Re: US <> Purto Rico: Options? (Julio Frondeur)
    Re: CO/Boston Added to NACN (John R. Covert)

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, 24 Jan 1995 03:35:21 -0500
Subject: Changes to 411 Directory Assistance Service in Atlanta
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Internex Online (io.org)


Southern Bell says it is introducing a more-automated directory
assistance service which will reduce the amount of speaking a
directory assistance operator has to do. The company didn't say
whether the resulting savings in operator time will lead to layoffs.
And it seems as if the company is reducing operator time at the
expense of making customers wait on the phone longer while a shortened
recorded version of their request is played back to an operator. It is
not clear whether the service will also be used for long distance
directory assistance requests from outside the Atlanta area.

A Southern Bell press release says: "With the company's new DA*Plus
service, customers dialing 411 are greeted by the system and then are
asked for the name of the city and the person or business whose phone
number they need. The system will then record the customer's response.
After the information is recorded, DA*Plus automatically trims the
silence at the beginning and end of the customer responses and places
the call in queue for the next available operator. By eliminating the
pauses and silence on each call, the operator hears only the
customer's responses, not any hesitation or pauses. The operator then
checks for the listing and provides the number requested to the caller
just as it is done today. At any time, a caller who wishes to bypass
the service can press zero and is immediately connected to an
operator." (The press release does not explain how someone with a
rotary dial can be connected to an operator.)

The company says that customers who have questions or comments about
this new service may call 404-780-2323. Attendants will be available
to answer questions Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Journalists can call Lynn Bress of Southern Bell at 404-391-2484.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn) Subject: BellSouth ISDN Rates (Was
ISDN in Florida) Date: 22 Jan 1995 16:01:31 GMT Organization: The
INTERNET Connection, LLC Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> 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.

The rates for BellSouth ISDN in all areas are:

            BELLSOUTH RESIDENCE
            --------- ---------
                ISDN RATES

        (2B+D)                    Flat Rate
            Monthly*
State        Minimum        Maximum            Installation

Alabama     $63.85     $68.60         $210.00
Florida        52.80        56.15            226.00
Georgia        60.05        66.40            184.50
Kentucky    54.67        60.05            213.00
Lousiana#    70.50        70.50            259.80
Mississippi    61.29        65.51            196.00 North
Carolina    72.44        75.01            197.50 South
Carolina    57.70        60.40            212.50
Tennessee    24.50        29.50             N/C**

*Minimum & Maximum Rates are due to different rate groups. (The rate
will not be more than the maximum or less than the minimum.)

#Louisiana rates are not rate group sensitive

**Residence service order charge and line connection charge for
initial installations will be waived for a period of one year
beginning October 29,1993. (Tenn. Only)


            BELLSOUTH BUSINESS
            --------- ^^^^^^^^
                ISDN RATES

           (2B+D)        Flat Rate


STATE            MONTHLY        INSTALLATION
----            -------        ------------
Alabama         $93.50 $219.00##
Florida            93.50        206.00##
Georgia            93.50        208.25##
Kentucky        91.00        230.00##
Louisiana        95.50        254.19##
Mississippi        94.50        236.00## North
Carolina        93.50        212.50## South
Carolina        91.00        232.50##
Tennessee        93.50         58.50##

These rates do not include any features    or packet services.

Rates Subject to change.  Rates Subject to all applicable taxes
==========================================================================
##Before firm rates can be confirmed, loop qualification and
facilities availability request must be processed for each address.

This request is to determine if the local facilities meet distance and
provisioning requirements.  This will determine if ISDN can be
provided to that address without additional charges.

To have the above request performed for your location, send your name,
the name telephone service is listed to, the address and existing
telephone number to:

                  [e-mail]
==========================================================================
Open Communication Networks, Inc. (OCN) provides turnkey ISDN
implementation services which includes the ordering and coordination
of ISDN installation with BellSouth (and other telcos) as well as
coordination with ISP's (we'll check what customer equipment
requirements they have).  OCN also provides a "dial-in" test site for
all forms of ISDN data connections including terminal emulation, SLIP,
and PPP (sync and async).

OCN provides the above services *at no additional charge* when the
customer's ISDN equipment is purchased at LIST PRICE.

For more information, send e-mail to [e-mail]


Ed Goldgehn E-Mail: [e-mail] Sr. Vice President Voice: (404)
919-1561 Open Communication Networks, Inc.  Fax: [phone]

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

Subject: Re: Belgacom and Greek Panaphone
From: [e-mail] (Juha Veijalainen)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 22:33:00 +0200
Organization: ComPart BBS - Helsinki, Finland


References: <[e-mail]>

> 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

This sounds familiar. Let me guess, you are using a handheld phone,
right? I visited Belgium and Holland last autumn and had similar
problems.

IMHO the problem is that GSM networks in those countries are not built
for handheld phones. Cells are too widely apart and use maximum power
allowed for a cell site (20 W?). Your phone sees the cell transmitter
and may even show maximum field strength. When you try to _use_ your
phone, you'll see that field strength indicator rapidly goes to zero
and net connection is lost (that is what happens with Nokia 2110).

Handheld phones' 2 W maximum transmitting power is not enough, when
cell transmitter is shouting at 20 W!

The only decent GSM nets (for handheld phones) are in my opinion in
Finland and Sweden (I've used my phone also in UK, the Netherlands,
Belgium and Switzerland).  Lots of low power cell sites make it work.


Juha Veijalainen Helsinki, Finland

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

From: [e-mail] (JT Leavens)
Subject: LD Provider Juggling
Date: 23 Jan 1995 13:35:15 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JT Leavens)


I had my LD service provided to me by AddTel, a LDDS reseller until
October 94, when I switched it all to LDDS directly, except for a
lonely 800 number that I was hanging on to, but not really using. So I
was still getting bills from AddTel for this 800 number with just a
few wrong numbers that called the line; no big deal.

In December, I took a closer look at my bill and noticed that AddTel
was still charging me for the monthly rates for the 800 number they
were no longer carrying, and I got suspicious. I then combed through
bills since I had switched my service, and found that there were calls
that were still being billed by them on that 800 number, even though
LDDS was supposedly my provider. Not a lot of calls, mind you, but
just a few. Checking my AddTel bills against my LDDS bills I found:

*Most of the service was provided by LDDS, as it should have been.

*There was an entire week in November when AdTel billed my service and
LDDS did not. It was a Monday through Friday, for no explanation I can
provide.

*There were some days when LDDS and AdTel seemed to fight for my
calls, some calls in a day going to one carrier and others going to
the other, right after each other with no pattern.

*Most upsetting were calls I found on BOTH bills, billed by both
companies. There is no doubt that these were the exact same calls.

How exactly can this happen? I got a partial explanation from a tech
at LDDS who said a "send resporg command to the SDS database" would
take care of the routing to LDDS (I assume that's the central 800
database that ensures the proper call routing), but how exactly could
the two companies both bill for a single call? And do I have any
responsibility to pay AdTel for providing service when I expressly did
*not* want them to? Especially since being able to compare identical
calls billed side by side proved that I had saved a good bit of money
by switching to LDDS.

Any ideas from anyone?


Thanks in advance!

Justin Leavens

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

From: [e-mail] (Clint Scott) Subject: Sub-Lease 900
Number Possible?  Date: 22 Jan 1995 16:02:37 -0600 Organization:
NeoSoft Internet Services [phone]


I am in need of 'renting' a 900 number for a one month trail period.
I don't want to have to pay the whole down money, etc just for this
brief time.  Is it possible to sort of sub-lease a 900 number with a
particular extension?  E-mail is preferable to news post.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Dolak) Subject: GAO's
Information Superhighway Report Date: 23 Jan 1995 00:00:40 GMT
Organization: Digex Net


The United States General Accounting Office (GAO) has released a
report entitled Information Superhighway: An Overview of Technology
Challenges (GAO/AIMD-95-23).

The 84 page report provides an overview of pivotal technical issues --
security and privacy, interoperability, and reliability -- facing the
industry and federal regulators in planning and implementing the
information superhighway.

Orders for a single free copy of this report may be placed by calling
[phone], by using fax number [phone], or by mailing a
request to the U.S. General Accounting Office, P.O. Box 6015,
Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015, USA.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dino Sims) Subject: Voice Over Frame Relay and
ISDN Date: 23 Jan 1995 14:02:53 -0800 Organization: CRL Dialup
Internet Access


Hello all,

My company is in the process of installing a WAN between our locations
here in Atlanta, Hong Kong and Holland.  And I was wondering is it
possible or even practical to do voice over frame relay or isdn to
extend our digital PBX system (Executone 432) so users here can just
punch in an extension and get someone over seas.  Also has anyone done
video conferencing over frame relay?  I know that all of this is
possible by using 56k leased lines but I would like to try and save
some money :-)


Dino Sims Systems Administrator Atlanta, GA email1 [e-mail] email2
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ry Jones)
Subject: Spokane Service Outage
Date: 23 Jan 1995 19:55:50 GMT
Organization: The SenseMedia Network, http://sensemedia.net/


Saturday morning on KIRO (710 AM, Seattle) they said that USWest was
trucking in hundreds on service persons from Idaho and Western
Washington to "Dry out lines on the south hill of Spokane", where
apparently several thousand people are without service at this hour.
Does anyone have the 411 on this outage? What happened?

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

From: [e-mail] (Shaun)
Subject: Jobs Available in San Diego: ATM/SONET/OC48
Date: 23 Jan 1995 20:27:51 GMT
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


ATM/SONET/DS3/T1/FAX/modem in moderate sunny San Diego: Pay can be
over 100K/year depending on experience!

If you have the above skills please read to the bottom.  More than ten
jobs are being filled right now.  From Component Engineer to Hardware
Manager.  From Software Engineer to Software Manager.  With the right
background you may find yourself working as a technology scientist
planning the next generation.

HARDWARE DEVELOPMENT MANAGER:

Overall responsibility for board level hardware development including
initial high level definition, detailed design,
simulation/verification building and debugging of prototypes, and
successful introduction into production.  In addition to extensive
hands-on detailed design experience (uP, ASIC's, FPGA's, ...), a
minimum of three years of management experience is required along with
a BSEE /MSEE.  Must be comfortable working in a team oriented high
energy environment, T1/DS3/SONET telecom experience is a plus.

SOFTWARE MANAGER TELECOMMUNICATIONS:

BSEE/BSCS (Masters desired): Eight + years experience with a minimum
of three years experience in managing software development for
multiprocessing embedded systems; strong C/C++ programming skills in
UNIX development environment; experience with real-time kernels (PSOS,
VRTX, OS-9, must also have experience with systems oriented towards
fault tolerant software architecture and software associated with
Digital Telephony switching systems.

TECHNOLOGY SCIENTISTS (multiple jobs):

Requires masters degree or higher with extensive ATM/SONET real world
experience.  Develop the next generation in a laboratory environment
with all the toys you want.  Within reason you will be given whatever
you need.

LEAD SOFTWARE ENGINEER: TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS:

BS/MS, EE/CS and eight+ years of experience in multiprocessor embedded
system software development.  Strong C/C++ programming experience in
UNIX development required.  Experience in software architectures
typified by digital telephony switching systems, telephony network
access servers/routers, etc. a plus.  Candidates will lead design team
in the architecting and development of real-time, fault tolerant,
multiprocessor software.  Must posses strong technical leadership
skills and proven ability to be a self-starter in the ground-level
architecting and development of new products.

LEAD SOFTWARE ENGINEER: DSP PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT:

BS/MS/PhD in EE or a related discipline and five + years DSP software
development experience.  Qualified candidates will lead design team in
the development of real-time DSP engine for high speed analog and
digital protocol analysis, Must Posess strong technical knowledge in
the area of DSP algorithms used in the transmission and discrimination
of FAX and modem protocols, associated training sequences, signal
constellations, and compression (Group III FAX, V.32, V.32bis,
V.42bis, MNP, etc.).  Strong technical leadership/decision making
skills and proven ability to deliver products from conception to
production also required.

SOFTWARE ENGINEERS: TELECOMMUNICATIONS (multiple jobs):

Candidates must posses BSEE/BSCS (masters desired); strong C/C++
programming skills; five + years experience in the development of
real-time embedded systems; basic knowledge of assemble language
(particularly the Motorolla 68K family); strong debugging skills using
native debugger and associated emulators.  Experience with products
interfacing to the digital telephone network a plus.

PHYSICAL DESIGN MANAGER:

Overall responsibility for Mechanical Engineering and Document Control
including mechanical/OEM issues, managing the engineering change
control process, and successfully transitioning new designs from
engineering into production.  BSME/MSME is required along with
experience in introducing complex multi-level products into volume
production in an ISO/Bellcore quality environment.  Hands on
experience is beneficial along with a minimum of four years of
management experience.

COMPONENT ENGINEER:

BSEE Required.  Work with design engineers selecting components and
perform functional/performance analysis of components.

Do not reply to this message.

EMail direct to [e-mail] with a phone number and reasume (if
easy).  Otherwise just your phone number will do.  I will call you on
my nickel.  Or you may call me if you wish at the number below.

    -- Shaun Maki
        [e-mail]
        503 614 9627.

Must be legal to work in the US (no H1/F1 visa!).  If you are a
student without experience please do not respond.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: FAX Group 3 and Group 4 Standard Information Wanted
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 07:02:11 GMT
Organization: Elron Adar


Where can I find the CCITT standard for fax group 3 and group 4
transmission?


Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Chinatti)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 16:45:27 -0500
Subject: Help Needed Locating Retailer for MicroTac Ultralite


Hi,

  I'm looking for information on purchasing a Motorola MicroTac
Ultralite flip phone.  I'm in the central NJ area and I am interested
in activating with Bell Atlantic mobile, as one of their plans seem to
best fit my travel area and calling patterns.  My problem is that I
cannot find a discounter in the area that activates with Bell Atlantic
and carries the Ultralite.  I've called Bell Atlantic but I have been
unable to get a list of discount retailers that activate with BAMS,
probably because Bell Atlantic would like to have me buy the phone
through them (at list price!).  The coverage area I'm looking for is
Central NJ - Philly.  I was wondering if anyone has any tips on how to
find a discount retailer in this area that I can buy from, or possibly
some mail order house that has good prices.  Since this is a pretty
specific question, it would probably be best to e-mail responses to
me, and if I come up with any leads I'll post a summary.


Thanks in advance,

Steve Chinatti   <[e-mail]>

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

From: [e-mail] (tacnav)
Subject: Help Needed With Procomm
Date: 23 Jan 1995 23:27:50 GMT
Organization: HoloNet National Internet Access System: 510-704-1058/modem


I am having trouble using PROCOMM. Can anyone offer me some help?


Thanks,

ken   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 04:43:27 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: PC Telcom Equipment Wanted
Organization: SunBelt.Net


Does anyone know of a drop in board for a PC which would allow it to
handle an office phone system?  I have three incoming lines and eight
extensions, and it seems like a perfect project for a dedicated PC.
The open architechture and programming would allow future expansion, etc>.


Thanks,

Tom Lempicke    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Where to Find Nice-Looking Phones?
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 20:59:55 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (Ophidian59) writes:

> 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.

Figure into the cost of picking up that phone, window or car repair.
The last time I parked down the street from Graybar, in Long Island
City, someone broke off a new padlock from the back of my truck
(within about 15 minutes).  It's much safer to deal with them via mail
order. <g>

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 19:14:36
Subject: Re: Where to Find Nice-Looking Phones?


Quoting [e-mail] (Ophidian59)

> 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?

Do you mean the Ericofon?  That was Swedish, made by L.M.  Ericsson
Company.


Wes Leatherock
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I knew someone with an Ericofon back in
1967; they were really considered very avante-guard back then. Of course
he had *no permission* whatsoever from telco to have it on his line.  PAT]

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

From: Julio Frondeur <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 16:13:42 -0500
Subject: Re: US <> Purto Rico: Options?
Organization: InfiNet


You may try asking Puerto Rico Telephone Co. for their Switched-56
offering which is much less expensive than the 4K monthly figure you
actually have.  The C.O. serving the Carolina area is a DMS-100
equipped with the TCM-based SW-56 feature called DATAPATH by Northern
Telecom.  If you are within 15K feet from the C.O., it will be piece of
cake for PRTC to give you the service.


Julio Fondeur

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 11:42:23 EST
From: John R. Covert  21-Jan-1995 1125 <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: CO/Boston Added to NACN


NACN in Boston does not appear to be working very well.

Sitting here in Boston, I just turned on my Montreal CanTel number;
the first thing I tried was to call in via the Montreal number.
Usually (e.g. in Pittsburg) calls are properly routed to the phone
within five seconds of power-on.

Calls continued to no-answer transfer at the Montreal end until I
actually attempted to originate a call with the Montreal number here
in Boston.

Then call delivery started working some but not all of the time.
Frequently there was just a fast-busy.

None of the feature codes work -- I've tried to use the Ericsson codes
(*21* to forward, #21# to cancel) which work when roaming using the
CanTel number in Albany, Rochester, Pittsburg, Florida, and San Francisco
but not in Utica or Dallas/Fort Worth.  I also tried the Cellular One/SWBell
feature numbers for Boston, but nothing.

At the moment I have turned the phone back off, and calls are no
longer going to the no-answer transfer location.  That works properly
when the phone is turned off in most other places (such as Florida),
without the need for any timeout period.  It even worked on failed
pages; in South Florida I could leave my CanTel number forwarded on
no-answer to my NYNEX number; if I got a failed page on the CanTel
number I had time to switch to the other NAM and would receive the
call on the NYNEX number via BellSouth.

But none of this works in Boston; it looks like Boston's NACN connection
is either AFU or not completed.


/john

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #56
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17463;
          24 Jan 95 20:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01817; Tue, 24 Jan 95 12:08:10 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01802; Tue, 24 Jan 95 12:08:07 CST
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 12:08:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #57

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 Jan 95 12:08:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 57

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Where to Find tpage? (Rob Etzel)
    Want Information on Wireless Short WAN Links (Eduardo Kaftanski)
    What's the Current Status of LEOS? (Donald R. Newcomb)
    Data Wanted Measuring Internet Performance (Jeff Grau)
    PC Board For Terminal Emulation (SNA, BSC, VIP) (Massimo Fusaro)
    Cellular Service in the Lincoln Tunnel (Doug Reuben)
    New RJ-48 Jack Used in Nynex Service Area For T-1? (Steve Pinkston)
    Marketing Strategies Information Request (Angelo Raffaele Fernicola)
    Looking For Voice Mail For Panasonic Key Switch (Rebecca Brooke)
    Where Can I Find a Telecom Group in Chicago? ([e-mail])
    Re: Looking For TDM Box (Roger Atkinson)
    Re: Flat Rate Long Distance (Edwin Chen)
    Re: Inter-Lata Rates in California (Ed Smith)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Lim Kong Hong)
    Re: T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference? ([e-mail])
    Re: Areas Covered by Phone Book? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: CallerID and ANI (Glenn Foote)
    Re: Antenna For Cellular Phone in Bangkok (Alan Shen)
    Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging? (Alan Shen)

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] (Rob Etzel)
Subject: Where to Find tpage?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 00:59:47 GMT
Organization: The Center for Process Analytical Chemistry


Can someone please tell me where I can find tpage, the perl (?)
code to talk to alpha-numeric pagers?

Also, where are the FAQ's that might have answered this question?


Thanks,

Rob Etzel    Computing Services Manager
Center for Process Analytical Chemistry
153 Chemistry Library Building
University of Washington, BG-10
Seattle WA 98195

Office: [phone]
Fax:    [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eduardo Kaftanski)
Subject: Want Info on Wireless Short WAN Links
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 02:36:49 GMT


Hi,

I need information on small (less than 300 meters) WAN/LAN wireless
links.  I have two offices separates less than three blocks, with a
clear line of sight, and as I am in a non-purely business area, leased
lines involve digging in the street at my expense.

I am looking forward to near Ethernet speed if posible.  Can it be
done? At what cost? I can buy direct from a US company (I am not in
the US but have a Miami address for shipping).

Many thanks for any answer.

I can be reached at: [e-mail] for direct e-mail.

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

From: [e-mail] (Donald R. Newcomb)
Subject: What's the Current Status of LEOS?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 08:01:14 -0600
Organization: University of Southern Mississippi


A few years ago we were hearing about numerous proposals for global
personal communications based on LEOS (Low Earth Orbital Satellite)
systems. One was Motorola's proposed Iridium system. I have not heard
anything about these in the last few months. Have we reached some sort
of watershed. What's the news? I'd like to find a low-power (e.g. ~1
W) system with better bandwidth than ARGOS.


Donald R. Newcomb             University of Southern Mississippi
[e-mail]     "The God who gave us life gave us liberty
[e-mail]    at the same time."  T. Jefferson (1774)

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 10:12:44 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Data Wanted Measuring Internet Performance


I am a reference librarian at Bell labs who has been asked to find
data measuring Internet performance.  Specifically, my client wants to
know how long it takes for ascii text to travel from a point "A" to a
point "B" under different situations that might be time of day, day of
week, etc. A colleague of mine says measurements of packet transfer
rates have been done but doesn't know where to find them.  If you have
such data and are willing to share it or know where I might find it, I
would appreciate hearing from you.

Please send any responses to:  [e-mail]


Thank you,

Jeff Grau

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

From: [e-mail] (Massimo Fusaro)
Subject: PC Board For Terminal Emulation (SNA, BSC, VIP)
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 14:36:52 +0100
Organization: Sixtel S.p.A


I need information about sells and forecast of PC board for terminal
emulation (BSC, SNA, VIP) for the european market or where to find
such information.

Please reply by mail, I'll summarize.


Massimo Fusaro    E-mail: [e-mail]
Sixtel S.p.A.    X400: c=it;admd=garr;prmd=IUnet;O=sixcom;S=max
Milan, Italy    Phone: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Reuben)
Subject: Cellular Service in the Lincoln Tunnel
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 13:42:57 EST


Just a quick note ...

Cell One/NY (00025) has added cellular coverage in the Lincoln Tunnel
("Temp" I-495 between NY and NJ), providing through service from one
end to the other.

Callers can now place and receive calls, or continue on existing calls
uninterrupted.

A very productive addition considering how backed up traffic can be
there!

No service yet (that I have heard of) in the Holland Tunnel (was going
to be I-78 when they still built new roads in NYC ...). NYNEX is dead
in the Lincoln Tunnel.

It seems that most of the tunnels in the northeast are now covered:

-In Boston, CO/Boston (and NYNEX/Boston?) has excellent coverage in the
Callahan and Sumner Tunnels.

-In NYC, the Lincoln Tunnel is now covered by CO/NY.

-In Baltimore, both tunnels are covered quite well by CO/Baltimore-DC and
BAMS/Baltimore-DC.

-In DC, the "tunnels" under the Mall (I-395, was to be I-95) and the
I-195 (?) tunnels both have excellent coverage with both carriers.

(How's the coverage in the Chesapeake Bay Bridge/Tunnel and in Newport
News, VA?)

Am I missing any?


Doug Reuben              [e-mail]              (203) 499 - 5221
Interpage Network Services -- E-Mail/Telnet to Alpha or Numeric Pagers & Fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Pinkston)
Subject: New RJ-48 Jack Used in Nynex Service Area for T-1?
Organization: ADC Kentrox - Portland, Oregon
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 19:13:52 GMT


We've had reports of a new type of RJ-48 jack being used in the Nynex
service area for T-1 service. Can anyone familiar with Nynex practices
and materials help us out?

The traditional RJ-48X jack provides shorting bars which loop transmit
(pins 4 and 5) to receive (pins 1 and 2) when the customer's plug is
withdrawn. The RJ-48X jacks we're familiar with do this by means of a
small stationary printed circuit board upon which the "fingers" of the
jack rest when the plug is withdrawn.

The reports we're getting describe a jack which has some sort of
mechanism that is moved off of its shorted position by contact with
the flat areas of the plug adjacent to the outside pins (1 and 8).
The problem is that some vendors' RJ-48 jacks are solid in this area
and some have grooves that look as if they could accomodate a 9th and
10th contact. These grooves apparently prevent the shorting mechanism
from releasing.

If anyone is familiar with these jacks, we would appreciate
your help. We need:

1. The name of the manufacturer of these jacks.
2. The part number of these jacks.
3. The spec, if any to which they are designed.
4. A sample of the jack itself, if possible.

Please respond directly by email to [e-mail] and
cc: [e-mail]. You can also reach me at 1-800-733-5511, ext 6341.
We would greatly appreciate any help or pointers to resources.

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

Subject: Marketing Strategies Information Request
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 16:49:29 CET
From: Angelo Raffaele Fernicola <[e-mail]>


Hi,

I'm looking for someone who can help me to find (or tell me where to
find) information on marketing strategies of communications companies
in the EEC.  Maybe it's not clear what I want, so if somebody thinks
they can help me, e-mail to [e-mail].


Thank you,

Raffaele Fernicola

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

From: Rebecca Brooke <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking For Voice Mail For Panasonic Key Switch
Date: 23 Jan 1995 14:38:32 GMT
Organization: The Internet Access Company


We have a Panasonic 616(KXT) key switch and want to add auto-attend/voice
mail.

Can voice mail be added to this system at all?

Is there a "generic" component we can add on that will do the job and
acts like a separate extension?

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

From: [e-mail] (LogicaRsch)
Subject: Where Can I Find Telecom Group in CHICAGO?
Date: 22 Jan 1995 22:05:25 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Are there any telecom groups/clubs/associations that meet in Chicago?

I'm not talking about cyberspace -- I mean the sort of thing where
real, live humans come together in a defined physical space -- a room,
for example -- and converse.

I'm an independent market research consultant specializing in telecom?
How can I hobnob with all you telecom types?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone is not checking through recent
back issues before submitting questions ... this identical question came
up here two or three weeks ago and perhaps one or more of the people who
responded at that time will write directly to the correspondent with an
answer.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger Atkinson)
Subject: Re: Looking for TDM Box
Organization: R. F. Atkinson & Co.
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 04:26:18 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Andrew P. Dinsdale) writes:

> 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.

Try Glasgal Communications, Inc.  Their number is 800-LANWAN1 (800-526-9261).

They have a huge variety of equipment, and in my experience, their people are
competent.


Good luck!

Roger Atkinson

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

From: [e-mail] (edwin chen)
Subject: Flat Rate Long Distance Information Wanted
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 20:26:52 -0800
Organization: Stanford University


If anyone has any information about flat rate long distance calling,
please e-mail me with it.  I'm trying to diminish my phone bill. I
currently have a $149/month service but it has a 20 minute/call limit.
Thanks.


Edwin   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Edwin, are you seeking information or
trying to slip in a sales pitch?  <g> ... by the merest coincidence of
course (of course!) this very topic consumed a great deal of bandwidth
in a couple other telecom newsgroups in recent weeks. Some respondents
were very suspicious of the program. Wasn't there some discussion of
having to make payment by courier service rather than regular mail?
Weren't there a couple other questions raised but never really answered
about the firm?  If you are getting truly unlimited service for $149
per month, with no gimmicks and no fraud (there was a hint of that in
the other discussion, wasn't there?) then I would say you probably have
the best deal you are going to find if your usage otherwise would total
at least $200-250 or more per month through more 'conventional' carriers.

If all you are using normally is $100-150 per month, then its just a
dollar for dollar trade, with your twenty minute per call restriction and
(I think I read) a limit of one call at a time. Since all the major and
well-established carriers will cut various deals with large users, even
if your 'normal' usage came to $200 or so per month, you would not be
getting any significant savings. I don't know of any instances where the
major carriers will give a forty or fifty percent discount, so if your
bill would usually be in excess of $250-300 per month, then I would say
you have a good bargain. But at the going rate per minute, if you are on
the phone long distance that much time, you must be on the phone for
something or other for several hours per day. Well ... I guess I am
also, now that I think about it. I am on the dialup to Northwestern
University for several hours each day, but I don't know how I could live
with the twenty minute per call limit. Is your useage mainly for data
transmissions, or do you use it for voice also?  Does the carrier allow
data transmissions?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Smith)
Subject: Re: Inter-Lata Rates in California
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 09:21:24 GMT


I know of at least one company in California that has inter-lata rates
that start at .096 flat per minute billed in six second increments for a
one year term. I am not permitted to post the company's name. I will
respond to any email on the subject.

(See Biz.Comp.Services) Puerto Rico $0.20; Australia $0.34; Germany
$0.46; U.K. $0.29; Hong Kong $0.52; Brazil $0.69; Canada $0.23; France
$0.41; Netherlands $0.40; Singapore $0.50.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lim Kong Hong)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 02:45:52 PST
Organization: Siemens (Pte) Ltd
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

>> Estonia      EMT

> New:
> Estonia=09=09Radiolinja

>> Hong Kong    Smartone

> Also:
> Hong Kong=09Telecom CSL

In Singapore there is Singapore Telecoms Mobilelink GSM GSM Code 525-01.

In Singapore, GSM subscribers have the option to subscribe to autoroaming
services to Hongkong, UK, Australia, Switzerland and Denmark. This means
that with their GSM SIM Card, they are able to send/receive call in the
above countries.

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

From: [e-mail] (SJohn0421)
Subject: Re: T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 10:05:21 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (SJohn0421)


The difference, (besides pricing) is bandwidth. A T1 has total
bandwidth at 1.54 Mbps. Thats 24 channels at up to 64kb of speed. A
DS3, or T3, has enough bandwidth to carry 28 T1's.

That's quite a bit of bandwidth.

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:13:54 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject:  Re: Areas Covered by Phone Book?


Benjamin P. Carter <[e-mail]>, 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?

The white area shows the limits of the white pages covered by that
book.  In the case of the Los Angeles area, there can -- and will be --
holes in that area because pieces will be covered by different telephone
companies there.  The yellow area is the maximum area that yellow pages
for that area will cover, and again, may have holes.

> 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.

Let's not forget that people can have nonpublished numbers that you
can still get from directory assistance, and in California, 40% of the
telephone subscribers are unlisted which means they don't show up
anywhere.

> 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.

A "neighborhood" directory is a private directory sold to companies
for a lot less money than additional Yellow Pages listings in the
phone book from the telephone company, but listings in those still
have to be purchased separately, and this costs extra money, so the
secondary books typically tend to be thinner.  Also, they usually
cover smaller areas (so the salesman can collect more commissions from
those who want good coverage by selling them listings in multiple
books).

> Why?  What is going on?

Directory advertising means money, and as long as they can sell
advertising to people, they will continue to publish them.  I'm
surprised we haven't seen fringe directories, say the "National Gay &
Lesbian Yellow Pages" for businesses that want to solicit to those
groups.  Or this could be used for people to run personal ads. :) (I
would have thought this was silly until I discovered American Express
was advertising it's double signature travelers checks in gay-oriented
newspapers and showing two men in the picture).

How about the "National Amputee Yellow Pages" where companies that
specialize in services for people with missing limbs can look.  Etc.  If
you can figure out something that you can sell advertising for, chances
are someone, somewhere, will create a magazine, directory or catalog to
cash in on it.  You or I may think it's wierd or unusual, but 50% of a
niche market can be a lot more revenue than 1/2 of 1% of a major national
one.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A few responses are in order. First of all,
in large cities like Chicago, there *are* the equivilent of 'gay and
lesbian yellow pages' directories. One published covering the Chicago area
is called 'OUT'. Next point: telco itself also publishes 'neighborhood
phone directories'. For instance, there are a couple hundred phone books
covering the greater Chicago area all of which are published by DonTech,
which is the recent name for the Ameritech subsidiary formerly known as
R.R. Donnelly and Company. There is the large Chicago alphabetical directory
and corresponding two-part Yellow Pages. There are about thirty 'neighborhood'
books, with their own yellow pages in the back of the book. These are just
subsets of the larger book, extracted by address groupings within a given
area of the city, and all published by telco.

There are eight 'regional books' for the suburbs, broken down by near north,
far north, northwest, near west, far west, southwest, south, and 'Calumet
Region' (northern Indiana suburbs). Each of these books contains a couple
dozen suburban communities, and each regional book is roughly equivilent to
the Chicago White Pages for their particular area. Just as the large Chicago
book has about thirty smaller 'neighborhood' books based on it, each of the
eight regional books has its own collection of smaller 'neighborhood' (or
actually, suburban town) books, usually with two or three villages or towns
grouped together. For example in Skokie where I am, we are in the near
north suburban regional book (white pages only, no yellow pages, but with
alpha listings divided into two categories, business and residential), and
we are in the book known as 'Skokie/Evanston/Morton Grove' with addresses
defaulting to Skokie unless 'MG' or 'EV' is shown following the address.
These little community books also have yellow pages. The other telco-published
directory comes from Centel. That phone company serves Des Plaines and Park
Ridge in their entireity. It also serves a small portion of Chicago on the
northwest side, along with bits of Niles, Illinois and bits of the Ohare
Airport complex not considered within the city of Chicago for whatever
reason. They publish their own book for those towns, and Centel even has
its own book for that part of Chicago it serves, entitled 'Chicago-Newscastle'
for the central office involved. But all of Centel's listings also show
up in the Illinois Bell/Ameritech/DonTech books in routine alphabetical order
as well with no mention made they are really Centel numbers.

Finally, although Lincolnwood, Harwood Heights, Norridge and unincorporated
Norwood Park Township are suburbs and not part of Chicago, for whatever
reason (I guess, since they are mostly surrounded by Chicago), their listings
appear in the large white pages book for the city itself.

There are a couple of independent (non-telco) directory publishers serving
this area, and there is even something called the 'Sprint Yellow Pages'
which I presume comes from that company.  It seems like every few days a
new book or books is dropped on our doorstep in a plastic bag. Some of these
independent directories are rife with errors; some so obvious even an
untrained eye like mine can scan through the pages and find mistakes.

Oh yeah -- DonTech also publishes numerous 'crisscross' or cross reference
directories for the entire area. I think there are about six or eight volumes
of those.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Glenn Foote)
Subject: Re: CallerID and ANI
Date: 21 Jan 1995 13:07:55 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet


John W. Barrus ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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).

> [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]
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Can someone [Pat maybe] shed some light on WHICH rulings you are referring
to here ... and why would they remove blocking on interstate long distance
calls that are dialed directly?


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The FCC said something recently about telcos
being required to pass Caller-ID between themselves on an interstate basis
beginning this year. I think the caller can still explicitly block his ID
if desired with *67, but the caller cannot get careless about this and assume
that since it is 'long distance' the other end won't get his ID by default.
In other words, no more (or very little) 'out of area' messages. It is not
so much that they 'removed blocking' as it is they said ID had to be passed
along where interstate calls was concerned. I routinely now get the ID of
parties calling me from all over the USA -- even California.  There are
still some 'out of areas' but they are getting to be fewer and fewer.

And it is always worth repeating to the newbies here and others: no matter
how many times you press *67 or how big of a tantrum you have on the phone
with a telco service rep and her supervisor and the office manager and the
president of the telco and the chairman of the board, when you dial an
800 number (or a 500/700 number using a reverse charge pin or you ask for
the charges to be reversed to the called party) your number *WILL* be
available to the person you are calling.   PAT]

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

From: Alan Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Antenna For Cellular Phone in Bangkok
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 10:08:55 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On 17 Jan 1995, Roland Peter Sauermann wrote:

[snipped stuff about over-loaded AMPS systesm, dropped calls ...]

> 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?

Your best bet is to magnetic mount on the roof, right in the middle so
the antenna has a grounding plane. Do not get a 5dB antenna. That's
over kill in a metro area. It'll over shoot the towers. Best one's to
try out is a 3dB, or a 1/4 wave antenna. Or maybe all you need is the
unigain antenna. This setup should help quite a bit.


Daniel Kao

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

From: Alan Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Is the Pentium Bug Really That Bugging?
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1995 10:17:41 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Tue, 17 Jan 1995, Anthony D'Auria wrote:

> 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?

Little off topic, but the bug does not affect system performance. CPU
bottlenecks are only caused by how your system was designed (your
motherboard). The problem has been solved. Intel will 'swap' chips with
you if you have a defective one, OR the NCSA has released a software
fix solution for the bug.


Daniel Kao

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #57
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa17811;
          24 Jan 95 20:41 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07209; Tue, 24 Jan 95 14:38:31 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07202; Tue, 24 Jan 95 14:38:26 CST
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 14:38:26 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #58

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 Jan 95 14:34:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 58

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Universal International Freephone Numbers (John Carl Brown)
    Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is (Greg Monti)
    Wireless Lan FAQ For Campus Networks (Jim Williams)
    Looking For ISDN in Burlington, Mass (Steve Samler)
    Old Phone Number Format Question (Andrew C. Green)
    GSM SIM Format - One Solution (Robert Lindh)
    Re: Which Countries Have Competition (for FAQ Update)? (Eric Tholome)
    Re: Question on Call-Back Operators (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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Universal International Freephone Numbers
Organization: AT&T NSD, Holmdel, NJ
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:17:02 GMT


I thought it would be helpful in the discussion of Universal International
Freephone Numbering (UIFN) for people to see what has actually been
discussed at the ITU-T Study Group 2, and what is on the table now.

As background, I am one of the people representing AT&T in UIFN work
in the US and at Study Group 2 in the ITU-T.

I'd like to pass on two pieces of information.  First, in response to:

J. Oppenheimer, [e-mail] who wrote:

> Bottom line, we agree that there are better options that merit serious
> consideration.

> So the question for U.S. 800 Subscribers to ask their U.S. carriers
> at the ITU is, why isn't this being discussed?!!!

I've included a time line we've kept as to what the format proposals
and discussions have been at the ITU-T Study Group 2 level.  Most of
this will look familiar to those who have read this thread thus far.

After that is an extract from the current DRAFT recommendation E.169,
specifically dealing with the case of duplicate requests for the same
UIFN.  As background, the procedures specify first-come, first-served.
At the start-up of UIFN assignments, a window of a specified number of
days is treated as the same time to allow applicants to get their
initial requests in and be treated as if they all arrived simultaneously.

I'd also like to note that the U.S. standards process is an open
process.  The State Department Study Group A coordinates the positions
and contributions going forward to ITU-T Study Group 2.  An Ad Hoc
committee on Numbering meets more frequently to discuss the issues in
depth.  We've had customer participation from associations and from
individual companies interested in this issue, and that participation
has been welcome and encouraged.  We've also encouraged multi-national
customers to contact thier carriers in other countries to make their
views known.

Also, this process is a contribution driven process.  Those with views
are most effective when documenting those views, and making specific
proposals as to positions or text to be deleted, added, or altered.
All contributions to the Ad Hoc or Study Group A meetings are discussed.

I hope this is helpful.

John Carl Brown

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

Universal International Freephone Numbering Timeline

Current study period June 1993 through May 1996

GENEVA - JUNE 1993

Study Group 2 (numbering experts group) accepted a liaison from Study
Group 1 (service description experts), recognizing the need for IFS to
have an easily recognizable universal global code, develop a numbering
plan for this Universal IFS Number.  The following is an excerpt from
that liaison:

     ... a universal freephone number as a service feature of IFS.
This feature allows a customer to be assigned a specific IFS number
that would be the same throughout the world, while calls to this
number, if required, can be routed to different destination accesses
depending on country or point of origin.

     ... the legitimacy of this IFS service feature, noting increasing
customer demand for such a capability, and the significantly increased
use of the IFS that would result from the provision of a universal IFS
number.

Recognizing the current North American 800 Service code has world wide
customer identification, country code "800" was reserved as the
Universal Freephone indicator.

A list of attributes for the numbering plan includes, but is not
exclusive of: the plan should provide a substantial capacity, and
should be easily recognizable.

OTTAWA - OCTOBER 1993

Proposed Numbering Structures:

Source: PTT Netherlands

800 0YXXXXX   To be issued by Administrations in countries with a 1 digit CC
800 1YXXXXX
800 0YYXXXX   To be issued by Administrations in countries with a 2 digit CC
800 1YYXXXX

800 0YYYXXX   To be issued by Administrations in countries with a 3 digit CC
800 1YYYXXX

Source: Telecom Denmark

800 ZYX XXXX        Allocated by countries with a 1 digit CC

800 ZYY XXXX        Allocated by countries with a 2 digit CC

800 ZYY YXXX        Allocated by countries with a 3 digit CC

Source AT&T and MCI

800 YXXXXXX[X][X]   A single numbering pool, of variable length where Y=1-9,
and X = 0-9

Source US West and Ameritech

2 digit CC + 1 digit     Actual CC (1 digit) <8 digit subscriber number
     "    "              Actual CC (2 digit) < 7 digit subscriber number
     "    "              Actual CC (3 digit) < 6 digit subscriber number

Source: Norwegian Telecom

800 - (Administrator code) - Subscriber Number

Source: France Telecom

     800 XXXXX      or,
     800 XXXXXX          or,
     800 XXXXXXX              or, up to a maximum of
     800 XXXXXXXX

All of the above proposals require the international prefix to precede
the call.

Results of these proposals categorized the numbering formats into three
groups (fixed, variable/reusable, and variable non-reusable).

Further attributes agreed to: The numbers should be portable so the
customers can retain their number and change their service provider.
The plan should be stable and support growth.


MADRID - JANUARY 1994

The debate over the UFN format continued, discussing as many as seven
different formats.  Preserving national freephone numbers within a UFN
as well as the administration of the numbers compounded the problem of
agreeing to any specific format.  It was suggested at this meeting
that a neutral body administer these numbers, under consideration is
the ITU.  All participants were asked to only consider two formats for
the next meeting; a variable six to eight digit length, or a fixed
eight digit length.


GENEVA - MARCH 1994

Source: AT&T

800 XXXXXXX (7 digits)

Existing customer's seven digit freephone subscriber numbers are
retained as the subscriber number of the UFNs for one year. After the
one year period all seven digit freephone subscriber numbers that are
not identified to be used as the subscriber number of UFNs for IFS
would be included in the UFN resource pool and available for
assignment.

Source: Remaining Representative:

     800 XXXXXXXX (8 digits)

One representative (Sweden) conclusion for supporting eight digits:
Since the seven digit fixed format doesn't give all the countries
existing countries customers the ability to either retain or embed
their existing numbers in an equal and fair basis, and doesn't offer
any way of expanding the capacity, the only alternative left is the
eight digit fixed format.

A fixed format was agreed to with bracketed text for seven or eight
digits.  Work will continue on administrative issues.

OSLO - JULY 1994

Approximately 30 countries presented a single contribution supporting
an eight digit fixed format.  The US was the only representative
supporting a seven digit format.  Acknowledging the need to continue
the work, the U.S., restated their support for seven digits but agreed
to work on the remaining portions of the document, assuming the format
would be eight digits in length.

Start up procedures, in particular conflict resolution procedures for
that time were debated.  The representative from the U.K., offered
partitioning the subscriber number with specific leading digits:

800  1Z   XXXXXX         For further study
800  2Y   XXXXXX         6 digit subscriber number migration space
800  3Y   XXXXXX         6 digit subscriber number migration space
800  4    XXXXXXX        7 digit subscriber number migration space
800  5Y   YYYYYY         New 8 digit number
800  6Y   YYYYYY         "    "
800  7Y   YYYYYY         "    "
800  8Z   ZZZZZZ         For further study
800  9Z   ZZZZZZ         For further study
800  0Z   ZZZZZZ         For further study


WASHINGTON DC - OCTOBER 1994 (joint experts editing team)

To try to progress the work, a small group of representatives met to
edit the document.  This will be presented to the next meeting in
Geneva, December 1994.

This document assumes a fixed eight digit subscriber number.  The numbers
will be assigned on a first come first served basis with no preallocation
of space.  Priority will be given to those subscribers who are embedding
their existing freephone subscriber number.  Embedding can be requested by
adding trailing or leading filler digits.  For example:

     Subscriber A's 7 digit existing number is 234 5678
     Embedding by adding leading filler digits: UIFN
     requested could be 800 X2345678
     Embedding by adding trailing filler digits: UIFN
     requested could be 800 2345678X

When two or more applicants request the same number, the Registrar
will communicate with the applicants and notify them of the duplicate
request and attempt to resolve the duplicate request by having the
applicant(s) change their filler digits to eliminate the duplication.


GENEVA - DECEMBER 1994


 The meeting agreed that the edited output of TD 1/2-127 (Washington
meeting) should be used to advance the work at the meeting and to
incorporate any points it thought as appropriate from E.IFSNUM.  The
TSB had assigned temporary number E.169 to E.IFSNUM.

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

end of timeline

Extract from draft recommendation E.169:

                                Annex A

A1  Duplicate Requests

1    The purpose of these procedures is to resolve UIFN conflicts, e.g.,
    when more than one applicant applies for the same UIFN at the same
    time.

1a)    The registrar should advise only the involved applicants when
    problems are identified, and provide advice to them and
    cooperate in problem resolution.

1b)    The registrar shall give priority to the applicants embedding their
    subscriber's existing entire national FSN [Freephone Subscriber
    Number], this is known as priority assignment.

2    The specific procedures are:

2a)    The applicant can only request and receive priority assignment based
    on the intent to embed the entire existing FSN.  The embedding can
    only be requested by adding trailing or leading filler digits to the
    entire existing FSN, in the manner illustrated below.

  For example:
    Subscriber A   7-digit FSN is 234 5678
    Embedding by adding leading filler digit:  UIFN request 800 X2345678
    Embedding by adding trailing filler digit:  UIFN request 800 2345678X

    Subscriber B   6-digit FSN is 654 321
    Embedding by adding leading filler digits: UIFN request 800 XX654321
    Embedding by adding trailing filler digits: UIFN request 800 654321XX
    Embedding by adding one leading and one trailing digits:
        UIFN request 800 X654321X

    where X = 0-9

    Similar principles apply for IFS subscribers with fewer than 6 digit
    FSNs

2b)    When two or more applicants request the same UIFN, and only one of
    applicants request a priority assignment, the registrar will
        assign the UIFN to the applicant which requested priority assignment.
    The registrar will then assign the stated alternative choices, or
    solicit alternative choices, to the other applicants.

2c)    When two or more applicants requesting the same UIFN based on their
    entire FSN, request priority assignment, the registrar will
    communicate with the applicants and notify them of the duplicate
    request and attempt to resolve the duplicate request by having the
    applicant(s) change their filler digits to eliminate the duplication.
    During this procedure, the registrar will inform the applicants that
    they are in contention for their selected UIFN.  Identities of other
    applicants involved in the contention will only be divulged with
    the consent of all the involved applicants, for the purpose of
    resolving the contention.

2d)    When two or more applicants requested the same UIFN, and none have
    requested priority assignment, the registrar will communicate with
    the applicants and notify them of the duplicate request and attempt
    to resolve the duplicate request by having the applicant(s) choose
    an alternate UIFN if applicable. During this procedure, the registrar
    will inform the applicants that they are in contention for their
    selected UIFN.  Identities of other applicants involved in the
    contention will only be divulged with the consent of all the involved
    applicants, for the purpose of resolving the contention.

2e)    Absent agreement to resolve the duplicate request with the applicants
    the registrar will, after 15 days, do a random selection to resolve
    duplicate request.  The applicants not receiving the number will be
    assigned one of their alternate choices or the registrar will solicit
    another choice, if not provided.

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

End of E.169 extract.

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 12:04:57 EST
From: Greg Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is


A story in the January 23, 1995, issue of {Communications Daily} says
that an Illinois Commerce Commission hearing examiner has "endorsed" a
plan to create the 630 area code to relieve 708.  Presumably, the
endorsed plan is the overlay that has already been discussed because
the story notes that it wouldn't require existing customers to change
their telephone numbers.

The story then says, cryptically, that the plan also would "create
'permissive and mandatory dialing arrangements' that wouldn't
jeopardize new competitors".  And that the City of Chicago "opposed
the stipulation on ground that eleven-digit rather than seven-digit
dialing requirement was 'onerous' and might predetermine similar fate
for 312 area code where customers are used to seven-digit intraLATA
calls."

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

Monti interprets shakily: Isn't this a little late for "endorsements"
with the new code already created?  Callers between the three
Chicagoland area codes will need to dial eleven digits to reach local
subscribers in the other two codes, which is the same as now.
Allowing seen digit dialing between 312 and 630 would require that the
prefix codes used in 630 not be usable in 312, which would exhaust 312
faster.  Allowing seven digit dialing *within* your own area code may be
 -- or may not be -- permitted.

Others who'd like to try their hands at translating this story into
English are welcome to do so.


Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    [phone]
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      [phone]
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 09:50:19 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Wireless Lan FAQ For Campus Networks


1.  What Bandwidth is available for campus area Wireless LANS?

    Ans.   2Mbps

2.  What distance's can they do?

    Ans.   From 3 miles to 10 miles (line of site)

3.  Are they secure?

    ANS.   Spread Spectrum Radio technology is Proven and Secure. Options are
           available for Encryption ie 64 bit DES chip.

4.  What type of management is available?

    ANS.   SNMP MTll compliant.

5.  Do they reguire a FCC license?

    ANS.   No

6.  For Large installations is there support for on site surveys and
installations?

    ANS.   Yes Airlan offers a S.W.A.T. Team of Professional field engineers.

7.  How about support after installation?

    ANS.   Toll free support is always available for all Airlan products

8.  Is this technology World Wide?

    ANS.   As of today it is available in The USA, Canada, and South America.

9.  Can this technology be used to connect inside of Buildings PC's, Desk
Tops, and
    Laptops, at the same 2Mbps?

    ANS.   Yes it supports all the above at 2Mbps, No matter what the size
           (5 doors, to 4 floors, to 5 miles or more.

10. What type of Lap Top adaptors are available?

    ANS.   Parallel/Pcmcia.

11. Does the inside technology support Roaming?

    ANS.   The Airlan Access point (Hub) creates a 50,000 Square foot "cell"
           area of connectivity, Access cell to Access cell maintains a
seamless
           connectivity to a network.

12. What networking operating Systems (NOS) is the Airlan compatable?

    ANS.   Airlan  is compatable with all Major network operating systems
(NOS)
           including all versions of Netware and Netware-life, Microsoft-Lan
           Manager, 3 Com 3 Com+, Dec Pathworks, Banyan Vines, IBM Lan
Manager,
           and Artsoft Lantastic

13. Can more that one Remote Bridge be connected to a single Host Bridge?

    ANS.   Yes with a Omni attenna, You can connect more than one Remote
Bridge
           with an agregate of 1.544Mbps.

14. How difficult is the Airlan Bridge Plus to install?

    ANS.   Menu driven diagnostic Software for the installation and alignment
of
           attenna's make Airlan/Bridge/Plus easy to setup, and SNMP makes it
           easy to use.

15. How does the Airlan compare in cost to a T-1 circuit?

    Ans.   Airlan/Bridge/Plus costs less than a T-1 bridge, and performs up to
           40 X faster than leased lines.


For more information contact:      Jim Williams
                                   1-800-837-4180

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:00:03 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Looking for ISDN in Burlington, Mass


Does anyone have any information on ISDN from the Burlington (Mass)
CO.  We've been told that since we are two miles from the switch, we
can't get ISDN.  True?  Anyone know when this might be available?

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 10:20:05 CST
From: Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>
Subject: Old Phone Number Format Question


The following question appeared recently in the Old Time Radio Digest
mailing list, and seems tailor-made for an answer from this forum.
Anyone care to comment or reminisce?

 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 16:17:25 -0500
 From: "Richard M. Weil" <[e-mail]>
 To: [e-mail]
 Subject: PaperMate Ball Point Pens

I was listening to a 1953 episode of The Hall Of Fantasy last night,
and there was an ad for Philco TVs being sold through a store called
CET in Rockford, Illinois. The main store was in Chicago. The pitchman
promised a FREE PaperMate Ball Point pen, without obligation, to
anyone who called the store to set up an appointment for a salesman to
visit your home to give you info about Philco TV's. The pitchman said
the new pen was "sweeping the nation", ... "a $1.59 value!"

For those interested, and maybe the offer still holds (hee hee), the
number for the store in Chicago was MOhawk 4-4100.  The number for the
store in Rockford was curiously 8-22-47.  I'm too young to know
anything about 5 digit phone numbers.  Is that how it was back then in
small cities? I'd also be curious to know if anyone remembers this
store and if it's still around. (I could call directory assistance
myself, but this is more fun.)

I'd also like to know if a ball point pen was such a novelty that you'd
let a salesman into your home for a free one, or was it the TV, or both?


Andrew C. Green           [phone]
Datalogics, Inc.          Internet: [e-mail]
441 W. Huron
Chicago, IL  60610-3498   FAX: [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: CET = Central Electric Television. They were
a big distributor of television sets in the 1950's here. Both television
and 'throw away when used' ball-point pens were new and unusual items in
those years. Pocket calculators had never been heard of. When I was in high
school, 1956-60, the school gave us the 'option' of using ball-point pens
instead of fountain pens, although the latter were preferred. Desks in
school classrooms had a little holder near the top for the bottle of ink
used to fill the little rubber bladders inside fountain pens. The schools
and all progessive educators of the era preferred that children use fountain
pens, as it was believed they helped develop better penmanship.

Television sets were becoming more common by then; maybe a third to
half the households in the USA had one, mainly if the owner lived in a
large city where television stations could be received. A few people
had television sets as early as 1946-47. Our family got one in 1949;
it had a two or three inch screen that was totally round with a very
large magnifying glass attachment which hooked on the front of it. It
was in fact a Philco (for anyone interested, that was our friends at
Phillips) and stood in a large cabinet about four feet tall and two
feet wide. We got three channels on it, one being WGN Channel 9; and
there were two others.

MOHawk was a central office in Chicago from shortly after the turn of
the century. Now it is known as 312-664, and then as now serves the
near-north side of the central Chicago area. In addition to CET, which
was located on Chicago Avenue at Halsted Street (now for thirty plus
years the site of a housing complex operated by the Chicago Housing
Authority known as 'Cabrini-Green Homes'), other notable subscribers
on the MOHawk exchange included the Chicago Rapid Transit Company,
MOHawk-4-7200 for administrative offices, (7000 for transit information)
which in 1947 became the Chicago Transit Authority. They still use
312-664-7200 for Transit Authority offices, but 836-7000 for general
transit information throughout northern Illinois in a consolidated phone
room operated jointly by all the commuter railroads and local/suburban
bus lines. Since CRT Company had that number as of about 1921, I guess that
makes 664-7200 one of the longest continuing subscribers on the same
number; 74 years of it now.

Five digit numbers were common in communities which had automatic dialing
systems in those days but only one exchange in the community. Since the
exchange name was always the same, it was assumed when dialing. In your
example you parsed the number incorrectly. It was 8-2247, or to be complete
about it, ROckford-8-2247. Gary, Indiana had the same kind of setup. The
company town named after William Gary, president of US Steel at the turn
of the century had several exchanges, but they were all TUrner, as in
TUrner 2,3,4,5,6 or 7. Therefore five-digit dialing (or five digit asking
of the operator, prior to 1955) was allowed in the form of 2-xxxx through
7-xxxx. Someone once asked who was Turner ... he was a vice-president of
US Steel about the same time, and highly revered for his contributions to
the civic life in Gary. In the early 1920's, the United States Supreme
Court required US Steel to divest itself of the Gary Municipal Corporation.
But some things did not change; the town name was retained and the phone
exchanges continued to be Turner. Today they are 219-882 ... 887.

Why yes ... ballpoint pens were quite a novelty in 1953, and the better
quality ones were quite expensive, in the $7-10 range. 'Cheaper' ones,
like the free gifts from Central Electric Television ranged in price from
a dollar to a dollar and a half. But don't worry, they made out like
bandits since the television sets sold for several hundred dollars each;
three-inch round screens which looked like oscilliscopes.  CET had as a
commercial, a jolly man singing "Cee Eee Tee .... for television! (and
concluding) Mohawk four, four one hundred!" They've been out of business
for about thirty years now.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Lindh)
Subject: GSM SIM Format - One Solution
Organization: Ericsson
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 14:03:04 GMT


At least one GSM-operator here in Sweden (Europolitan) automatically
gives you 2 SIM-cards per subscription, one small and one full-size.
Originally, the incoming calls go to the cellular phone that have the
small card inserted.  If you want to change that, you insert either
one of the cards in a cellular phone and use a code ("333") to switch
incoming calls from the card now receiving them to the other card.

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Re: Which Countries Have Competition (for FAQ Update)?
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 22:36:14 +0200


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

> As the FAQ update is under way, one section dealt with the various
> countries that have introduced telecom competition in some form or
> other. I've heard of a European Community directive to the effect that
> its member countries are to open up telecom markets by a given date.
> Competing local networks are also emerging (including UK, US
> developments).

Indeed, competition will be introduced no later than 1998 in most
European countries (except in countries that specifically asked for a
delay).

Actually, we need to be more precise: for instance, we tend to think
that the French public telecoms are still under a monopoly, which is
almost true, except for international and mobile communications, which
have long been open to competition (and there has indeed been
competition for quite some time).

I don't recall what exactly will be opened to competition in 1998. I believe
the story says that all services will, but not infrastructures, though
many countries are willing to open *everything* to competition by 1998. Can
someone be more precise on this point? Otherwise, I'll have to look up my
archives.

Hope this helps!


Eric Tholome
23, avenue du Centre          [e-mail]
78180 Montigny le Bretonneux  phone: [phone]
                    France    fax: same number, call first!

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Tholome)
Subject: Re: Question on Call-Back Operators
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 22:36:10 +0200


Pat wrote:

> [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.

Well, let me give you some figures:

France Telecom's rate to call the U.S.A. varies between $0.95 and
$1.27/minute depending on the time of the day.

My ATT calling card isn't much cheaper, especially because of the $2.50
initial charge.

My callback operator does not require a minimum monthly charge, nor
does it impose a monthly fee. It charges $0.66/min at any time for the
same call.

You're right that I'm also charged $0.14 for my call to the callback
center. Moreover, my callback call is timed from the moment I get the
American dial tone (only if the call is answered), which adds another
$O.15 (approximately). Still, if the call lasts a minute or more
(which is almost always the case, even for calls that reach an
answering machine), my callback service is a good deal; a very good
deal.

I called an American friend last month and we stayed 70 minutes on the
phone. I saved around $25 thanks to my callback operator. Not bad, right?

To be totally honest, I must add that my callback operator times the call
in 30 second periods, whereas France Telecom uses circa 7.5 second periods.
Who cares? The service is so much cheaper.

I'm looking forward to signing up for your new callback service (still
to come), which will have to beat mine! :-)


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 #58
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19137;
          24 Jan 95 22:59 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13570; Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:42:17 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13563; Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:42:15 CST
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:42:15 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: telecom
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #60


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 Jan 95 16:40:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 60

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: North Korea Holds US Representative Over $10K Phone Bill (Alan Shen)
    Re: Long Distance Caller ID ([e-mail])
    Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles (Mark Fletcher)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Robert Levandowski)
    Re: Internet Mail With Half the Address? (Larry Drebes)
    Re: Where to Find Nice-Looking Phones? (Bill Garfield)
    Re: Using U.S. Modem in Israel (Supak Lailert)
    Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas (Kimmo Ketolainen)
    Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed (John Lundgren)
    Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed (Dale Wooden)
    Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed (Harold Buehl)
    Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System (Greg Habstritt)
    Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System (Bill Garfield)

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: Alan Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: North Korea Holds US Representative Over $10K Phone Bill
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 10:36:17 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Thu, 19 Jan 1995, Paul Robinson wrote:

> 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.

> $10,000 is about eight times North Korea's per capita yearly income.

Why didn't they just bring a satellite phone with him? Or was he out
of range? $10K for 23 calls ... is a LITTLE too much for me ...


Daniel Kao

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Long Distance Caller ID
Organization: Internet Direct, indirect.com
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:51:56 GMT


Paul J Zawada <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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.

> 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.

US West has offered Caller-ID in the Phoenix Metro Area for over a
year now, and I have been quite pleased with it.  All non-cellular
local calls either have display a name and number, or PRIVATE NAME for
blocked calls.  I recieved a note from US WEST in December saying that
they would have long distance Caller-ID in place by summer 95, as well
as having Caller-ID work when a call-waiting call comes in (so you can
decide whether to answer or not).


Lee

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:55:52 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Mark Fletcher)
Subject: Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles


> In many areas the local cable company has rights to access
> all pole space (for a small fee per year per pole, as a rule).
> I've found the cable operators to be more that willing to construct
> and maintain private fiber optic cables, for reasonable costs.
> This is the very simplest solution I've found, they have all the
> rights, equipment and contractors in place.

> You should also consider fiber due to its longer life and lower
> problem level, e.g. lightning immunity, etc.

> There are also contractors who are willing to take on such a project
> on a turnkey basis, including negotiating access rights.  They can
> be located by contacting a few of the larger contractors, such
> as Henkels and McCoy, and others out of industry directories.

> You might want to consider the use of a experienced consultant for
> this project.  They know who to approach and what to consider.

We tried a few contractors who "knew the ropes" on who to contact, but
their cable prices were through the roof! The cable company is an
interesting route though ...

It looks like T1 may be an answer, and cost effective from the RBOC,
and TELCO Inc. has an interesting product that links direct with the
Northern Telcom Meridian for 2500 or Digital sets.

Getting close to the answer! Thanks all!

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Levandowski)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 22:05:43 GMT


> is 'worth'. If all you and Paul are saying is that people or companies who
> have things stolen from them occassionally inflate the value of what was
> stolen for reasons of their own, i.e. insurance payoff, then I would agree
> with you. Yes, they do that. If they report what they sold as worth
> one dollar and what was stolen as worth two dollars (for the same quantity
> or product, etc) then that is wrong. If they report what was stolen as
> worth the same amount as that which was sold, then I don't think that is
> wrong.

> To put it another way, consider a large supermarket in a city like Chicago.
> Jewel Food Stores tosses a huge amount of perishable stuff out in the
> dumpster each week when their new stock comes in. Milk with an expiration
> date only two or three days away. Loaves of bread which have been around
> awhile or which got banged up and the wrapping slightly sliced open by
> accident in transit. Entire cartons of eggs where one egg got broken. Boxes
> of breakfast cereal smashed up in transit. In other words, perfectly
> good food, but American consumers are picky people. Homeless or other poor
> people with sophistication or 'street-smarts' know exactly what day, or
> rather night of the week each Jewel store in the area gets its deliveries
> and within minutes or maybe an hour what time to go hit those dumpsters
> and clean them out. Granted, you can't be too picky about variety; you
> can have a dozen boxes of corn flakes because they threw out the whole
> carton when the box on top got sliced open accidently by the stock clerk
> opening the carton, but don't look for any Raisin Bran this week. And in
> the middle of winter, all those gallon jugs of milk are just fine, but
> in the middle of the summer if they've been out there in the dumpster more
> than an hour or so, you don't want them ... otherwise, everything is fine.

> So since a grocery store is going to toss out all of its perishables when
> a new order comes in, and since they never manage to sell it all, and
> since the price tag for the item is probably five times higher than what
> they paid for it, what real problem is there if someone wants to shoplift
> a little right from the store?  Right? Now substitute cellular carriers
> and/or telcos and/or software writers. If sneaking something out without
> paying is cool, then fine. If 'shoplifting' is wrong, then it is wrong. PAT]

This is an interesting analogy, but it's not quite what the original
poster was trying to say, I think.  To expand:

If said supermarket were to suffer from a crime wave, and a certain amount
of milk were stolen, but no more milk than would normally be discarded in
any given week as you described, what if the supermarket then turned around
and announced it would increase its milk prices to make up for its losses?
Should it figure the value of the lost milk at full retail, or at wholesale?
It would not have sold the milk; if they recover the full retail price, they
would end up making more money than they would have if the crime had not
occurred in the first place.

Persomally, I don't think that's reasonable, from the customer's point of
view.  When you move from supermarkets to cellular carriers, an additional
factor comes in.  The cellular system transmits its authentication in the
clear, making it relatively easy for modern crooks to commit cellular fraud.
I've seen lots of people here mention this, and it seems the carriers must
have known this weakness.  To go back to the analogy, would the supermarket
customers be happy about rate increases if they found out the store had
knowingly left the back door unlocked and unguarded every night, at the time
the milk thefts occurred?

I see the point as being: the cellular customers are not responsible
for the theft of their billing codes.  They exercise reasonable
caution in protecting the company from fraud; it is the system that is
at fault and it's not reasonable to ask people not to use their
phones.  In this case, it's bad enough to be charged for theft beyond
your control, and even worse to be charged based on theoretical costs
that will net the company more money than they'd get if there were no
crime to start with.


Rob Levandowski
Computer Interest Floor associate / University of Rochester
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I am reminded of several years ago when I
had a neighbor by the name of Mike Polonski and his wife. They were an
older, retired couple. Not being able to get by on what Social Security
paid them as a married couple, they decided to get a divorce -- after
fifty years of marriage! -- so that each of them would begin getting
their own check each month, in a total amount higher than what they gpt
as a married couple. None the less they continued to live together, they
were simply divorced in the eyes of the law is all. We would get together
for dinner at least once a week, sometimes more often. Time and again, at
dinner in their home, we had only the finest meats, vegtables, and other
foods. Where do you do your shopping, I asked ... Mr. Polonski's answer
shocked me: the Carnegie Safeway dumpsters every Tuesday about midnight,
he said.

He saw my startled look and explained what I said in my previous message.
Every Wednesday morning at 4:00 am the semi-trailer truck full of stock for
the store would show up. About the same time the refrigerator truck would
show up with milk, eggs, butter, ice cream, etc. Then soon the 'bread man'
would be there. In anticipation, the stock clerks late Tuesday night began
cleaning out the old stuff from the shelves; anything with an expiration
date *even two or three days ahead* had to be disgarded. The store knew the
stuff was still good, but they figured if someone had milk at home with the
current day or the day before as the expiration and they got sick for some
reason they would blame in on the 'spoiled milk' and sue the store. It
was easier to dump it all. You would not believe all the stuff they throw
out ... I know I did not believe it until about a week later Mr. Polonski
came to my home and brought three large shopping bags with him. "Here," he
said, "I did your shopping for this week."  He had already taken home three
or four bags for himself, and these were mine. Milk, peanut butter, crackers,
bread, several boxes of macaroni and cheese, hamburger helper, two packages
of pre-sliced balogna (this was in the winter; I caution you against taking
the meat or dairy stuff in the summer!) and more. Everything had some minor
thing wrong with it; usually it was near the 'must be sold by' date. Some
boxes were smashed. A box of 48 Milky Way candy bars where two of the bars
on the top row had been sliced in half accidentally with a box-cutting knife.

I asked him if he ever had the nerve to take something he did not want
back inside the store to the courtesy counter to get a refund and tell them
he 'lost his reciept' ... <g> he said no, but he knew of one older lady who
'did it all the time' until Safeway finally slapped her hands for it and
told her to stay away from the store and the dumpsters.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Larry Drebes)
Subject: Re: Internet Mail With Half the Address?
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 13:49:43 GMT


Try Four11.  It's free to search and add your own info.  It has both a
Web interface ( http://www.Four11.com ) and an e-mail interface
([e-mail]).

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

Subject: Re: Where to Find Nice-Looking Phones?
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 12:10:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


[e-mail] (Ophidian59) in <[e-mail]> writes:

{some deleted}

> 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?

Wasn't this the "ERICO" phone of that era?  I recall they were very
modernistic-looking for the day, but the dial and switchook contacts
were prone to cause static after a few months use and the carbon
button mic tended to get packed easily from overzealous hangups. :-)
Neat phones, but a maintenance nightmare.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Supak Lailert)
Subject: Re: Using U.S. Modem in Israel
Date: 24 Jan 1995 05:25:12 GMT
Organization: San Diego State University, College of Sciences


Jeremie Kass ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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?

I've had a problem of using a US modem in other countries. I used
SupraExpress 144i modem in Thailand and it doesn't detect the busy
signal so that automatic redialing is impossible. The answer from
Supra tech support is that "Your modem is adjusted to detect US busy
signal. The UK busy tone used in Thailand is different. They are
faster. There is no way to adjust the modem to detect the busy
signal." (Thailand uses UK telephone standard).

Is this true?


Supak Lailert -- MBA (IS) Program, San Diego State University
[e-mail]     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kimmo Ketolainen)
Subject: Re: 800 Numbers From Overseas
Organization: Turun yliopisto - University of Turku, Turku, Finland
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 12:44:25 GMT


I seem to have terrible trouble with accessing the 1 800 numbers from
Finland, using Telecom Finland (code 990). About every second try
gives me the usual error message "the number is not in use" instead of
"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." Luckily I have a redial button.

I called this week one of the other international operators, Finnet
(99= 9) and was told that they are planning to offer similar service.


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] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed
Date: 24 Jan 1995 00:08:00 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Paul Garfield ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I've seen a couple similar questions posted but haven't seen an
> answer.  Please post the answer.  I'm looking for cards for IBM PCs
> that can handle phone calls.  I need to be able to program how the
> call is handled (when and what to play and record, what to do with
> touch tone presses, etc).  All I've seen is things for one line.  I
> want to start with about four lines but have the ability to upgrade to
> perhaps 24, so I need multiple (four or eight) lines per card.  What
> are good vendors for this and where can I go for information?  Thanks.

Try Periphonics for a vendor.


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: Dale Wooden <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed
Date: 24 Jan 1995 15:53:01 GMT
Organization: NB*Net


> answer.  Please post the answer.  I'm looking for cards for IBM PCs
> that can handle phone calls.  I need to be able to program how the
> call is handled (when and what to play and record, what to do with
> touch tone presses, etc).  All I've seen is things for one line.  I
> want to start with about four lines but have the ability to upgrade to
> perhaps 24, so I need multiple (four or eight) lines per card.  What
> are good vendors for this and where can I go for information?  Thanks.

Pika Technologies Inc has such a card, the V12.  It is programmable
and comes in several configurations.  you can contact Rahul Virmani at
[phone] or [e-mail]

Hope this helps.  We have had very good success with this card in our
own products and have been very pleased with the service.


Dale Wooden

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed
Date: 23 Jan 1995 22:46:49 GMT
Organization: Des Moines Internet
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Paul
Garfield) writes:

> I've seen a couple similar questions posted but haven't seen an
> answer.  Please post the answer.  I'm looking for cards for IBM PCs
> that can handle phone calls.  I need to be able to program how the
> call is handled (when and what to play and record, what to do with
> touch tone presses, etc).  All I've seen is things for one line.  I
> want to start with about four lines but have the ability to upgrade to
> perhaps 24, so I need multiple (four or eight) lines per card.  What
> are good vendors for this and where can I go for information?  Thanks.

There are a number of PC based solutions for being able to take
multiple line analog and digital trunks, do stuff such as play voice
scripts and capture DTMF Digits, generally referred to as VRU or to
actually recognize the the caller's voice, generally referred to as
Voice Recognition.  Natural MicroSystems of Natick MA and Dialogic of
Parsippany NJ are a couple of names that leap to mind, although there
are certainly others.  Go to Barnes and Noble, or one of the Book
Superstores and pick up a copy of Computer Telephony Magazine.  It is
like a toy catalog of all of the new CTI hardware and software.


Harold Buehl   Croyle & Associates   Des Moines, IA

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System
Date: 23 Jan 1995 20:45:48 GMT
Organization: CADVision


> 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.

Alot of the major manufacturers go about their upgrades in this way.
Pretty well EVERY Voice Processing manufacturer uses regular
off-the-shelf components, and they are all PC-Based (whether they like
to admit it or not.)  Some claim "stand-alone" but that just means
they sell their components under their own name and proprietary
nature, and charge crazy amounts of dollars for it.

They often install a 200+ MB HDrive into their systems, but only
format a certain percentage of it depending on how much you pay for.
Then, when you upgrade, they send out a technical specialist who
inserts a 5 1/4" floppy and runs a little UPGRADE program that
basically formats a larger part of the drive (as they put it, "unlocks
more memory".  So, you end up paying hundreds of dollars for something
that should really have no cost involved at all.

That is one of the biggest rip-offs in Voice Processing today.


[e-mail]    Greg Habstritt
Intellitech Communications Group
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

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

Subject: Re: Planning to Purchase a Voice Mail System
From: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 12:10:00 -0600
Organization: Ye Olde Bailey BBS - Houston, TX - 713-520-1569
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Bill Garfield)


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?

I've had an OCTEL "Aspen" (mid-sized) system in service since 1990
(nearly five years now) with absolutely -ZERO- downtime.  It is fully
integrated with my Mitel SX2000SG pbx and just keeps working and
working.  I originally purchased a service contract from OCTEL but
finally let it go as they were about like the Maytag man... :-)) I've
had them out once, to replace a disk drive.

My Octel Aspen system has 20 ports and serves approx. 800 users. Much
to Octel's chegrin, I'm still at the original installed software rev
level, 8.45.:-) My system is running four 80-meg drives and is still
at less than 1/2 capacity.  Small mailbox sizes and short save times
help that alot.  I typically allow each user a max of 20 two-minute
msgs with a "new" message hold window of 21 days and a save/archive
window of seven days, tho I do make an occasional exception -- just
don't let it become a filing cabinet nor an attic. Make that a -POLICY-
and your life as System Administrator will be much more pleasant. Run
monthly subscriber usage reports to keep tabs on your big "exception"
mailbox users as they can bring your disk space to its knees if they
abuse the "save" priviledge. Force passwords to six digits, minimum.
Beware that "auto attendant" can become a sneak path for toll fraud
with any voicemail system.

Otherwise, it takes a licking and keeps on ticking.  Expensive? Yes.
Worth it? You tell me ...

As an aside, my Octel/Aspen system sits in a 68-degrees/temp-stable
environment and is powered through a Liebert PDU (clean power), plus
has a sturdy industrial grade UPS behind it.  That may contribute to
the good results thus far achieved. I know if the need arose that I'd
sure buy another one in a heartbeat.


Bill Garfield <[e-mail]>  The pbx/datacomm guy
Panhandle Eastern Corp, Houston        NYSE: PEL
America's Natural Gas Transportation Company

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

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #60
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19440;
          24 Jan 95 23:21 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13529; Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:40:39 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13522; Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:40:36 CST
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:40:36 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #61

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 Jan 95 17:36:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 61

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    New Educational Telecom List Started (Todd Graham)
    500 Numbers and CID (Mark Stieger)
    Looking For Papers on LD Competition (Elizabeth Wasserman)
    Automatic Page Application Off of NT-SL1 ? (Ken Stone)
    Re: Cellular Service in the Lincoln Tunnel (Carl Moore)
    Re: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die! (Eduardo Kaftanski)
    Re: ISDN in Florida (Bruce W. Glassford)
    Re: T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference? ([e-mail])
    Re: Looking For 900-MHz Cordless Handsfree Headset (Wayne Huffman)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Roger Atkinson)
    Re: Cattle Call (Dale Neiburg)
    Re: Internet Mail With Half the Address? (Ted Timar)
    Re: LD Provider Juggling (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Re: GSM SIM Implementation (Sam Spens Clason)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and 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: Todd Graham <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Todd Graham <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Educational Telecom List Started
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 15:09:08 -0500


Members of this list -- and the greater listserv community -- will be
interested to know that the Midwestern Higher Education Commission has
recently established a new list dedicated to educational telecommunications.

MHEC-TEL is intended as a forum for discourse and information exchange
by telecommunications professionals within the higher education community
and others interested in opportunities enabled by telecommunications tech-
nologies -- for example, distance learning, teleconferencing, interinstitu-
tional resource sharing and programming cooperation.

List membership is not geographically constrained -- the list welcomes
higher education administrators, faculty and professionals from all
regions of the country. However, discussion on the MHEC-TEL list
should avoid focus on issues of no applicability to institutions in
the Midwest.

To subscribe, simply follow the normal protocol for Bitnet list
subscription.  Send a message to: [e-mail] (or LISTSERV@VM1.
SPCS.UMN.EDU) Message should include your name and the name of your organi-
zation/institution:
   SUBSCRIBE MHEC-TEL First-name Last-name (Affiliation)

Comments? Questions?
The list-owner for MHEC-TEL is Jeff Williams <[e-mail]>.

              ----  opening message on list ----

Welcome to the Midwestern Higher Education Commission's
Telecommunications listserv.

The MHEC-TEL list has two main purposes.  The first is to provide a
forum for higher education telecommunications professionals to share
ideas, questions, comments, and announcements with peers across the
Midwest.  The second is to solicit ideas and suggestions from
telecommunications professionals in MHEC member states about common
institutional challenges, existing MHEC programs, and future
cost-savings initiatives.  Each of you is welcome (and encouraged) to
tell your higher education colleagues about the mhec-tel list and
discuss its contents.  However, MHEC wishes the list to remain
"private" within the higher education community; commercial entities,
such as equipment vendors, will not be allowed to join.

[stuff deleted]

If you have specific questions or suggestions for the MHEC-TEL list,
please do not hesitate to contact either MHEC or myself directly.

Once again, welcome.

Jeff Williams, MHEC-TEL Administrator ([e-mail])
MHEC

     ------------ Forwarded Message ends here ------------

ABOUT THE MIDWESTERN HIGHER EDUCATION COMMISSION

The Midwestern Higher Education Commission (MHEC) was established in
1991 by the Midwestern Regional Education Compact, an interstate
agreement among midwestern states. The current member states include
Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and
Wisconsin. The mission of MHEC is to improve higher education
opportunities and services in the midwest region though interstate
cooperation and resource sharing. Programs include activities to
produce regional cost savings to benefit colleges and universities,
expand student access, support public policy development through
analysis and information exchange, facilitate regional cooperative
academic programming, encourage quality management, and promote
economic growth through higher education and industry innovation.


 Todd Graham                  Midwestern Higher Education Commission
 <[e-mail]>   1300 South 2nd Street, Mpls, MN 55454
              ph.: 612/626-8288    fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Stieger)
Subject: 500 Numbers and CID
Date: 24 Jan 95 20:35:36 GMT
Organization: StarNet Communications, Inc


Here's something I haven't seen asked in here. When nationwide Caller
ID is available, and someone calls you through a 500 number, will
their CID information be passed, or will the 500 number (or some ATT
number show up?


Mark


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know, and let's talk about it
when the service gets underway.  Actually I am a little ticked off
about this. In the middle of December I ordered 500 service, and got
my number assigned. They insisted there was no way to turn it on until
Janaury 20.  Comes January 20 it is not working and I call AT&T. It
will really be the 23rd, the lady says.  Okay, I waited until Monday
afternoon and tried it ... still nothing. I get intercepted at the
1-500 and 0-500 mark; Ameritech will listen to nothing further after
that. I call back to AT&T and ask them about it. The lady put me on
hold for the *longest* time -- about ten minutes -- then comes back
and says Ameritech won't have it turned on until January 30. So on
that day I shall try it again; who wants to bet me I will still get
intercepted at the local switch?  And of course, poor, put upon little
AT&T: 'there is nothing we can do about it; the local telcos have to
install the billing software ...'  Well heck, in case she has not
heard, Ameritech and AT&T have been fighting over the access fees to
be charged for 500 service, and Ameritech is planning their own 500
service. Who wants to bet me this will drag on for months before it
gets installed here. Meanwhile of course, AT&T promptly billed me for
the service on January 24 -- on my local Ameritech bill -- so much for
how it is out of their control until Ameritech cooperates.    PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 15:04:50 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Elizabeth Wasserman)
Subject: Looking For Papers on LD Competition


I'm doing some research into long distance competition in the US and
am looking for academic papers or articles that evaluate the
competitive situation in the US marketplace.  I've managed to find
about 5-7 good articles but would like to dig up a few more -- do any
of you have suggestions on what articles I should be looking out for?

I'm interested in anything published after 1988, although articles
done in the last two or three years would be most useful.

Send your suggestions to me at [e-mail]


Thanks for your generous help,

Elizabeth Wasserman   [e-mail]   chicago, evanston

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

Subject: Automatic Page Application Off of NT-SL1?
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:59:21 -0800
From: Ken Stone <[e-mail]>


I have an application where I need to generate a numeric page when a
phone number is dialed.  We have an emergency number here on site that
when called rings a series of "red phones" around the site at key
people's desks.  What I would also like to do is generate a page to
these same people when the emergency number is dialed.

Any ideas?


Ken Stone   Hewlett Packard, San Diego Site Telecomm & Networking

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 21:25:52 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Service in the Lincoln Tunnel


In New York City, there are also the Queens-Midtown Tunnel and the
Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel.

For the Lincoln Tunnel, what do you mean by "'Temp' I-495 between NY
and NJ"?  This was to be I-495, which: split off NJ Turnpike at what
is now exit 16-E; was to cross Manhattan from Lincoln Tunnel to the
above- mentioned Queens-Midtown Tunnel (this stretch was never built),
and then emerged from there as the Long Island Expressway, becoming
N.Y. 495 at or near the Clearview Expressway in eastern Queens.  The
latest I remember now is that the stretch in NJ is state route 495,
and I-495 signs were erected from Queens-Midtown Tunnel all the way to
the expressway's end in Suffolk County (eastern Long Island).

Old maps had I-78 crossing the Manhattan Bridge, passing near the JFK
airport, then turning north to the Throgs Neck Bridge (into the Bronx)
and hitting I-95.  Now the last reference to I-78 is the New Jersey
Turnpike Extension. (From there, you have to go through two intersections
to reach the Holland Tunnel.)

> In DC, the "tunnels" under the Mall (I-395, was to be I-95) and the
> I-195 (?) tunnels ...

Where is this I-195?  I live and work less than 100 miles from DC, and
given adequate description could figure what you are talking about.

> Chesapeake Bay Bridge/Tunnel and in Newport News, VA

There are two or three tunnels between Norfolk and Portsmouth (one is
I-264); the I-664 bridge-tunnel going south from Hampton; and the
I-64/U.S. 60 bridge tunnel across Hampton Roads.

Going west, there are the tunnels on the PA Turnpike and in Pittsburgh.

Oops, there are at least two tunnels in Philadelphia, but not on main
routes.  There is the 5th Street tunnel, which goes under the approach
road to the Ben Franklin Bridge.  And there is another tunnel near the
Art Museum.  At the 26th Street/Passyunk Ave. interchange on the
Schuylkill Expressway (I-76) you pass through a short tunnel if you
are on 26th Street.

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

From: [e-mail] (Eduardo Kaftanski)
Subject: Re: Help ... Ancient Party Lines Must Die!
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 05:09:32 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Raymond Mereniuk <Raymond@
zed.ca> wrote:

> 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

This could as well be true. Chilean's biggest telco is CTC (Compa~ia
de Telefonos de Chile) nowadays a long way from the state inefficiency
it was submerged what eight, maybe less, years ago. CTC Corp., as it is
called now, is a corporation with full independancy. It was once owned
by an investor named Bond, and I think is now owned by Telefonica de
Espa~a (Spain's telco).

Ok, back on track, CTC has changed nearly all the switches here for
new ones.  (Does somebody know tech info on them?) And you can kow get
all kinds of services you could not dream of five years ago. So if the
rumor heard is betweeen three and ten years old, it may be true.

Anyways, I hope this didn't sound as propaganda. I still hate
monopolies. CTC Corp is one, they sometimes work REALLY well (I got three
lines installed in my office in less that 24 hours) and sometimes
real bad (try to get a line where my apartment is; I quit after three
years of waiting in a line and got a second hand line from a competing
telco (CMET) who works better that CTC but has a VERY limited area).

Just a last bit of information. Chile has now a full 'multicarrier'
system since October 94. But almost no one has gotten any bill. I myself
have not paid a single long distance call since then. How do US long
distance operators bill?

Ah, you also get an 'IS...D... what?' response here. You do get that
response also if you ask for leased lines.


Eduardo Kaftanski    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Long distance calls here are billed each
month. You will usually get the bill within a month or less of making the
call; occassionally it might be the second month before the bill comes.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Bruce W Glassford)
Subject: Re: ISDN in Florida
Date: 23 Jan 1995 05:43:34 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link


In article <[e-mail]>, Evon Bent says:


> 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.

The local SB folks here know squat.  But, I went to a BellSouth
get-together a few months ago touting Intel's ISDN application
ProShare, and BellSouth announced an 800 number for ordering ISDN
services.  The event was in August of last year, and I don't have my
notes with me (meaning I don't have the 800 number), but you might try
800 Info for "BellSouth ISDN Service".  I don't have my BRI yet,
probably will order it in the next few months.

Hope this helps.


Bruce W. Glassford   Digital Communications Consultants, Inc.
Orlando, FL          [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve)
Subject: T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 12:02:45 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


The most basic difference is that a T3 is roughly 28 times "faster"
than a T1.  T1s are 1.544 Mbps while T3s are 44.736 Mbps.  Telcos and
big telecomm users often aggregate their T1 traffic onto T3s with an
M13 type multiplexer or a 3:1 digital cross-connect machine.

This is just a start.  The line coding is different as well.  T1s uses
AMI or B8ZS, whereas T3 always uses B3ZS.


Take it easy,

Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Wayne Huffman)
Subject: Re: Looking For 900-MHz Cordless Handsfree Headset
Date: 24 Jan 1995 13:13:52 GMT
Organization: Netcom


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Martin
Soques) writes:

> Greetings!  Subject line says all; I'm looking for a 900-MHz digital
> phone with a cordless headset rather than a cordless handset.

So that Pat doesn't seem to be the one plugging Hello Direct, *I* will
take a turn at it. They show a 900MHz cordless HEADset on page six of
their Spring '95 catalog for US$349. It weighs 7 ounces with the two
hour battery.

Hello Direct can be reached at 1-800-HI-HELLO. They also have a WWW
site at URL http://www.hello-direct.com/hd/

Their e-mail address is [e-mail]

BTW I don't work for them either.


Wayne Huffman

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger Atkinson)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Organization: R. F. Atkinson & Co.
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 02:33:26 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pete
Norloff) writes:

> I'm looking for some information on the sharing of long distance fees
> between long distance carriers and the RBOCs.  I've found casual
> references which indicate that the long distance carriers pay the
> RBOCs approximately 25% each of the fees collected for long distance
> calls and keep 50% for themselves.  This 25% was referred to as
> something like "line termination charges".  It's the payment to the
> local carrier for connecting one end of the call.

> I'm hoping to find an authoritative reference to help me in an
> argument with a Bell Atlantic engineer.  This engineer believes that
> Bell Atlantic is providing the terminating end of long distance calls
> to the long distance carriers for free.

Obviously, you don't believe that Bell companies give anything away.
I suppose you also don't believe in the tooth fairy <g>.

Seriously, there must be a tariff filed with the state utilities commission
for them to collect money, on a regular basis, from multiple customers
(IXCs).  Check your local telco business office.  In most states, they
are required to make their tariffs available for public inspection.
(Maybe we should start a movement to pressure PUCs to require that
tariffs be on the Internet?)  (Maybe they already are in some states?)

Consider the case of the small telco (non-Bell), in Nebraska, I
believe, that apparently had some mysterious financial relationship
with a local filthy talk operator.  Said sleaze bag (my opinion)
advertized his "service" all over the country, and listed an ordinary
area code and number, not a 900 SAC.  The net income of the telco
reportledly went up spectacularly in the ensuing months.  The filth
peddler continued to operate, and expand his system.  Since he was
merely receiving ordinary long distance calls, he had no obvious
source of revenue to support his generosity.  I read about it in the
{San Diego Union Tribune}, because a local mother of a teenage girl
was stuck for thousands of dollars of ordinary toll charges, even
though she had arranged with the local Bell company to block 1+900
calls.

Getting back to your question, it would appear that the various long
distance carriers involved in carrying these calls paid the local
telco for such termination.  This used to be called something like
"settlements and separations" before Judge Greene "fixed" the phone
system.


Hope this helps!

Roger Atkinson

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 15:25:58 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cattle Call


In TELECOM Digest v15 #46, the Moderator noted:

> [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

If not, this practice may lead to a worse problem.  What happens when the
cow gets corrupted by the promise of easy fodder and starts moonlighting
as a drug courier?


Dale Neiburg, STC      National Public Radio   Phone:  [phone]
635 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.  Washington, D.C.  20001
Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Timar)
Subject: Re: Internet Mail With Half the Address?
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc.
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:12:22 -0500


In Volume 15, Issue 53, Message 9, Jane McMahon wrote,


> How do find someone using Internet?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps it is about time for someone to
> write an article describing the Internet 'white pages' and how to use
> them. I think searching those would be a good way for you to start.   PAT]

Three Usenet FAQs of use exist,

    in Comp.Mail.Misc,      "Updated Inter-Network Mail Guide"
    also in Comp.Mail.Misc, "FAQ: How to find people's E-mail addresses"
    and in Soc.Net-People,  "FAQ: College Email Addresses"

These in turn are archived at rtfm.mit.edu as (in order),

    pub/usenet/news.answers/mail/inter-network-guide
    pub/usenet/news.answers/finding-addresses
    pub/usenet/news.answers/mail/college-email/part[123]

The last of these (College email addresses) is close to a year out of
date, so any volunteers to take it over would probably be extremely
welcome.


Ted Timar   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Judith Oppenheimer)
Subject: Re: LD Provider Juggling
Date: 24 Jan 1995 11:42:56 -0500
Organization: Interactive CallBrand(TM)


Justin,

My advice is to call your LDDS account representative and explain your
problem; copy them by fax on the paperwork, and *expect* them to iron
out the problem.

Much of our long distance is via a top-notch reseller in Atlanta.
When there are billing or other adminstrative errors, overlaps, etc.,
one phone call to her, with a documenting fax, is all it's ever taken
to straighten the problem out.  Including appropriate account crediting,
etc.

If you are not getting this level of service from your account rep at LDDS,
speak with that person's manager.  If they are still not responsive, switch
service providers.

If you need any more help, feel free to email me directly -
[e-mail].  Good luck!


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Sam Spens Clason)
Subject: Re: GSM SIM Implementation
Date: 24 Jan 1995 18:02:19 GMT


In <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Eric
Tholome) writes:

> 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.

I agree that different SIMs are pain.  But, it's really not that bad.
All Swedish operators offer two-card subscriptions.  Two IMSIs but one
phone number.  Only one phone can make or receive calls at the same
time.

I don't have a cellphone myself.  But I've been told that on Europolitan
you must dial 333 to "change IMSI" but on Comviq you only have to turn
the other phone on.  The IMSI last to do a manual update is the one
that gets the calls.  How it works on Telia I don't know.


Sam
<A HREF="http://www.nada.kth.se/~d92-sam/">Sam Spens Clason</A>

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #61
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21953;
          25 Jan 95 2:52 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19866; Tue, 24 Jan 95 21:43:11 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19849; Tue, 24 Jan 95 21:43:07 CST
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 21:43:07 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #62

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 Jan 95 21:43:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 62

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Where is PicturePhone II Now? (Ed Ellers)
    Re: Using U.S. Modem in Israel (Rich Galen)
    Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs? (David E.A. Wilson)
    Re: Ancient Party Lines (David Breneman)
    Re: Voice Response Unit Question (Christian van der Ree)
    Re: Help Locating Telephone/PC Interface Board (Christian van der Ree)
    Re: Cellular Phone Information Wanted (John Lundgren)
    Re: Where: T1 Information/FAQ? (John Lundgren)
    Re: Help Needed With Displaying X Windows on the PC (Mike MacFaden)
    Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges (David Hough)
    Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed (Joe Sulmar)
    Re: ANSI Terminal Communications (Timothy D. Shoppa)
    Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia? (Justin T. Leavens)
    Re: Looking For 900-MHz Cordless Handsfree Headset (Roger Snyder)
    Re: AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers (jamiec102)
    Re: CID Question (Dave Levenson)
    Re: More CO Codes For Each NPA; Any Telcos Take Advantage? (W. Leatherock)
    Five Digit Phone Numbers (Carl Moore)
    Cable Cost-of-Service Regulation (Prakash Hariramani)
    Radio Station Transmission Lines (Daniel Ritsma)

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: Ed Ellers <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Where is PicturePhone II Now?
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 18:33:55 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


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.

NYNEX, Bell Atlantic and Ameritech probably have them, if they weren't
sent back to Western Electric to be scrapped -- the service was
offered in New York, Chicago and Pittsburgh, with other cities getting
intercom-only Picturephone service (i.e. you could have it within your
own PBX but not to other sites because the video switches weren't in
place).  The Bell System also had a setup for several years between
top executives at 195 Broadway and the presidents of each of the BOCs,
and some other BOCs obtained sets to be used for demonstrations.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They were in the lobby of the Illinois
Bell headquarters building in Chicago. Customers could use them by
appointment to hold conferences, etc with people in other cities.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rich Galen)
Subject: Re: Using U.S. Modem in Israel
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:20:58 -0600
Organization: EDS


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Jeremie
Kass) wrote:

> 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?

This will NOT be technical because I aren't one, but I have been in
Israel several times over the past few months and have found (1) my US
modem (GV Mercury) works fine back to the US; and (2) sometimes you
find an RJ-11 jack and sometimes you find a jack which is the same
height, but about 4x wider than an RJ-11.  A friend of mine said he
would send me a converter which had the RJ-11 female on one end and
the standard Israeli jack on the male end.


Rich Galen   [e-mail]
EDS Emerging Market Development
Plano, TX          214-605-0017

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

From: [e-mail] (David E A Wilson)
Subject: Re: Wireless CO's Challenge New NPAs?
Date: 25 Jan 1995 09:35:11 +1100
Organization: University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.


[e-mail] (Phil Ritter) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]> Liron Lightwood <liron@insane.
> apana.org.au> writes:

>> 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.

> 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].

It even breaks down here in Australia -- we often get calls from
mobile phones which should have gone to the adjacent 044 area code but
end up here in 042.

When the new eight digit numbering plan arrives in 1998 we will only
have four area codes for the entire country the only problems will be
along a couple of state borders.


David Wilson    Dept CompSci Uni Wollongong Australia    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Breneman)
Subject: Re: Ancient Party Lines
Date: 24 Jan 95 23:41:13 GMT
Organization: Digital Systems International, Redmond WA


Scott Falke ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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 ...

On our system, you dialed the number of the person you wanted, got a
busy signal, then hung up.  Unless you and the other party shared a
ring (ie, one long vs two short) you heard nothing -- you just had to
wait a while and pick up the receiver and find out if they were there.
Of course, this system could always be used to ring your own phone as
well.  When the Jehovah's Witnesses showed up, an accomplice would
ring the phone, then annouce you had an important call.  Worked every
time. :-)


David Breneman                        Email: [e-mail]
Systems Administrator,          Voice: [phone]  Fax: [phone]
Product Development Platforms
Digital Systems International, Inc.        Redmond, Washington,  U. S. o' A.

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

From: [e-mail] (Christian van der Ree)
Subject: Re: Voice Response Unit Question
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 00:03:17 GMT
Organization: TTM Nederland


> 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?

What about this workaround that I use:

A caller types in the extension he wish to connect to. If he types in
#110 for instance, the computer beeps one time. I know he wish to speak
to me and pick up the phone. If the caller types in #200, the computer
makes two beeps (or plays a  .wav file) I know its for ...

Hopefully you like one. I'm still waiting for some nice payable voice-
hardware that can transform a PC in a real PBX.


TTM Nederland

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

From: [e-mail] (Christian van der Ree)
Subject: Re: Help Locating Telephone/PC Interface Board
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 00:07:53 GMT
Organization: TTM Nederland


> 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.

If it must be an IBM board, I can't help you. But else I can suggest
some real nice boards that will do the things that you want it to do
and much ... much ... more.


TTM Nederland

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Information Wanted
Date: 24 Jan 1995 15:12:26 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


LOKESH KALRA ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Is there a place other than the January 93 issue of {Consumer Reports}
> (probably quite out of date now) that discusses the Cellular/Mobile
> phone technology, kinds of plans offered, and the various models and
> how they are rated? Would appreaciate any info at [e-mail]

It seems that the carriers are practically giving the phones away to
get you to sign up with them for a year or so.  Just goes to show
where the profits are.

Rather than worry about the phone technology, it might be wise to
worry about the bills you may be getting.  According to the newsmedia,
the cloning and fraud is rampant.


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 Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Where: T1 Information/FAQ?
Date: 25 Jan 1995 00:09:42 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


[e-mail] ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Would some one please pass on any sites/addresses where information or
> FAQs on T1 service might be found.  Looking for general technical
> overview of the service.

Probably the best place to look for this is the local telco service
representative.  Maybe for tech info try a good library.


John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
Rancho Santiago Community College District
17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
[e-mail]\[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike MacFaden)
Subject: Re: Help Needed With Displaying X Windows on the PC
Date: 24 Jan 1995 18:44:03 -0800
Organization: Premisys Communications, Inc


In article <[e-mail]>, Ken Stack <[e-mail].
edu> wrote:

> 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

1) You need a SLIP or PPP link from home. If your workstation doesn't
have it, then I suggest your sysAdm install a Terminal Server which
does provide good security (companies: Livingston, Xylogics, Xyplex)

2) Get a copy of an X server that implements Low Bandwidth X (LBX) A
good company to talk to is Network Computing Devices (NCD).

All of these companies are on the net.


Regards,

Mike MacFaden       Premisys Communications, Inc Fremont CA USA

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

From: David Hough <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Chatter Heard on Scanner Leads to Criminal Charges
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 10:33:38  GMT
Organization: Chaotic


In article <[e-mail]> it was written:

> 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.

In the UK you are only allowed to listen to authorised broadcast stations,
amateur radio stations and transmissions from the Standard Frequency
Service. Even listening to CB is illegal unless you possess a CB
licence.

Dave   [e-mail]
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]

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

From: Joe Sulmar <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed
Date: 24 Jan 1995 20:04:40 GMT
Organization: North Shore Access/Eco Software, Inc; ([e-mail])


> I'm looking for cards for IBM PCs that can handle phone calls ...
> with about four lines but have the ability to upgrade to perhaps 24

The following companies make boards that will meet your needs:

    Dialogic                800-755-4444, 201-993-3030
    Natural Microsystems    800-533-6120, 508-650-1300 (Vikki Stoneback)
    Rhetorex                408-370-0881

I also know of some sources of used equipment, but I recommend that
you buy your first board direct, so that you get all of the latest
doc, software and support.  A 4-port board from these companies costs
approximately $1200 (check out the quantity discount break points
before you buy).  All of the above companies offer OS/2 and UNIX
drivers, some of them offer DOS drivers, and NT is either under
development or already available.

Lots of third party companies make application development tools for
these boards.  Let me know if you need information on software.

Good luck.


Joseph J. Sulmar                 [e-mail]
Computer-Telephony Consultant    voice: 617-862-6358
Lexington, MA                    fax:   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy D. Shoppa)
Subject: Re: ANSI Terminal Communications
Date: 24 Jan 1995 10:29:00 PST
Organization: California Institute of Technology


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(David O. Laney) writes ...

> I am interested in getting the ANSI Terminal Standards (i.e. escape
> sequences) to use to drive a communications package.

Check out the anonymous ftp site cs.ukt.edu; in the directory:
/pub/shuford/terminal

You'll find many files that will be useful, particularly "ansi_x3_64.txt".


Tim. ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (JT Leavens)
Subject: Re: Anyone Have Experience With LDDS/Metromedia?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 13:20:16 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JT Leavens)


I agree with the comment on inbound service from LDDS. I've got an 800
line with them right now, and I am getting comments from customers
about once a week that they can't get through, getting some intercept
message.  Outbound is no problem, but I don't know how long I am going
to keep them for inbound. It's a tough choice though: I've got their
rates at something like 13 cents/min for inbound and outbound calls ...
($1000/monthly and one year commitment).

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

From: [e-mail] (Roger Snyder)
Subject: Re: Looking For 900-MHz Cordless Handsfree Headset
Date: 24 Jan 1995 21:38:25 -0500
Organization: SHAD


Martin Soques ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Greetings!  Subject line says all; I'm looking for a 900-MHz digital
> phone with a cordless headset rather than a cordless handset.

Hello Direct (1-800-444-3556) has a 900MHz cardless headset for $349.


Roger

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

From: [e-mail] (JamieC1024)
Subject: Re: AT&T First to Deliver Long-Awaited "Follow-Me" 500 Numbers
Date: 24 Jan 1995 08:50:30 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JamieC1024)


It is the owner of the "Follow-Me" card. However this information may be
misleading.  AT&T was not the first to deliver long-awaited "Follow-Me"
Numbers. A case in point:  a company in Michigan called US Signal was in
fact the first to have TRUE "Follow Me" capabilities. The AT&T card is
really a FIND ME card where it calls a set of preprogramed numbers; this
service can get expensive real fast.


UniDial Communications


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And despite their statements that 500 numbers
would be available by now, they still are not turned on, at least here in
the Chicago area. I was one of the first people to sign up for 500 service
when they started taking orders. Despite calling within a day or so of their
announcement that orders were being accepted, there were absolutely *no*
good numbers available ... already taken, I was told. Yeah, we know how
AT&T does that; trying to get 800 numbers away from them and into the hands
of another resporg or carrier got me soured. All these 'reservations' and
never once a name to go with them. Well, be that as it may, they told me
back in December that my 500 number would take a month to turn on but be
available January 20. Comes last Friday, they said it would be Monday the
23rd ... now they are saying it will be next week on January 30. As usual,
point your finger at someone else; the rep claimed to me that Ameritech
does not yet have the billing software in place; that's nonsense because
in fact I got billed for my first month of 500 service by AT&T back on
January 24 as part of my Ameritech bill. Watch on January 30 for some new
date to be set. Why wouldn't the AT&T reps have known this when they
took my order now over a month ago?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Re: CID Question
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 02:37:11 GMT


Stan Schwartz ([e-mail]) writes:

> I have recently begun using TotalTel as a secondary LD carrier (by
> signing up for secondary service and a calling card).
 ...
> 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.

This is just a guess on my part, but this sounds very similar to the
service we get using Cable & Wireless.  Could it be, perhaps, that C&W
and TotalTel are both reselling WillTell service?  WillTell is the
company most often described in this digest as providing Inter-LATA
delivery of ANI via CID, or something like that.


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

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 95 21:29:55
Subject: Re: More CO Codes For Each NPA - Any Telcos Take Advantage?


Quoting [e-mail] (Dave Leibold):

> 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.

> Are there other area codes where introduction of N(0/1)X
> format CO codes/prefixes is planned?

   I first encountered CO codes in this format at least ten years ago
when I was calling a Southern California firm with which my company
was doing business.  (Sorry I don't remember the area code, and it's
probably been changed from what it was then anyway.)

   The July 1992 telephone directory for "Greater Fort Worth" has a
list of all prefixes in both the Fort Worth metro calling area (in
area code 817) and the Dallas metro calling area (area code 214).

   In 817 these prefixes are listed in the N(0/1)X format:

                      410 and 806

   And in the 214 area code:

   Southwestern Bell exchanges:

   508 703 712 812 704 707 815 202 204 212 215 305 314 502 504
   601 602 603 606 609 616 707 801 802 803 804 805 807 808 906
   908 909 912 913 914 708 709 217 218 515 617 302 309 302 312
   819 407 713 401 402 506 406 919 308 404 419 701 702 715 716
   301 705 801 802 803 907 917 918 902 904 706 503 613 203 319
   819 905 216

   GTE exchanges:

   313 413 513 514 518 607 714 717 718 719 915 916 219 304 315
   317 316 318 306 307 416 417 418 403 516 517 519 604 605 608
   612 618 619 205 303 414

   (These were scooped off the maps arranged geographically by wire
centers/zones, so they are not in numerical order and I might have
missed one or two.)

   This was two and a half years ago, and there are probably more of
these now.

   I know the Houston metropolitan exchange (area code 713) also has a
lot of CO codes in the N(0/1)X format.


Wes Leatherock
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 23:09:10 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Five Digit Phone Numbers


I am originallly from Wilmington, Delaware.  For many years, what
became the {News-Journal} newspapers were on what became 302-654-5351.
(Please don't call that number; it was changed long ago!)  Originally
(and I had to read about this since I am too young to remember that
far back) it would have been printed as "Wilmington 4-5351" or simply
"4-5351" with Wilmington being understood; I believe you had to ask
the operator if you wanted to reach such a number. "Wilmington" was
replaced by "OLympia" (OL for short) when it came time for customers
to be able to dial directly.  Then, in 1966, Diamond State Telephone
stopped printing exchange names in the Wilmington phone book, and
existing numbers of form OLx-xxxx began to be printed as 65x-xxxx.


TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Until the late 1960's a peculiar thing
existed in Lafayette/West Lafayette, Indiana with Purdue University and
the rest of the phones in the town. Lafayette was surrounded by area
code 317, and it had seven digit numbers like everyone else, yet it
was not direct dialable. You could call Indianapolis, or towns on
either side of it by dialing 317 and the number, but for Lafayette and
West Lafayette you asked your operator for the number. Purdue had
five digit extension numbers, and locally from within town if you knew
the desired extension you could dial 92 plus the five digits. To get
the Purdue operator from anywhere in town, you just dialed 90. If you
were calling from somewhere like Chicago, you dialed 211 for the long
distance operator and asked for 'Lafayette, Indiana nine-oh' or
perhaps for nine-two-whatever. Finally about 1970 long after everywhere
else in the area was dialable, Lafayette and Fort Wayne (both were
served by GTE, both had seven digit numbers like everyone else) got
connected with everyone else.

Does anyone remember when all the military bases around the USA had
their own special arrangements?  Camp McCoy in Wisconsin, for example,
was just 'Camp McCoy' to the long distance operator; it had four digit
extensions but no actual 'main listed number'. It was just 'Camp McCoy,
extension xxxx' via the long distance operator.  Ditto Fort Benjamin
Harrison in southern Indiana and Great Lakes Naval Base.   PAT]

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

From: Prakash Hariramani <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cable Cost-of-Service Regulation
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 18:56:03 -0500
Organization: Info Networking Institute, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


Hi:

I was wondering if any one could tell me the status of cost-of-service
regulation for cable companies by the FCC.  I am specifically
interested in accounting details, i.e. what costs should be considered
and how to calculate cost-of-service.  I searched through the FCC
gopher but did not find anything with this level of detail.


Thanks,

Prakash Hariramani ([e-mail])
Information Networking Institute
Carnegie Mellon University
5000 Forbes Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15213

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

From: Daniel Ritsma <[e-mail]>
Subject: Radio Station Transmission Lines
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 00:23:51 -0500
Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences


I am working for a small radio station that is now using two 8kHz
lines to feed four tansmitters (AM).  On one line we feed three
transmitters since they are for buildings next to each other; the other
line is for a building some 150 blocks from here.

Should we stick with analog lines or slowly move over to other types
of communication by phone? The fact that we have to branch off led me
to believe that we should go for digital transmition, so that we would
have less noise and a better signal.

Does anybody have experience with this?  We are located in Manhattan
and NYNEX is not of much help. Getting our current two lines to work
properly without too much loos was already a great victory for us.

Our budget is limited as we are a college radio station.  All help is
greatly appreciated.


Sincerely,

Daniel

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #62
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02513;
          25 Jan 95 17:20 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00129; Wed, 25 Jan 95 09:22:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA00119; Wed, 25 Jan 95 09:22:03 CST
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 09:22:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #63

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 25 Jan 95 09:22:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 63

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    205/334 Area Code Split (Jerry Pruett)
    Radio Modems For the European License-Free Bands? ([e-mail])
    Questions About ADSL and HDSL (Olivier Andrieu)
    Implementations of the German SISA Specs? (Finn Andresen)
    Marine Telecom Installation (Demosthenes Panagopoulos)
    Wireless Networks (Marie-Louise Kok)
    Difficulty With Atlantic Bell ISDN (Jeff Hersh)
    Value of Motorola Flip Phone (Microtac 950) (Brian Klaas)
    Technical Help Needed With Pending Litigation (John Marinelli)
    Re: Question on Call-Back Operators (Georg Oehl)
    Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed (Christian van der Ree)
    Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines ([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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: 205/334 Area Code Split
From: [e-mail] (Jerry Pruett - KD4CIM)
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 19:41:33 -0600
Organization: Vulcan - Live Long and Prosper!


On 1/15/95, the 205 area code (Alabama) was split into 205 and 334.
205 remains the area code for LATAs 476 (Birmingham) and 477 (Huntsville).
LATAs 478 (Montgtomery) and 480 (Mobile) were moved to the new 334
area code.

The following is a list of the NNXs that have moved to the 334 area
code.  This list does NOT come from any official source, but my
sampling of it seems to agree with the ad posted by South Central Bell
in the 1/16/95 Communications Week.  There is a "grace" period for
which both the 205 and 334 area codes will work, but I left the Comm
Week at the office, so I don't have the exact date.  I seem to recall
the "grace" period ending in June or July though.  For more precise
information for programming PBXs and such, call SCB (they had an 800
number in the Comm Week ad).

At the end of the "grace" period, I assume that SCB (or is it Bellcore)
will start assigning new NNXs that may duplicate in the 205 and 334
NPAs.

Again, this following information is NOT guaranteed as it is extracted
from a personal database.  My use of the database requires that I keep
it as accurate as possible however.  For exact details, you should
consult the Comm Week Ad and/or call SCB.

NPA-NNX  CLLI      NPA-NNX  CLLI      NPA-NNX  CLLI      NPA-NNX  CLLI
334-206  MTGMALMT  334-210  ANDSALXA  334-213  MTGMALDA  334-215  MTGMALDA
334-216  DMPLALMA  334-222  ANDSALXA  334-223  MTGMALMT  334-223  MTGMALMT
334-225  CTHRALXA  334-227  FTDPALMA  334-240  MTGMALMT  334-241  MTGMALMT
334-242  MTGMALMT  334-243  BNKSALXA  334-244  MTGMALDA  334-246  JCSNALNM
334-248  RPTNALXA  334-255  DLVLALXA  334-256  FMTNALMT  334-256  FMTNALMT
334-257  NTSLALXA  334-258  GSPTALXA  334-260  MTGMALDA  334-261  MTGMALMT
334-262  MTGMALMT  334-263  MTGMALMT  334-264  MTGMALMT  334-265  MTGMALMT
334-266  LSVLALXA  334-267  FRCYALXA  334-269  MTGMALMT  334-270  MTGMALDA
334-271  MTGMALDA  334-272  MTGMALDA  334-275  GVHLALXA  334-276  CFVLALXA
334-277  MTGMALDA  334-278  LWBOALXA  334-279  MTGMALDA  334-281  MTGMALNO
334-282  FNBGALXA  334-283  TLLSALXA  334-284  MTGMALNO  334-285  MTGMALMB
334-286  MTGMALNO  334-288  MTGMALNO  334-289  DMPLALMA  334-293  MTGMALMT
334-294  HXFRALXA  334-295  LNDNALMA  334-296  FMTNALMT  334-299  NWTNALXA
334-301  MTGMALDA  334-303  MTGMALDA  334-304  MOBLALSH  334-308  ENTRALXA
334-312  MTGMALDA  334-316  MOBLALSH  334-317  MTGMALDA  334-327  WLHLFLXA
334-330  MOBLALPR  334-334  EUFLALMA  334-335  LVRNALXA  334-337  VRBGALXA
334-341  MOBLALSH  334-342  MOBLALSH  334-343  MOBLALSH  334-344  MOBLALSH
334-346  FRHMALXA  334-347  ENTRALXA  334-361  PRVLALMA  334-365  PRVLALMA
334-366  MPVLALMA  334-368  ATMRALXA  334-369  WLHLFLXA  334-374  MCKNALXA
334-376  GRGNALXA  334-380  MOBLALSH  334-382  GNVLALXA  334-385  ARTNALXA
334-388  GNTTALXA  334-393  ENTRALXA  334-397  CLIOALXA  334-399  MTGMALDA
334-401  MOBLALAZ  334-402  MOBLALAZ  334-405  MOBLALAZ  334-408  MOBLALBF
334-409  MTGMALDA  334-412  SELMALMT  334-414  MOBLALSH  334-415  MOBLALAZ
334-416  MTGMALDA  334-417  MOBLALAZ  334-418  SELMALMT  334-419  SELMALMT
334-421  MOBLALAZ  334-427  ANDSALXA  334-431  MOBLALAZ  334-432  MOBLALAZ
334-433  MOBLALAZ  334-434  MOBLALAZ  334-438  MOBLALAZ  334-439  MOBLALAZ
334-441  MOBLALAZ  334-443  MOBLALBF  334-445  OZRKALXA  334-450  MOBLALOS
334-452  MOBLALPR  334-454  MOBLALAZ  334-456  MOBLALPR  334-457  MOBLALPR
334-460  MOBLALSH  334-469  RDLVALXA  334-470  MOBLALOS  334-471  MOBLALOS
334-473  MOBLALOS  334-474  PROTALXA  334-476  MOBLALOS  334-478  MOBLALOS
334-479  MOBLALOS  334-484  GSHNALXA  334-485  FTDVALXA  334-493  OPP ALXA
334-496  DOZRALXA  334-502  AUBNALMA  334-503  DLVLALXA  334-513  MOBLALAZ
334-514  WTMPALMA  334-516  MTGMALMT  334-519  MTGMALMT  334-522  GRDNALXA
334-527  BTLYALXA  334-529  MDWYALXA  334-537  LAPIALXA  334-540  FTMRALXA
334-541  ECLCALXA  334-542  SILSALXA  334-548  HYVLALXA  334-562  RAMRALXA
334-563  GOVLALXA  334-564  PTMNALXA  334-565  KSTNALXA  334-566  TROYALMA
334-567  WTMPALMA  334-569  HLVIALMA  334-573  ALBRALXA  334-575  MOVLALXA
334-577  MCCLALXA  334-578  EVRGALMA  334-580  BYMNALMA  334-584  PNLVALXA
334-585  ABVLALXA  334-588  HRFRALXA  334-598  DLVLALXA  334-602  MOBLALSK
334-604  MOBLALAZ  334-605  MOBLALAZ  334-607  MOBLALAP  334-610  MOBLALAZ
334-613  MTGMALNO  334-615  DTHNALXA  334-616  EUFLALMA  334-617  MOBLALSH
334-621  MOBLALSF  334-624  GNBOALMA  334-626  MOBLALSF  334-627  THMTALXA
334-628  UNTWALNM  334-633  MOBLALAP  334-636  THVLALMA  334-639  MOBLALAP
334-641  MOBLALSE  334-645  MOBLALSE  334-649  MOBLALSE  334-653  MOBLALTH
334-660  MOBLALSK  334-661  MOBLALSK  334-666  MOBLALSK  334-667  HRBOALOM
334-670  TROYALMA  334-671  DTHNALXA  334-675  MOBLALSA  334-677  DTHNALXA
334-677  DTHNALXB  334-679  MOBLALSA  334-682  CMDNALXA  334-683  MARNALNM
334-684  GENVALXA  334-687  EUFLALMA  334-690  MOBLALAZ  334-691  CTWDALXA
334-692  WCBGALXA  334-693  HDLDALXA  334-694  MOBLALAZ  334-696  CLMAALXA
334-702  DTHNALXA  334-703  OPLKALMT  334-704  OPLKALMT  334-705  OPLKALMT
334-712  DTHNALXA  334-714  DTHNALXA  334-724  TSKGALMA  334-727  TSKGALMA
334-735  BRNDALXA  334-736  NNFLALXA  334-738  UNSPALXA  334-742  OPLKALMT
334-743  MOVLALXA  334-745  OPLKALMT  334-746  PNAPALXA  334-749  OPLKALMT
334-754  FKVLALXA  334-762  ARITALXA  334-765  EXCLALXA  334-770  MOBLALAZ
334-774  OZRKALXA  334-775  CYTNALMA  334-777  DRPKALXA  334-789  BTRCALXA
334-792  DTHNALXA  334-793  DTHNALXA  334-794  DTHNALXA  334-795  ECHOALXA
334-807  TROYALMA  334-809  BRTOALMA  334-814  ASFRALXA  334-821  AUBNALMA
334-824  BLBTALXA  334-826  AUBNALMA  334-827  FRDLALXA  334-829  MTVRALMA
334-832  MTGMALMT  334-834  MTGMALMT  334-843  GLTWALXA  334-844  AUBNALMA
334-846  MLRYALXA  334-847  CHTMALXA  334-857  KWLGALXA  334-860  MTGMALMT
334-861  DPISALXA  334-862  URIHALXA  334-863  RONKALXA  334-864  LFYTALRS
334-865  GDBAALXA  334-866  CTRNALNM  334-867  BRTOALMA  334-872  SELMALMT
334-873  FWRVALXA  334-874  SELMALMT  334-875  SELMALMT  334-885  RCMLALXA
334-886  SLCMALXA  334-887  AUBNALMA  334-889  NWVIALXA  334-894  NWBCALXA
334-897  ELBAALXA  334-898  SMSNALXA  334-899  ASFRALXA  334-928  FRHPALMA
334-937  BYMNALMA  334-943  FOLYALXA  334-944  MCINALMA  334-946  SMNLALXA
334-947  RBDLALXA  334-948  GLSHALXB  334-949  BNSCALXA  334-952  FOLYALXA
334-953  MTGMALMT  334-957  IRSEALXA  334-962  LLLNALXA  334-963  PNHLALXA
334-964  LXLYALXA  334-965  MGSPALXA  334-966  CSTLALXA  334-968  GLSHALXA
334-973  BLFNALMA  334-981  ORBHALXA  334-983  MLCYALXA  334-986  ELBTALXA
334-989  SRDLALXA  334-990  FRHPALMA  334-992  DXMLALXA  334-994  SWWRALXA
334-996  ORVLALXA


73 de Jerry

BHM AmprNet  - [e-mail]  [44.100.113.19]
Packet Radio - KD4CIM @ KD4CIM.AL.USA.NA
Internet     - [e-mail]  (or [e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (kS)
Subject: Radio Modems For the European License-Free Bands?
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 10:34:03 +0100
Organization: V2S


What are those bands 9.. Mhz, ... Ghz in Europe?

Are there products in these bands to build a >1Mbps wireless digital
network?


V2S    Holland

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

From: [e-mail] (Olivier Andrieu)
Subject: Questions About ADSL and HDSL
Date: 25 Jan 1995 12:22:53 GMT
Organization: ADIT


Hi,

Where can I find some informations about the HDSL and ADSL
technologies (URLs, Gopher sites, FAQs) ? I am also looking for
informations about the integration projects of these technologies in
the future Electronic Highways in USA, Australia, Europe, etc.


Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Finn Andresen)
Subject: Implementations of the German SISA Specs?
Date: 25 Jan 1995 12:49:24 GMT
Organization: NetMan A/S, Denmark


Hi,

I am looking for some information on implementations of the German SISA
specifications for management of PDH/SDH equipment. I'm lokking for the
following kind of information:

1) Which vendors of PDH/SDH equipment are supporting the SISA specs? This
   would help us to decide whether to implement an equipment specific
   solution or to go for a more generic approach.

2) Are there any implementations of the SISA protocol stack available
   out there (freeware or comercial)?


Regards,

Finn Andresen                           E-mail:  [e-mail]
Netman A/S, Vandtaarnsvej 77            Phone no: ([phone]
DK-2860 Soeborg, Denmark                Fax no:   ([phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Demosthenes Panagopoulos)
Subject: Marine Telecom Installation
Date: 25 Jan 1995 13:41:49 GMT
Organization: FORTH - ICS, P.O.Box 1385, Heraklio, Crete, Greece 71110


I was wondering if anybody whould know of any information source
regarding marine teleommunications installations.  The question I am
facing is the installation of some voice/data lines on a marina.
Ideally the boats should be able to dock and hook into the marina
network.  Are there any special products (connectors, cables, etc.)
for marine installations?  Are there any other information (standards,
past experience)?  I would appreciate any help.


Thanks,

Demos

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Wireless Networks
Organization: NLnet
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 14:30:29 GMT


IOS Press is pleased to announce the publication of:

WIRELESS NETWORKS

Catching the mobile future

Edited by: J. H. Weber, J. C. Arnbak and R. Prasad

Proceedings of two combined conferences held in The Hague, The
Netherlands, 18 - 23 September 1994: 5th IEEE International Symposion
on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC'94 ); ICCC
Regional Meeting on Wireless Computer Networks (WCN'94)

1994; 1528 pp. in 4 volumes; paperback; ISBN: 90 5199 193 2

Price: HFL 390; GBP 140; DM 350; US$ 200

The professional fields of Wireless Computer Networks and Personal,
Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications have, within a few years,
become the fastest growing business area of telecommunications. The
papers presented in these volumes on WCN focus on the emerging
wireless extensions of intelligent networking and other computer
services. The contributions on PIMRC concentrate on the latest
developments in radio technologies and network access.

If you would like to receive a full list of contents and more
information on other telecommunication-books by IOS Press, please
e-mail your full mailing address to [e-mail].

If you would like to place an order, please e-mail [e-mail]

IOS Press, Van Diemenstraat 94, 1013 CN Amsterdam, The Netherlands,
fax: [phone]

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

From: Hersh Jeff <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 09:25:00 GMT
Subject: Difficulty With Atlantic Bell ISDN


My office (located in Eatontown, NJ, area code 908) recently had two ISDN
lines installed for experimental purposes.  We receive our ISDN from a
#5ESS.  It was obvious, despite what is written about Bell Atlantic in
"Reengineering the Corporation," that it is very inexperienced and
unorganized in providing ISDN service.  All we asked for was two ISDN
BRI lines with NT-1s.  It took about two months before we were able to
get the lines installed, and we have already had to replace the NT-1s
once.  Anyone else have experience with Bell Atlantic ISDN?


Jeff Hersh, Booz, Allen & Hamilton    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Klaas)
Subject: Value of Motorola flip phone (Microtac 950)
Date: 25 Jan 1995 01:50:52 GMT
Organization: Intel Corp., Chandler, Arizona


Given the fact that phones are given away free with subscription, does
an old phone have any value?

I changed service and was able to purchase a new phone (the exact same
alpha flip phone model) with two batteries for the cost of two batteries.
Now, I am left with an old phone.  Is taking it apart to see what's inside
its only value?


Thanks.

Brian Klaas       ADC Design Automation   Intel, Corp.
[phone]                            6505 W. Chandler Blvd.
Mailstop CH11-91                          Chandler, AZ  85226

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 00:31:32 EST
From: John Marinelli <[e-mail]>
Subject: Technical Help Needed With Pending Litigation


I need a specific technical question resolved for pending litigation
with Bell Canada. Here it is:

Is it physically possible to infiltrate a telephone company's network,
remotely manipulate the company's switches; process long distance
calling; make it appear that those calls originated from a particular
site and the subsequently billed to that location?

Can anyone answer this question or lead me to the individual(s) that
could?  Any help will be justly rewarded and sincerely appreciated by
yours truly.  Please leave a way to get in touch!  However, if you
prefer to remain unknown, thanks a million, and rest assured that I
will respect and protect your anonimity.

Thank you for your help in this matter.


Regards,

John P. Marinelli       [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, this generally can be done. It is
not real easy, and requires a degree of sophistication by someone who
knows how to do it. It involves getting into the telephone network using
a 'backdoor', using a dialup and passcode. In other words, what I am
saying is certain switches have a phone number you can dial into, give
the correct passcode, and then manipulate or make changes to the way
calls are processed as though you were in the central office itself at
a terminal and keyboard. Quite a few telcos have disabled this 'feature'
for obvious reasons. I guess some still have it available. I would not
have the slightest idea *what* commands/passcode to use, nor the numbers
to dial to get into the switch. The commands probably stay the same from
one switch to the next more or less, but certainly the phone numbers and
passcodes are different. Plus, I strongly suspect anyone fooling around
like this leaves tracks all over the place leading back to them.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Georg Oehl)
Subject: Re: Question on Call-Back Operators
Organization: University of Kaiserslautern, Germany
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 09:56:12 GMT


> [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.

    Well, Pat, I tell you how much it is in Germany. Calls to the
States from here cost you the (rounded) equivalent of 15 cents for every
seven seconds of your phone call. That means billing is in those seven
second increments as well; so if you make a phone call of, say, ten
seconds you pay 30 cents and give the PTT a gift of four unused seconds.
Hence, assuming it is possible to type six buttons on your phone
within seven seconds (to enter your PIN), your initial call to the
callback company costs you 15 cents.

    Now for the rates: I have seen Callback services that charge
as much as 75 cents a minute; but the chepeast I came across so far
was 51 cents per minute with a 30 second minimum and billing in six
second increments. And that is without a monthly flat fee, or call
surcharge. (Note: This is only for calls _from_ Germany _to_ the US of
A.)  So, a three minute call the direct way (ie. with "wonderful"
German Telekom) costs you about $3.75. (This is all rounded). Using
the Callback service it is $1.53 plus the 15 cents I used to call the
Callback service, ie. $1.68. That's more than 50% cheaper!  Things
from France may look a little narrower, because German Telekom, as far
as I know, charges the most in Europe, perhaps even in the world
(which wouldn't surprise me.)  But still -- you can apparently save
from France too.

> 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?

    They were?  Was unnoticed here.

> 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.

    Go right ahead. It is cheaper. The more competitors the better.

> 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]

    Well, what's the difference (in terms of security) between calling a
number, letting it ring a couple of times and calling a number and _letting_
them answer to punch in your PIN?  I don't see any. The point you originally
tried to make I didn't understand either: misdialed calls.  If someone has
your Callback number, he stole it or got it in some other illegal way.  People
can steal Credit Cards or Credit Card numbers too and cause quite some harm
to you, although a harm more of the subtle kind -- it doesn't wake you
up at three o'clock in the morning. Instead, it lets you sleep and comes in
the (later) morning in your credit card bill.


Georg


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, AT&T was claiming that deliberatly
causing a phone to ring then disconnecting amounted to sending coded
transmissions without paying for them (which it does). When it was
noted that AT&T's own answering machines use 'toll-saver' techniques
the same way (if ringing phone does not answer within two rings, disconnect
since there are no messages waiting for you), then the company found it
difficult to object to others using their network in the same way.

The difference between merely calling a number, letting it ring a couple
times and hanging up versus dialing a number, waiting for an answer and
specifically entering a PIN number is that the former happens how many
ever millions of times daily when clumsy people dial wrong numbers and
realize it within seconds of finishing the dialing. They then hang up,
but the callback switch has no way of knowing if the real user was giving
a signal or if some careless person caused that to happen. At least by
inserting a PIN, a positive, specific effort has to be made. Most wrong
number callers and telemarketing people don't get that far along.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Christian van der Ree)
Subject: Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 00:29:32 GMT
Organization: TTM Nederland


> I've seen a couple similar questions posted but haven't seen an
> answer.  Please post the answer.  I'm looking for cards for IBM PCs
> that can handle phone calls.  I need to be able to program how the
> call is handled (when and what to play and record, what to do with
> touch tone presses, etc).  All I've seen is things for one line.  I
> want to start with about four lines but have the ability to upgrade to
> perhaps 24, so I need multiple (four or eight) lines per card.  What
> are good vendors for this and where can I go for information?  Thanks.

The company I'm working for is developer of voice-processing software.
We are also distributor of Dialogic Voice hardware. You can start with
a two or four lines board and when you need more capacity, you youst
plug in extra boards. All Dialogic boards come with manuals and drivers
that allows you (if you are a good programmer) to make everthing you want
for the DOS OS.

Contact us for detailed information and pricing:

TTM Nederland    Rietveld 10
3641 GS  Mijdrecht  The Netherlands
Tel. [phone]  Fax. [phone]
Or e-mail full details

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines
Organization: bpd.harris.com
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 14:41:27 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> Daniel Ritsma <[e-mail].
edu> writes:

> I am working for a small radio station that is now using two 8kHz
> lines to feed four tansmitters (AM).  On one line we feed three
> transmitters since they are for buildings next to each other; the other
> line is for a building some 150 blocks from here.

> Does anybody have experience with this?  We are located in Manhattan
> and NYNEX is not of much help. Getting our current two lines to work
> properly without too much loos was already a great victory for us.

Contact Harris Allied at [phone] They engineer systems for
Radio stations and supply equipment from many manufacturers.  Should
be able to help you out on all of your many possibilities.

I must say that I DO work for a sister division of this company, but I
think that they can help you out.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #63
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa06731;
          26 Jan 95 1:19 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19344; Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:04:15 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19337; Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:04:13 CST
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:04:13 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: telecom
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #59


TELECOM Digest     Tue, 24 Jan 95 15:15:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 59

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

 **REMAILED SINCE VARIOUS READERS REPORTED NOT RECEIVING THIS ISSUE WHEN**
 **FIRST MAILED ON TUESDAY AFTERNOON. IF DUPLICATE TO YOU, PLEASE DISGARD**

    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (John Lundgren)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (G. Straughn)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Ed Goldgehn)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Barry Margolin)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Peter Knoppers)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Paul Houle)
    Re: T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference? (John Dearing)
    Re: T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference? (John Lundgren)
    Re: Areas Covered by Phone Book? (John Levine)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and 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: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: 24 Jan 1995 15:08:11 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Pete Norloff ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I'm looking for some information on the sharing of long distance fees
> between long distance carriers and the RBOCs.  I've found casual
> references which indicate that the long distance carriers pay the
> RBOCs approximately 25% each of the fees collected for long distance
> calls and keep 50% for themselves.  This 25% was referred to as
> something like "line termination charges".  It's the payment to the
> local carrier for connecting one end of the call.

I heard somewhere that this might have something to do with the number
of connections that the RBOC supplies.  There don't have to be as many
connections to the long distance carriers as there are subscribers.

> I'm hoping to find an authoritative reference to help me in an
> argument with a Bell Atlantic engineer.  This engineer believes that
> Bell Atlantic is providing the terminating end of long distance calls
> to the long distance carriers for free.

I know I'm paying something like $3.50 a month to be connected to the
LD carriers.  At one time, it was something like $2, and was upped to
$3.50.  Maybe the difference at one time was paid by the LD carriers
but it was later shifted to the subscribers.  I think it had something
to do with the old AT&T Long Lines high profits funding the local
exchanges (before breakup).

I know that my next bill will have another couple bucks added to the
basic service charges to make up for the money lost from letting the
LD carriers compete for intraLATA toll calls.  That's going to make a
lot of old ladies unhappy.  I'm not pleased about it either, but I can
afford it.  Our district, with $30K bill, will be getting a four percent
raise.  That's about $1200 a month.  I guess I should be happy.  But
the Pac Bell reps say that it will be a wash when the toll rates are
factored in.  Hmmm.

> Anyone have any information on this topic?

Just mostly rumor and hearsay, and a decade of faded memories.


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] (g straughn)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 09:40:06 -0800
Organization: BEST Internet [phone]


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

> I'm looking for some information on the sharing of long distance fees
> between long distance carriers and the RBOCs.  I've found casual
> references which indicate that the long distance carriers pay the
> RBOCs approximately 25% each of the fees collected for long distance
> calls and keep 50% for themselves.  This 25% was referred to as
> something like "line termination charges".  It's the payment to the
> local carrier for connecting one end of the call.

In California, Pacific Bell charges $0.0142 per minute of "terminating
access" to all IEC's, this rate is regulated at the FCC and I suspect Bell
Atlantic has a similar tariff on file at the FCC.


Greg S.

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 1995 00:37:58 -0500
From: Fred R. Goldstein <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs


[e-mail] (Pete Norloff) asks,
> I'm looking for some information on the sharing of long distance fees
> between long distance carriers and the RBOCs.  I've found casual
> references which indicate that the long distance carriers pay the
> RBOCs approximately 25% each of the fees collected for long distance
> calls and keep 50% for themselves.  This 25% was referred to as
> something like "line termination charges".  It's the payment to the
> local carrier for connecting one end of the call.

In the olden days (before 1984's FCC-mandated rules change, which
coincidentally was the same time as the Bell breaksup), there were
"separations and settlements" in which the overall toll revenues were
divided based upon a complex formula.  Nowadays, the local companies
use certain formulas to justify the rates they charge for "access" by
LD carriers.  When an inter-LATA call is carried from and/or to a
local carrier, the inter-LATA carrier pays a tariffed rate.

The last time I looked, the lowest rates were just over 3c/minute for
either the originating or terminating end (thus over 6c/minute for
both ends), but up to around 5c/minute for some telcos.  There may
also be a distance charge for intra-LATA calling TO the carrier's POP;
typically this is 1/100 of a cent per minute per mile.  That's their
real "toll" cost base!

In a few obscure cases (very small telcos) the price can be much
higher, so the interexchange carrier is guaranteed to lose money on
it.  (America's Network columnist Art Brothers owns one such telco,
Beehive Tel in Utah, which has extremely high costs and thus can
charge something like 90c/minute to terminate calls there.)

If a customer has direct access to an interexchange carrier switch
(say, a T1 into the POP), thus not using (let's not use the "b word",
bypass, here) the local Bell's switched network, the fee is avoided.
Most big 800 numbers work that way, so only the consumer (caller) end
invokes a Bell charge.

The flip side is that for intra-LATA toll calls, a customer who hooks
up as a carrier gets a lower price (3-5c/minute) than almost anybody's
intra-LATA WATS rate.  This is not impossible for a large user
(there's a game called "rusty switch" in case you need to leave the
LATA) so intra-LATA tolls are being forced down.  NYNEX, at least,
understands this and charges only around 5c/minutes for bulk business
toll, and actually encourages big users to go directly to their own
toll switches and hook up as carriers do for around 3c/minute.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: 24 Jan 1995 16:10:23 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


All fees charges for LD termination can normally be found in the
Feature Group tariffs.  Normally, LD carriers fall under (last I
heard) Feature Group 'D' tariffs due to their method of termination.
You can request a copy of these tariffs from each of the RBOC's or
from the PUC in any State.

BTW, the method of charges is entirely different for LD service in the
cellular industry.  With cellular, it is not unusual for local cellular
carriers (RBOC's or otherwise) to provide FREE or flat rate termination
charges to LD carriers.


Ed Goldgehn                           E-Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr. Vice President                    Voice:   [phone]
Open Communication Networks, Inc.     Fax:     [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Judith Oppenheimer)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: 24 Jan 1995 13:56:27 -0500
Organization: Interactive CallBrand(TM)


Pete, you're absolutely right and this is a GIANT issue and always has
been.  This is known as "access charges" and is a basic feature of the
phone charges.  WHY DO YOU THINK THE LD CARRIERS ARE SO INTERESTED IN
WIRELESS?  It bypasses the local access charges and they keep the
whole banana.  This is a major threat to Local that is struggling
anyway.  This is the most likely reason RBOC's will get relief against
the prohibition on doing long distance.  Because:

1.  Technically LD carriers will be providing local service
which is  prohibited too.

2.  Local Service providers will have to jack up rates to
survive and that angers users who for the most part don't make
long distance calls (95% of all  traffic is local, 40% of LD is
to 800 numbers.)

3.  The local rates have already been jacked up because those
companies have lost the off setting revenue they use to get from LD
before divestature, so angry localities are demanding competition for
local service just like there is competition for LD.  To do that would
drive prices down even further and really kill the RBOC's.

4.  Local's revenue stream is from access charges.  To their benefit
though, they do get the fee even if the call isn't completed.

RBOC's will have to be allowed to do long distance, provide
information services, provide video delivery and anything else they
can to off set lost access charges.


Judith  Oppenheimer, [e-mail]

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

From: Barry Margolin <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 11:15:26 -0500
Organization: NEARnet, Cambridge, MA


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Michael P. Deignan) writes:

> Can you really say when a fraudulent call is placed that the loss is
> $.50?  Not really. Loss implies that you're depriving the company of
> something that they otherwise couldn't sell. In a cell call case, its
> bandwidth.  Unless bandwidth is saturated, the "fraudulent" cell call
> is simply using unoccupied bandwidth that would simply be assigned to
> a legit call.

It's not quite that simple.  Telecommunications providers generally
engineer their network so that the bandwidth should never be saturated;
it's common to target something like 40-60% load.  So if fraudulent
calls increase the load on the network, the carrier will have to
increase the capacity to accomodate it.  This costs money, but because
the calls are fraudulent there's no corresponding income to pay for
it.  This is precisely the same as any other kind of theft: the vendor
fails to receive income when someone gets something that the vendor
paid for.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter Knoppers)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 13:37:18 GMT
Organization: Delft University of Technology, Dept. of Electrical Engineering


The preceding discussion compared cellular fraud with making illegal
copies of software or tapping the signals from the cable television
company. I believe that those cannot be compared because cellular
phone facilities and the cable television signals can easily be pro-
tected from fraud or theft without hampering the legitimate users,
unlike software, where copy-protection invariably reduces the use-
fullness and attractiveness of the product.

A cellular phone or cable television facility is a product that has
value. Protection from fraud is technically feasible and affordable
and does not reduce the usefullness of the system. (In fact increased
protection from fraud _increases_ the attractiveness by reducing the
probability that customers are billed for calls that they did not
make.)

The fact that the providers of cellular phone systems do not protect
their product suggests that said providers make more profit from the
product in its current state than they would if the product was
adequately protected. The legitimate users pay part of the cost of
the fraud. More is paid by the taxpayers through the provision of
police and justice systems that track down and prosecute phreakers.

Using taxpayer's money to track down and prosecute phreakers should
stop until the providers of cellular phone systems add _reasonable_
protection from fraud to their product. Customers of those cellular
phone companies (should) know that each bill must be scrutinized and
anticipate to dispute billing errors. If they do not want the hassle,
customers should select a provider that has a better product.

Cable companies can protect their product from unauthorised use (i.e.
theft) at a reasonable price without hampering legitimate users.
Regretfully, software producers do not have this luxury, therefore it
is acceptable that software producers rely (in part) on the police and
justice systems to control illegal copying.

Generally, everyone is obliged to make a reasonable effort to protect
his or her products and properties from theft, vandalism or misuse.
The police and justice systems are public services for cases where
reasonable protection fails, or is impossible.


Peter Knoppers - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Houle)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 22:12:09 -0500
Organization: Cornell University


> [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.]

       I think it does matter, because when companies hue and cry
about fictional losses they add to the cloud of media distorsions
about technology.

       To take an example, a friend of mine brought an AP story to my
attention today about an "attack" on the internet that makes it
possible for people to "steal information" and makes it sound like it
is a really great crisis that is a fantastic threat to the "information
superhighway", that people are going to tap future commerical traffic
on the internet to steal credit card numbers and so forth.

       Now it's certainly true that people are doing things like this,  but
our beef with the article is that this has been going on as long as there
has been an internet,  as long as we've had data networks,  and that it's
something that we're going to live with as long as we have data networks.
The media plays up particular incidents as if they were world shattering,
as if they were warning us that there is a band of cocaine-crazed Lybian
terrorists hiding an atomic bomb in somebody's basement,  instead of
recognizing individual network 'incidents',  computer viruses and so forth
as rather common events:  not any more newsworthy in themselves then would
be individual muggings in central park.

       What the media ought to be doing is to put electronic intrusion,
vandalism and crime into context, how this is a problem inherent in
our social organization and technology and that it's something that we
have to find ways to live with, instead of something that we should be
cowering in fear about.

       Similarly, every few months, some paper somewhere prints a
story about the discovery of a "vast pornographic computer network"
with 8 million users, thousands of sites and so forth.  That's right,
somebody just stumbled onto the alt.sex hierarchy or a secret cache of
porno GIF's, so now your local paper prints that the local research
university has not only been corrupted by post-modernist deconstructionalist
Marxist English professors, but adding insult to injury, is part of an
international porn conspiracy called USENET.  There's no mention, of
course, that you can also read comp.dcom.telecom, rec.arts.startrek.tech,
sci.chemistry, comp.os.  linux.announce, or even alt.angst!  [Except
of course, when an AT&T PR man told the media that people from the
"network" (meaning comp.dcom.telecom) who were communicating and
complaining about the USA Today 800/900 incident were people who were
interested in "getting something for nothing".  (Remember that Pat?)]

        More recently, we can consider media coverage of the Canter &
Siegel affair, heroes of the {Wall Street Journal} editorial page right up
there with Milton Freedman, Arthur Laffer and Margaret Thatcher.

        It hurts the electronic community when software publishers
wildly overestimate their "losses" due to software piracy.  It leads
to alarmism, crippled shareware, and looses dongle-peddling charlatans
on the street.  [Why don't dongle ads show the twenty-odd dongles that
you'd have hanging off your parallel port if every software publisher
used dongles?  A fellow worker had what amounted to a cute little CNC
milling machine that cut traces out of circuit boards; it was controlled
by a propreitary piece of software that ran on an IBM PC -- and even
though the software was only useful to control a piece of hardware
manufactured by one company, it was still "protected" with a dongle!]

        Digital storage and communications create a crisis in intellectual
property, this is a technological fact.  Our society needs to find some way
to protect the rights of people that produce information products and
those that use them -- and when industry screams like chicken little
about hypothetical losses, it doesn't help us think clearly about the
problem.

        It is the same thing with the cellular phone companies; the problem
of cellular phone fraud is real; but if they want the public [including the
police, regulators, etc] to be part of the solution, they'd best come clean
about the economics of cellular phones.

        ObAnswer: To directly address Paul Robinson's question, I had
the impression that an awful lot of cellular phone phraud is directed
out-of-the-country, particularly to third-world countries that have
absurdly high phone rates.  According to a phriend, a cloned phone is
typically going to cost an "end user" something in the $100-$300
range, though people sometimes program phones for less (like $50 or
so); you have to talk a ~long~ time to justify that cost making local
and long distance calls in the US.  Compare this to a typical cost of
$8 or so for a code.

        Unless Colombian Dial-a-Druglord and Bangladesh Telegraph and
Telephone are remarkably forgiving, I think cellular phone carriers
~are~ paying for those calls.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Dearing)
Subject: Re: T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 04:40:12 GMT
Organization: Netaxs Internet BBS and Shell Accounts


Alan Jackson ([e-mail]) wrote:

> What's the difference between the two as far as the user is concerned?

In a word, SPEED.

In another word, COST.

T1 gives you a 1.544MB/sec circuit. T3 is a 45MB/sec circuit. The
prices for the terminal gear that goes on the end of a T1 have come
down a lot over the last few years as more companies start using T1's.

The end user market for T3 terminal gear is still pretty small (but
growing). One application (besides Internet backbone trunks) that is
pushing the use of T3's is full-motion commercial broadcast quality
video conferencing.


John Dearing   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: T1 vs. T3: What's the Difference?
Date: 24 Jan 1995 00:04:16 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Alan Jackson ([e-mail]) wrote:

> What's the difference between the two as far as the user is concerned?

^$$^  Bye-bye!

Lotsa difference in $.  If you can't afford either one, why bother to
ask  ...

Don't quote me on this, but I think there's a difference of 28 times
the data thruput between them.  T-3 = 28 T-1's and then some.


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 Levine)
Subject: Re: Areas Covered by Phone Book?
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 95 02:56:14 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?

Around here, NYNEX makes big bucks by having zillions of different
Yellow Pages, far more than they have white pages.  For example, the
West Suburban white pages are available by themselves, or bound with
three different sets of yellow pages for subareas of the area covered
by the white pages.  So the map means what it seems to, the white
pages cover a larger area than the yellow pages.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail]
Primary perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies"

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #59
*****************************



Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa07376;
          26 Jan 95 2:28 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20431; Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:54:36 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20424; Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:54:32 CST
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:54:32 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #64

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:54:30 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 64

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Service Outage ND and MN (Kevin Bluml)
    Telebit Introduces Two V.34 Modems (Eileen Lin)
    UC Berkeley Short Courses on Communication (Harvey Stern)
    AT&T LD Carrier CID Question (Terrence McArdle)
    Cellular Provider in Israel (Isaiah W. Cox)
    RS449 - Help Please! (Vadim P. Kikin)
    WAN Employment Opportunities (Bobby Lowe)
    Alpha Paging via PC (Kevin Kadow)
    GSM SIM Simulator Suppliers Wanted (Gurj Bahia)
    Re: Old Phone Number Format (Wes Leatherock)

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, 25 Jan 95 10:40:33 CST
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Bluml)
Subject: Service Outage ND and MN


Phone service to Moorhead, Minnesota and portions of Fargo, North
Dakota is still out after someone cut at least five different major
cables in the Fargo area over the weekend. Most of the service lost is
in Minnesota even though the cuts were in North Dakota. Some cables
were above ground, others were in manholes. Most were cut in several
places so simple splicing is not possible. Some of the cables were up
to five inches in diameter. Full service has been restored as of Tuesday
night to the Fargo area, with only 911 service and long distance service
restored to Moorhead, full service is expected to be restored by Saturday.

Emergency services had cellular service available and instructed people
needing assistance to go to the local fire stations or police stations
to seek help. I have not heard of any emergencies that were worsened due
to this, but many areas in northwestern MN had no dial tone for several days.
I believe as many as 500,000 people were impacted by this at one time
or another.

The police and FBI are looking for a suspect in a burglary of a stereo
store from Saturday night where the alarm wires where also cut.

Initial suspicions were that it was someone with knowledge of the system
due to the way things were damaged, however the current burglary suspect
is not a past telco employee according to current reports.


 From:      Kevin V. Bluml  - Cray Research Inc. 612-683-3036
 USmail -   655 - Lone Oak Drive, Eagan, MN 55121
 Internet - [e-mail]  UUCP - uunet!cray!kevin

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

From: [e-mail] (Eileen Lin)
Subject: Telebit Introduces Two V.34 Modems
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 15:41:08 GMT


Contact: Direct Marketing Dept., Telebit Corp.
Tel: [phone] or 800/835-3248
Fax: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]

TELEBIT INTRODUCES TWO V.34 MODEMS

SUNNYVALE, Calif., Jan. 16, 1995 -- Telebit Corporation, a leader in
the on-demand remote access industry, today announced that its
FastBlazer 8840 modems now support the ITU-T V.34 standard.  The
FastBlazer(R) 8840 is designed for environments where large central
site modem requirements include reliability, comprehensive network
management, high speed and global homologation.

In addition, today the company introduced the TeleBlazer, a V.34 modem
designed for remote users dialing into LANs who want to take advantage
of increased speeds.

Product Features:

Features of the FastBlazer 8840 include:

   - Speeds of up to 28.8 Kbps uncompressed and up to 115.2 Kbps with
     compression
   - Support for V.34, V.32terbo and eight other ITU-T and Bell standards
   - Flash memory for simple upgrades
   - Simple on-site configuration, control and monitoring via an 18-button
     front panel keypad and LCD display
   - Extensive command set and configuration parameters
   - Automatic single-call dial restoral of leased lines
   - Full configuration, control, testing and monitoring of FastBlazer
     rackmount modems via Telebit's ViewBlazer (R) network management
     system
   - Full compatibility with Telebit's NetBlazer(R) family of dial-up routers
   - Available in standalone and rackmount versions
   - Conformity to worldwide regulatory requirements
   - Extensive global homologation plans

TeleBlazer features include:

   - Speeds of up to 28.8 Kbps uncompressed and up to 115.2 Kbps with
     compression
   - Support for V.34, V.FC and eight other ITU-T and Bell standards
   - Support for 14.4 Kbps fax transmissions
   - V.42bis and MNP 5 data compression
   - Full compatibility with Telebit's NetBlazer(R) family of on-demand
     routers
   - MNP 10 with `Adverse Channel Enhancement' for reliable cellular
     communications

Price and availability

The FastBlazer 8840 Standalone and FastBlazer 8840 Rackmount are
available at the end of January 1995 and have a list price of $1,199
(U.S.).  Telebit's TeleBlazer is also available at the end of January
1995 and has a list price of $399 (U.S.).

V.34 support can be added to the FastBlazer through a free software
upgrade that is available through Telebit's Customer Service bulletin
board.  The telephone number for the Chelmsford, MA bulletin board is
508-656-9103; to contact the Sunnyvale, CA bulletin board, phone
408-745-3707 or 408-745-3861.

Telebit Corporation designs, manufactures and markets a family of
remote network access products to enable cost-effective extension of
LANs to remote users.  The company has offices in the United States
and Europe and markets its products and services worldwide through
value-added resellers, wholesale distributors and OEMs.  Telebit is
traded on the Nasdaq exchange under the symbol TBIT.

Telebit, FastBlazer, ViewBlazer and NetBlazer are registered trademarks
of Telebit Corporation.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: UC Berkeley Short Courses on Communication
Date: 25 Jan 1995 18:20:13 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]

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

From: [e-mail] (Terrence McArdle)
Subject: AT&T LD Carrier CID Question
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 14:09:27 -0500
Organization: University of Pittsburgh Medical Center


I have seen articles indicating the LD carriers WilTel and US West (at
least in Phoenix area) forward CID information interstate.  Does
anyone know if the major LD carriers, notably AT&T, Sprint, & MCI,
foward CID information interstate?

As secondary questions,

(1)  can anyone tell me if the areas of Louisville, KY and Cincinatti, OH
can send the CID information and

(2)  whether Pennsylvania (that CID-fearful state) will accept the
information?  The Bell Atlantic person told me that PA switches suppress
CID information on INTER-LATA calls, but my understanding is that this is
only an outgoing suppression, not an incoming supression.

Specifically, I'm interested in pinning down why I get an out-of-area
message on calls from Louisville, KY to my number in Pgh, PA. They use
MCI, I use AT&T.


Thanks for the info/experiences,

Terry McArdle                          email    [e-mail]
Mgr, Information Systems               work     [phone]
Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care  University of Pittsburgh Medical Center

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

From: [e-mail] (Isaiah W. Cox)
Subject: Cellular Provider in Israel
Date: 25 Jan 1995 22:30:33 GMT
Organization: The Direct Connection (Call London, 0181 317 2222 for demo)


Bezek has a cellular competitor -- they are like $0.03/minute in
Israel, which beats the pants off of Bezek.

I know these phones are selling well -- but I have been unable to find
people selling them!

I know that the venture is jointly done by Southwestern and Cellcom
(not the one is Wisconsin). So if I could get an e-mail address for
Southwestern Bell, I could track this down.

If anyone could help, it would be most appreciated.


Thanks,

Isaiah


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sometimes it is simply easier to call on
the phone than it is to look all over for an email address. Have you
considered calling their offices in St. Louis, finding out where their
cellular headquarters is located, then calling there?   PAT]


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

Organization: UGTU-UPI
From: Vadim P. Kikin <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 18:18:24 +0300
Subject: RS449 - Help Please!


Hi friends,

I want to connect my hardware to a sort of cisco router. They say I
have to match my output connector with RS449 interface. I couldn't
find any hints what RS449 is. People who own the router cannot help
me.Can anybody give me advise were to look for schematic of
connections with RS449 and its signals description?  Every help will
be appreciated: hints on Internet locations of docs, titles of printed
books or articles etc.

Thanks in advance.


Regards,

Vadim Kikin   Department of Transmitting devices
Ural State Technical University   Ekaterinburg, 620002 Russia
Email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (B. LOWE)
Subject: WAN Employment Opportunities
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 19:43:24 +0000
Organization: emjay


                Network Application Engineer

                  - Integration of Network Application in WAN

                Network Design Engineer

                  - Design a Cell Swithching Backbone Network

                Network System Engineer

                  - Integration of WAN systems tools

                Satellite/Wireless Engineer

                  - Design and Integration

                ( x.25, Frame Relay, TCP/IP)

                DEGREE REQUIRED, Masters Degree preferred


     THE OPPURTUNITY!:

                Major Partnership to build a Worldwide Network Service
                Company to provide Frame Relay, x.25 and Cell Backbone
                Network Services.  This network will reach over 100
                countries and will utilize state of the art technology.
                Great growth potential for the company as well as the
                individual employees.


     Call BOBBY @ [phone] or FAX[phone] OR [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 21:00 CST
From: [e-mail] (Kevin Kadow)
Subject: Alpha Paging via PC
Organization: Ripco Internet BBS, Chicago


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The original message shown below did
not appear in this Digest.   PAT]

In article <3fsmd0$[e-mail]>, Robert Babcock v
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> I have a Motorola advisor pager, it is an alpha/numeric pager is
> there any way to send a message to my pager via a pc? A friend who
> used to work for a local messenger service said that it is possible.
> He said that he would type a phone number for the local transmitting
> tower and type in the message and that would send the text to the
> pager. Well if anybody has got any info on this please let me know.

You need the modem number for the paging company; usually it connects
at 300 or 1200 baud. At least for the system I use the pager ID is the
same as the phone number for the pager.

A MS-DOS program for paging is available from ftp.ripco.com:

    /pub/msdos/comm/acspg31.zip


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A new service started here on the net is
also worth exploring. Send email to [e-mail]. Or perhaps Doug
Reuben will see this message and reply directly to the writer.   PAT]

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

From: Gurj Bahia <[e-mail]>
Subject: GSM SIM Simulator Suppliers Wanted
Date: 25 Jan 1995 16:30:14 GMT
Organization: Fujistu Systems Europe Ltd


Anyone know if there are any other GSM SIM Simulator providers apart
from GemPlus and Orga ?

Please email me at the address below.


Thanks,

Gurj Bahia   email: [e-mail]
smail: Mobile Radio Division, Fujitsu Europe
G  S  M      Telecom R & D Centre Ltd.2 Longwalk Rd,
Global       Stockley Park, Middx, UB11 1AB, U.K.
System for   phone: [phone]    (natl)
Mobile com.         [phone] (intl)

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 15:47:25
Subject: Re: Old Phone Number Format Question


Quoting Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>

> The following question appeared recently in the Old Time Radio
> Digest mailing list, and seems tailor-made for an answer from this
> forum.

> From: "Richard M. Weil" <[e-mail]>

> The number for the store in Rockford was curiously 8-22-47.  I'm
> too young to know anything about 5 digit phone numbers.  Is that
> how it was back then in small cities?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:

> It was in fact a Philco (for anyone interested, that was our
> friends at Phillips) [ ... }

        I must respectfully disagree with Pat on this.  Philco was a
big U.S.A. appliance company not connected, at least at that time,
with the Netherlands electronic giant N.V. Philips (not Phillips).

        "Philco" was formed from the company's original corporate
name, the Philadelphia Storage Battery Company, and was one of the
biggest manufacturers of radios in the 1930s and probably earlier.
Perhaps they got into radios as allied to their battery business,
since radios, at least home radio receiver, originally were all
battery operated.

        It is my recollection that they became a major player in the
television business because in the 1930s they acquired the rights to
the patents of Philo T. Farnsworth, who had invented a television
system entirely compatible with, but not the same as, the system
invented by Vladimir Zworkin, the RCA genius.  Farnsworth invented his
system at age 16 and was granted the key patent at age 22.  Some
commentators have suggested he has largely been dropped out of the
history of television because the idea that this callow youth could
have developed a system that worked as well as the system developed by
great corporate laboratories staffed with multiple Ph.D.'s is
inconsistent with the supposed value of extensive higher education and
big R&D expenditures, and the big embarrassment this caused RCA.

        Philco, I believe, was the only manufacturer that didn't have
to pay licensing fees to RCA, although I think they later reached a
cross-licensing agreement with RCA.

        Philips, the Netherlands company, was not very well known in
the United States before World War II.  During World War II, after the
Netherlands was occupied by Germany, their American operation became
separate under the name North American Philips Company, which used the
trade name Norelco.

        But Pat's description of the early television sets and how
they developed is right on the mark.

> Five digit numbers were common in communities which had automatic
> dialing systems in those days but only one exchange in the
> community. Since the exchange name was always the same, it was
> assumed when dialing. In your example you parsed the number
> incorrectly. It was 8-2247, or to be complete about it,
> ROckford-8-2247.

        I couldn't speak to the situation in Rockford, but I'm very
familiar with Oklahoma City, which had five-digit numbers for many
years, starting in 1920 when the "Northwest" office was put into
service as the first dial operation in the city (and the first central
office outside the downtown area).  The downtown office was all
manual, with exchanges Maple and Walnut (not MAple and WAlnut; they
were manual exchanges and you spoke their names to the operator).  The
manual numbers were the exchange name plus one, two, three or four
digits: Maple 5, or Walnut 4434.  Maple 5, for example, was not Maple
0005; it wouldn't have had any meaning in a manual exchange.

        The "Northwest" office (it's really part of the inner city
now) had five-digit numbers starting with 4, such as 4-1468.  But
there was no name associated with that; there was no toll dialing and
it was just 4-1468 in Oklahoma City; not Oklahoma City 4-1468.

        The downtown office was cut over to dial in 1928, using the
prefixes 2 and 3.

        Tulsa had a different history, and right up until the days of
2L-5N numbering (seven digits expressed as two letters and five
numerals) in the 1950s or 1960s, had four, five and six digits
numbers.

        In a small town I lived in (Konawa, Oklahoma, one of the first
CDOs in Oklahoma) the numbers were three and four digit.  My home
number was 287; office 234.  Four digit numbers there were party
lines; the central office was terminal per line and the fourth digit
selected the type of ringing.

        It's true that Bell companies usually recommended printing
five digit numbers as "8-2247," as Pat said, and six digit numbers as
"54-1468."  But it was variable; Dallas and Houston expressed their
numbers as, for example, Riverside-4085, which was dialed as R-4085.
But not too many telephones outside the largest metropolitan areas had
letters on the dial in those days.  And independent companies often
recommended displaying numbers in different ways, such as 8-22-47, or
82-247.

        "All Number Calling" (ANC) (seven numerals) came after the
2L-5N (two letter and five number) arrangement, usually in the 1960s
or thereabouts.


Wes Leatherock
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #64
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08948;
          26 Jan 95 3:18 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21958; Wed, 25 Jan 95 22:51:07 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21945; Wed, 25 Jan 95 22:51:04 CST
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 22:51:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #65

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 25 Jan 95 22:51:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 65

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Dan J. Declerck)
    Corporate Creativity, was Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much is Real? (C. Jones)
    Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers (Linc Madison)
    Re: Freephone Forum vs. ITU Question (David Leibold)
    Re: Northern TeleCom Norstar Key System ([e-mail])
    Re: Internet Mail With Half the Address? (Ted Timar)
    Re: Help Needed With Displaying X Windows (Daniel R. Oelke)
    Re: Where to Find tpage? (John R. MacLeod)
    Re: Areas Covered by Phone Book (Wes Leatherock)
    Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines (Ron Kritzman)
    Re: GSM Cellular Operators List (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos)
    28.8k bps Modem (Victor Hu)
    What is an STD Coupler? (Richard Palmer)
    Re: Voice File Formats (Steve Rothkin)
    Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed ([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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Dan J. Declerck)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: 25 Jan 1995 18:45:20 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group


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

> Paul Barnett wrote me in response to my message:

>> Paul Robinson said:

>>> 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.

>> I think you made some good points about the impact of cellular fraud,
>> but I think you missed an important one (I didn't read real carefully,
>> so the omission may be mine):

>> Unlike software piracy, cellular bandwidth is a limited commodity.
>> Every fraudulent call has the opportunity to block a legitimate call
>> that would have resulted in some additional revenue.

> I did make that point in part.  Additionally, and if a particular
> system is saturated, then some additional fraudulent unpaid traffic
> might cause legitimate, paid traffic to not get through.

>> Furthermore, there is the capital investment required to build and
>> maintain the facilities to provide the additional increment of bandwidth
>> used by fraudulent calls, in order to provide a satisfactory level of
>> service to the legitimate subscribers.

> Yes, but again, how much of the claimed losses are real chargebacks
> and out of pocket costs, and how much of it is illusory lost profits
> (some of which might never have occurred).

> If someone who can't afford cellular service places fraudulent calls,
> certainly the cellular company loses revenue and perhaps has out of
> pocket costs, but those calls would never have been made, so the company
> would never have received the revenue from it.

Plain and simple ... ethically, there is NO difference between cellular
fraud and calling card fraud.

Both of them require the carrier to purchase additional equipment or
potentially deny service to a paying customer.

The carrier can't always eat the costs. EVERYBODY pays for cellular fraud.

> About the only place where lost revenue might be a valid issue is for
> people who use fraudulent time, not because they can't afford to use the
> service, but because they cannot afford to have a particular call tracked
> to a phone issued in their name, again typically because they are involved
> in the manufacture and sale of unauthorized dried plant residues, and
> referred to by police and prosecutors as drug dealers.

> This was the point I probably should have made: that if the cellular
> companies were actually getting hit for $1 million a day in settlements,
> I find it likely that they would have pushed for encryption a long time
> ago.  What the $1 million figure probably represents is imaginary lost
> profits from unbilled fraud, which is a whole different matter
> altogether.  It means that their overall profit margin is less, it does
> not mean they are actually *out* any money.

Businesses exist solely for the purpose of making a profit.

BTW: the new digital systems (CDMA/TDMA, etc) will have much more robust
authentication and encryption algorithms.  This will be another reason to
move to digital.

> And this may be the reason cellular companies have essentially either
> made customers eat most of the fraud, or barely done anything beyond lip
> service to stop it.

I wouldn't say they've done nothing. There exist many methods to combat
fraud, but they cost money!

Since they'll end up migrating to digital, which will probably fix the
problem, why spend now??


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Carl Jones)
Subject: Corporate Creativity, was Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much is Real?
Date: 26 Jan 1995 00:59:51 GMT
Organization: U S WEST NewVector Group, Inc.


> Or even better ... These calls "would have been" at the Roaming Rate
> of $5/minute. Wow!.

Ok, let's get something straight.  If a cloner takes a number from
Seattle and uses it in New York to make fraudulent calls, the Seattle
company has to pay hard cash to the New York company because those
calls were put through using a MIN/ESN combination that belonged to
the Seattle company.  That money must be paid even though the calls
were fraudulent.  That is where the big losses occur.  It's not
cooking the books, it's not tax evasion.  It's a hard cash loss!  End
of story ...


I speak for everyone in a twenty mile radius around me  :)
Any questions..E-Mail [e-mail]...................

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

From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 1995 00:43:08 GMT


My mother is from the small town of Goliad, Texas, about half way
between San Antonio and Corpus Christi (in the Corpus LATA).  Until
very recently, all local numbers were dialed as just five digits.
Until about ten years ago, all local numbers were 5-3xxx, but they are
now up to 5-2xxx and even 5-8xxx numbers.  However, as of a few months
ago, you now must actually dial the entire seven-digit number for local
calls!  (All long-distance calls are eleven digits.)  They finally got
touch-tone some time in the late 1980's.

The reason for the change, however, is that the local calling area is
being expanded slightly, to cover points as far as 30 miles away.  It
will now be a local call to phone Fannin, Charco, Weesatche (all 30 or
so subscribers), and Victoria (a town of 50,000 or more with an airport
and two TV stations).

For you history buffs, Goliad is the oft-forgotten second piece of the
battle cry: "Remember the Alamo, remember Goliad!"


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

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

From: [e-mail] (woody)
Subject: Re: Freephone Forum vs. ITU Question
Date: 25 Jan 1995 22:19:20 -0500
Organization: Internex Online (io.org) Data: 416-363-4151  Voice: 416-363-8676


In article <[e-mail]>, Judith Oppenheimer <producer@
pipeline.com> wrote:

> 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.

With regards to International Freephone service, it would seem that a
country code *other* than +800 should be used, due to the possible
confusion this would create with the domestic toll-free services, most
of which use an "800" code already. One potential problem is that
someone intending to call a domestic 800 number might try to use the
international format instead -- a company called as a wrong number
might have to pay the international charges.

How much of the international freephone system has been decided so far?


[e-mail]

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

From: SHERI <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Northern TeleCom Norstar Key System
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 17:12:26 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Daniel Aharonoff <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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.

      I'm a certified installer of Norstar switches. I've been installing
them for two years. I would like to say that they are the best systems
I've installed so far.

      I've never heard any complaints from any customers. All had good things
to say about the systems. They are also very flexible when it comes to
expanding.

      Northern Telecom makes a voice mail systems that goes side by side with
the Norstar systems. It's called Star Talk. There are different size voice
mail systems. Norstar systems are also compatibile with other voice mail
systems.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ted Timar)
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 11:12:00 -0500
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc.
Subject: Re: Internet Mail With Half the Address?


In Volume 15, Issue 53, Message 9, Jane McMahon wrote,

> Pat,

> How do find someone using Internet?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Perhaps it is about time for someone to
> write an article describing the Internet 'white pages' and how to use
> them. I think searching those would be a good way for you to start.   PAT]

Three Usenet FAQs of use exist,

    in Comp.Mail.Misc,      "Updated Inter-Network Mail Guide"
    also in Comp.Mail.Misc, "FAQ: How to find people's E-mail addresses"
    and in Soc.Net-People,  "FAQ: College Email Addresses"

These in turn are archived at rtfm.mit.edu as (in order),

    pub/usenet/news.answers/mail/inter-network-guide
    pub/usenet/news.answers/finding-addresses
    pub/usenet/news.answers/mail/college-email/part[123]

The last of these (College email addresses) is close to a year out of
date, so any volunteers to take it over would probably be extremely
welcome.


Ted Timar   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel R. Oelke)
Subject: Re: Help Needed With Displaying X Windows
Date: 25 Jan 1995 18:19:12 GMT
Organization: Alcatel Network Systems Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> In article <[e-mail]>, Ken Stack <[e-mail].
> edu> wrote:

>> 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

> 1) You need a SLIP or PPP link from home. If your workstation doesn't
> have it, then I suggest your sysAdm install a Terminal Server which
> does provide good security (companies: Livingston, Xylogics, Xyplex)

> 2) Get a copy of an X server that implements Low Bandwidth X (LBX) A
> good company to talk to is Network Computing Devices (NCD).
>

1 - you do not *need* a SLIP or PPP link if all you want to do is
    display X-windows on your PC.

2 - NCD has a product called X-Remote.  It implements LBX over
    a direct modem connection, and exports your Sun's x-windows
    into an MS-Windows environment.  I love it.

For X-windows, this is the best solution (and cheapest) that I know
of.  If you want to do more on your PC -- then you might need an actual
network (i.e. SLIP/PPP) connection.


Dan Oelke            Alcatel Network Systems
[e-mail]       Richardson, TX
http://spirit.aud.alcatel.com:8081/~droelke/

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

From: [e-mail] (John R MacLeod)
Subject: Re: Where to Find tpage?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 19:19:53 GMT


The `tpage' distribution is at lcs.mit.edu, in the directory
/telecom-archives/technical.

The FAQs and www search engines I tried were utterly useless in
finding this stuff, I just happened to notice telecom-archives and
went searching.

Look for ixo.program.scripts and ixo.tap.protocol (there are also
two unrelated files, pager.bin.uqx and pager.ixo.example, for Macintosh).

It turns out that the ixocico program at lcs.mit.edu can be made to
work with our pager service, "Pagenet". Just recognize the ACK
character at the end of the service's message packet, do not require
length 1. For example, ixocico should consider "PAGENET MESSAGE
CENTER<ACK>" equivalent to plain ACK.


John

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 15:47:27
Subject: Re: Areas Covered by Phone Book?


Quoting Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>

> Benjamin P. Carter <[e-mail]>, 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?

> The white area shows the limits of the white pages covered by
> that book.  In the case of the Los Angeles area, there can --
> and will be -- holes in that area because pieces will be covered
> by different telephone companies there.  The yellow area is the
> maximum area that yellow pages for that area will cover, and
> again, may have holes.

        I believe the Los Angeles area was mentioned in this respect,
and if there are holes in the listings because of different telephone
companies that is a retrogression.

        At one time there were 30 or 40 telephone companies in the
L.A. area, and they somehow reached agreement (possibly at the
prodding of the P.U.C. or local civic leaders) to issue regional books
with the listings "interleaved" (all in one alphabetical list).  For
example, one for Northwestern, one for Central, etc.  The independent
exchanges were dotted all over the area.  There was no indication in
the listings as to what telephone company served what customer.  The
yellow pages were a different story and each company usually issued
yellow pages, and sold yellow page advertising, only for their
territory.  So a book would have complete white pages listings for the
area covered, but only yellow pages for the area served by that
telephone company.

        Now, of course, the independent companies have all been
absorbed by GTE and the only two players are Pacific Telephone and
GTE.  But I'd be surprised in the P.U.C. or public pressure would let
them go back to issuing directories with "holes" in the area covered.

        Yellow Pages directories, "locality" directories and
private directories, of course, are an entirely different story.


Wes Leatherock
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Sometimes all the listings will be in one
book but in separate parts. For example, I remember seeing a couple of
books issued by Bell a few years ago which covered some regional area,
however after that part of the book finished, and some other pages were
put in the middle (maps, etc) then another set of white pages started,
with a notation saying something like 'alphabetical listings for Podunk'.
'Copyright 19xx, Podunk Telephone Company'.  So they were in the directory
of record for the area (the Bell System directory) but not actually merged
with it. Other times, such as with Illinois Bell and Centel, the Centel
listings for Chicago only are part of the Illinois Bell Chicago White
Pages, with no reference at all to the fact that they are part of a
different telco.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Kritzman)
Subject: Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines
Date: 25 Jan 1995 15:50:03 GMT
Organization: American Information Systems, Inc.


Daniel Ritsma ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am working for a small radio station that is now using two 8kHz
> lines to feed four tansmitters (AM).  On one line we feed three
> transmitters since they are for buildings next to each other; the other
> line is for a building some 150 blocks from here.

> Should we stick with analog lines or slowly move over to other types
> of communication by phone? The fact that we have to branch off led me
> to believe that we should go for digital transmition, so that we would
> have less noise and a better signal.

This sounds like the typical "carrier current" scenario.  We had the
same sort of setup when I was in college.  Since the 8 kHz line well
exceeds the bandwidth you can cram thru an AM radio, the two remaining
questions are noise and cost.  For your "close" string feeding the four
buildings -- is there enough noise on the line to be objectionable?
How about the 150 block run?  Your "yu" login tells me you're in NYC,
which means twenty blocks to the mile.  Thats about seven miles then,
give or take the zigzagging to and from the telco COs.  Presuming that
the noise and bandwidth are acceptable on both lines, look at cost. What
will NYNEX hit you with for a digital line?

One more thought, especially if you want to save money.  Does the
school have some sort of dedicated carrier already connecting the
locations?  A T-1 maybe? And can the Telecomm or MIS dept or whomever
runs it, spare you a bit of bandwidth?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: New York City has twenty blocks to the
mile?  Gee whiz ... they must be very small blocks. In Chicago we have
eight blocks to the mile with the exception of one area just south of
downtown where there exist twelve blocks to the mile, and that's only
for about one mile.  On first reading the above, I thought there was a
distance of 15-18 miles involved.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos)
Subject: Re: GSM Cellular Operators List
Date: 25 Jan 1995 15:13:26 GMT
Organization: Delco Electronics Corp.


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

> In Singapore, GSM subscribers have the option to subscribe to autoroaming
> services to Hongkong, UK, Australia, Switzerland and Denmark. This means
> that with their GSM SIM Card, they are able to send/receive call in the
> above countries.

Could someone provide a brief explanation of GSM? A friend of mine in
Greece got a car phone with GSM and he was talking about the SIM card
and of course I had no clue as to what he's talking about.


Thanks,

Spiros Triantafyllopoulos                  Kokomo, IN 46904   [phone]
Software Development Tools, AD/SI          [e-mail]
Delco Electronics/GM Hughes Electronics    "Reading, 'Rithmetic, and Readnews"

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

From: Victor Hu <[e-mail]>
Subject: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 95 19:43:02 PST


Hello,

I just purchased a 28.8 K modem with the brand "Supra".  I paid extra
to get the 28.8 K instead of the 14.4 K.  Can someone help me with the
following?

1.  Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or
14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression?

2.  What kinds of host supports 28.8K?  I only connect up to my
university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max.

3.  What is the speed of fax machines?

My impression of my new modem:

1.  The Supra has a nice display (external version for the PC) that
shows the mode of transmission.

2.  However, I found that it required a different initialization string
than that suggested as default for modems that are Hayes compatible.


Thanks very much,

Victor

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Palmer)
Subject: What is an STD Coupler?
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 1995 17:05:56 GMT
Organization: RD & MA Palmer MD PMC


My local telco (South Central Bell) has been charging me $18 a month
for an STP coupler.  I am apparently not using this, not in posession
of it, and there is some question in my mind if I ever was.  Could
some kind soul please tell me what this is, and if anyone has any
insights as to their responsibility about refunding erroneous charges
I would be very interested.

The South Central Bell representitive with whom I spoke told me that
the "statute of limitations" was six months.


Richard Palmer   [e-mail]   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (S Rothkin)
Subject: Re: Voice File Formats
Date: 25 Jan 1995 10:20:19 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (S Rothkin)


Another reply to your message answered your question for all formats
except Vbase. If by Vbase you mean the indexed file used by VFEdit,

The file starts with a header record which can be read with the
following C structure (note that TD_BYTE4 should be defined to
whatever will evaluate to four bytes on your platform):

struct t_VFE_xfile_hdr
  {
   unsigned TD_BYTE4 IdxTot;        /* total indices allocated in the file
(including gaps) */
   unsigned TD_BYTE4 SmpFrq;        /* Sample frenquency */
   unsigned TD_BYTE4 IdxUse;        /* total indice used by phrases */
   unsigned TD_BYTE4 dummya;        /* dummy */
   unsigned TD_BYTE4 BytUse;        /* total bytes used */
   unsigned TD_BYTE4 dummyb;        /* dummy */
  };


Following the header is an array of IdxTot entries of the following
structure. Entries are in order of phrase number. If you have gaps in
phrase numbers, there will be some entries with length 0.

struct t_VFE_xfile_index
  {
   unsigned TD_BYTE4 offset;        /* absolute offset in file */
   unsigned TD_BYTE4 length;        /* length of the index */
   unsigned TD_BYTE4 Txtoff;        /* annotation text offset in file */
  };

The rest of the file is the phrase data, and the annotation text
entered through VFEdit (if any). The offset and length fields of the
index entries control access to the phrase data and annotation text.


Steve Rothkin   Senior Systems Consultant, Granada Systems Design
Email: [e-mail]   Work: [phone] ext. 217
Fax:   [phone]     Home: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ramin )
Subject: Re: Telephony Card/Software Needed
Date: 25 Jan 1995 16:13:48 GMT
Organization: Alcatel Network Systems Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Paul Garfield ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I've seen a couple similar questions posted but haven't seen an
> answer.  Please post the answer.  I'm looking for cards for IBM PCs
> that can handle phone calls.  I need to be able to program how the
> call is handled (when and what to play and record, what to do with
> touch tone presses, etc).  All I've seen is things for one line.  I
> want to start with about four lines but have the ability to upgrade to
> perhaps 24, so I need multiple (four or eight) lines per card.  What
> are good vendors for this and where can I go for information?  Thanks.

Try Dialogics at 1-800-755-4444.  If you need some help with the software
drop me a line.


Ramin

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #65
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa24059;
          31 Jan 95 20:35 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10842; Tue, 31 Jan 95 14:57:17 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA10834; Tue, 31 Jan 95 14:57:15 CST
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 14:57:15 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #66

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 31 Jan 95 14:57:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 66

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    No Activity in This Newsgroup? (Glenn Foote)
    GSM Operators - List (Robert Lindh)
    When Will PBXs Go Away? (Brent Laminack)
    Infrared Network Devices (Tim Lee)
    Sprint For IntraLATA Calls in California (Javier Henderson)
    Anyone Know High Speed Serial Interface (Chuc Do)
    Ten Digit Dialing (Evan Champion)
    Cheap Way to Get an 800 Number? (David Hayes)
    Data Engineer Position in Houston ([e-mail])
    Directory Assistance in Tokyo (Javier Henderson)
    CCITT Class A (Jesus Ruelas)
    Is There a Newsgroup For SONET? (Geno Rice)
    The Four Minute Battle For 800-555 (Dave Leibold)
    Bell Canada Multi-Language Operator Support Trial (Dave Leibold)
    IVR Software Information Wanted (Robert Geradts)
    DAX Software - RAM Research (Barton Fisher)
    Telebit Introduces Two V.34 Modems (Eileen Lin)
    Consultant Wanted in Denver, Colorado USA (Richard Bourassa)
    RBOC Aids Motorola's ISDN Push (Chris J. Cartwright)
    Plumber Arrested: Fraudulent Call Forwarding (Dave Levenson)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America
On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated
newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'.

Subscriptions are available 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] (Glenn Foote)
Subject: No Activity in This Newsgroup?
Date: 31 Jan 1995 14:28:26 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus Freenet


I haven't seen any activity in this newsgroup for about a week now.
Is it my site, or has our moderator been ill?


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Our site, nwu.edu was victimized by a
hacker last Thursday. Somehow he got in as root and did quite a bit of
damage. The entire site was down for a couple days while repairs were
made. At that point, by the weekend, the computers were operational
again, however our links to the outside world (that is, our dial ups
and our telnet, rlogin, ftp, etc) remained shut down until some additional
changes were made. Our links to the network and our dialups were turned
back on late Monday night. The sysadmin here has complete details on it
but I discourage writing or bothering him as there are still some repairs
going on and he is quite busy. I am grateful he and his staff made the
enormous effort they did in order that things like this Digest could get
back in publication as quickly as possible. I think we now have Caller-ID
on our dialup lines. Its too bad hackers have to ruin things for everyone
else.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Lindh)
Subject: GSM Operators - List
Organization: Ericsson Telecom AB
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 19:01:56 GMT


Country      Operator name          Network code   Tel to customer service
 ------      -------------          ------------   -----------------------
Argentina

Australia    Optus                  505 02
             Telecom/Telstra        505 01         Int + 6 118 018 287
             Vodafone               505 03         Int + 612 415 7236

Austria      PTV Austria            232 01

Belgium      Belgacom               206 01         Int + 32 2205 4000

Cameroon

Denmark      Sonofon                238 02         Int + 45 9936 7196
             Tele Danmark Mobil     238 01         Int + 45 80 20 20 20

Estonia      EMT                    248 01
             Radiolinja Estonia

Finland      Radiolinja Finland     244 05         Int + 358 800 95050
             Telecom                244 91         Int + 358 800 7000

France       SFR                    208 10         Int + 33 1 44 16 20 16
             Telecom                208 01         Int + 33 1 44 62 14 81

Germany      D1, DeTeMobil          262 01         Int + 49 511 288 0171
             D2, Mannesmann         262 02         Int + 49 172 1212

G Britain    Cellnet                234 10         Int + 44 753 504548
             Vodafon                234 15         Int + 44 836 1100

Greece       Panafon                202 05         Int + 30 944 00 122
             STET                   202 10         Int + 30 93 333 333

Holland      Telekom                204 08         Int + 31 50 688 699

Hong Kong    SmarTone               454 06         Int + 852 880 2688
             Telecom CSL            454 00         Int + 852 803 8450

Hungary      Pannon GSM             216 01         Int + 36 1 270 4120
             Westel 900             216 30         Int + 36 30 303 100

Iceland      Telekom                               Int + 354 96 330

Ireland      Telecom                272 01         Int + 353 42 31999

Israel

Italy        SIP                    222 01         Int + 39 6615 20309

Jersey       Jersey Telecoms

Lebanon      Libancell

Lithuania    LMT                    247 01

Luxemburg    Telekom                270 01         Int + 352 4088 7088

Macao

New Zealand  Bell South             530 01

Norway       NetCom                 242 02         Int + 47 92 00 01 68
             Telenor Mobil          242 01         Int + 47 22 03 03 01

Portugal     Telecel                268 01         Int + 351 931 1212
             TMN                    268 06         Int + 351 1 793 91 78

Singapore    Singapore Telecom      525 01

South Africa MTN                    655 10
             Vodacom                655 01         Int + 27 82 111

Spain        Telefonica Spain       214 07

Sweden       Comviq                 240 07         Int + 46 200 22 20 40
             Europolitan            240 08         Int + 46 20 22 22 22
             Telia                  240 01         Int + 46 771 91 03 50

Switzerland  Telekom                228 01         Int + 41 46 05 64 64

Thailand     AIS GSM

Turkey       TEKnoTEL               286 02
             Turkcell               286 01         Int + 90 800 211 0211

UAE          ETISALAT               424 01

Uganda


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The information for the last entry on the
list, Uganda, was missing when this arrived here.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brent Laminack)
Subject: When Will PBXs Go Away?
Date: 31 Jan 1995 10:17:45 -0500
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology


What is the current thinking on when a PC (powerPC, whatever) replace
the PBX? i.e. when can I run my T1 from the telco with my voice trunks
on it into one card on a PC and have it route voice over the LAN to
other desktop computers that double as phones? It will probably be a
time curve: first available for small offices (ten users) on an ethernet,
then a while later available for 200 lines on a faster LAN, etc. What
says the net? My Mitel sx200 lite has a 68000 for a processor: it's a
MacPlus! Surely the cpu horsepower is available to replace lots of
dedicated TTL and switching hardware. I was just at a briefing from
Apple and they're working with the PBX makers for a Geoport Mac to be
a voice terminal behind a "big maker" PBX. But who are the startups
that are out to kill the PBX makers?


Brent Laminack ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Tim_Lee)
Subject: Infrared Network Devices
Date: 31 Jan 95 10:39:45 PST
Organization: California State Polytechnic University, Pomona


Those of you who have some experience working with Infrared Network
Devices (for LANs):

What are some of the more reliable equipments you have used or you know of?
Will you also inform me on their basic specs?

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

From: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 11:20:58 PDT
Subject: Sprint For IntraLATA Calls in California
Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA


We had a discussion about the Sprint offer of one cent per minute for
customers in California using them to carry their intraLATA calls.

One of the caveats mentioned here was that customers on any of their
'saving' plans (say, The Most) would not be eligible for the special
rate.

I am with The Most plan, and today I got my bill. There are several
intraLATA calls, all billed at one cent per minute. This confirms what
I was told on the phone by Sprint customer service: the rate is good
for all of the residential customers (the person didn't specify any
geographical restrictions, i.e., Northern versus Southern. I'm in
SoCal [Ventura, to be precise]).


Javier Henderson (JH21)   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 13:27:26 +0000
From: bcarh8ab!bcars703![e-mail]
Subject: Anyone Know High Speed Serial Interface?
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada


I'm looking for any available information on commercially available
products that support HSSI (1M-52Mbit/s).

Please, feel free to post information or send it to me via e-mail.  In
returns, if there is enough interest, I will post a summary of what I
get in e-mail.  Thanks in advance.


Chuc Do   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 08:55:08 +0000
From: evan champion <[e-mail]>
Subject: Ten Digit Dialing
Organization: Bell Northern Research


Recently there has been a lot of talk about having to do ten digit
dialing to call even local numbers that are in a different phone
number.

I have a number of users who are going to be affected by the above and
am looking for a good explanation for them.  I'm myself am not
completely sure myself of all the reasons for making the changes to
out-of-area dialing and would like to get it right the first time :-)

Could someone e-mail me with an explanation?


Thanks!

Evan


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, it is eleven digit dialing, not
ten digit if you count the '1' on the front. However, one would think that
when this becomes universal all over the USA that we could in fact get by
with ten digits since the '1' would no longer be needed; there would be
no 'local' calls to distinquish from 'long distance'. Since everything that
we dial would consist of area code plus seven digits, there would be no
need for a '1' to indicate that 'what follows is an area code' -- everything
that follows would be area codes!  It would be nice to see the '1' vanish
under those cirucmstances. Or maybe they will insist on keeping it using
as their rationale that '1' is also -- by coincidence -- the country code
for the USA and Canada, and that what we are really dialing is country code,
area code and seven digit number. As to *why* they are imposing it on calls
within the same area -- as is supposed to be the case in Chicago beginning
sometime in 1996 -- I do not know. Various reasons have been given.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Hayes)
Subject: Cheap Way to Get an 800 Number?
Date: 31 Jan 1995 17:54:01 GMT
Organization: On-Ramp; Individual Internet Connections


Some friends and I are starting a new small business. We would like to
have an 800 number.

How do I get one? Other than ATT/MCI/Sprint, are there other people
who can provide an 800 number cheaply?

How do I minimize my cost?

How do I get 800-CALL-MY-BUSINESS? Do I have have to pay extra for a
"good" 800 number.


David Hayes               PGP public key available on request, or send
[e-mail]    mail subject: help to [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Data Engineer Position in Houston
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:42:40 PDT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link


Responsibilities include supporting regional and national customer CDPD
applications, coordination with marketing, network engineering, MIS and
systems vendors. Eight years experience in software/networking/data comm-
unications (or four years with BSEE/CS) REQUIRED. Experience in TCP/IP
and Software Testing needed; Documentation and presentation skills,
knowledge of cellular industry and technology are a plus.

Payment for relocation to Houston will be considered. Immediate availability.

PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND TO ME BY E-MAIL AS I DO NOT LOG IN EVERY DAY;
FAX RESUMES TO 713-876-5011.


Thanks.

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

Subject: Directory Assistance in Tokyo
From: [e-mail] (Javier Henderson)
Date: 31 Jan 95 08:30:58 PST
Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA


Hello,

I need help with directory assistance in Tokyo, Japan. I tried AT&T,
which I guess connected me with DA in Tokyo, but I may not have the
correct spelling for the business I'm looking for, so the search was a
bust.

It's a hotel, and I was told it spells Abiko. Any help will be much
appreciated.


Javier Henderson (JH21)   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jesus Ruelas)
Subject: CCITT Class A
Organization: Motorola GDL - IS Department
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 02:34:21 GMT


Hi everybody,

I read about the committee CCITT that is formed by 5 class groups,
they are class A, class B, ..., class E; and know that only the group
class A has the voting right while proposing a Standard specification.
Does anybody know why only this group has this kind of privileges?.


Thanks and regards,

Jesus Ruelas     Telecommunications & WAN   Motorola, Inc.

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

From: [e-mail] (-E.RICE)
Subject: Newsgroup For SONET?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 19:37:37 GMT


What newsgroup contains discussions of SONET?

Geno Rice


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You will find them here from time to time.
Does anyone know of a group specifically on the topic?   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 00:14 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: The Four Minute Battle For 800-555


[from Bell News, 23 Jan 95 - content is Bell Canada's]

[from photo caption...]

I've got one ... The event began at 9 a.m. and by 9:04 a.m., it was
over. On December 15, a new NXX (555) was opened for 1-800 numbers
across North America allowing for approximately 8,000 new numbers. We
were competing against all the other telephone companies in North
America to get as many of them as we could. Doris Tesolin, an 800
Service Centre associate, celebrates getting the first number just
after the 9 a.m. start. At exactly 9:04 a.m., the entire 8,000 numbers
were gone and the 800 Service Centre was successful in securing about
40 numbers for our customers.

[dl note: apart from 555.1212 and perhaps 555.4141, and with a capacity of
10 000 possible 800 555.xxxx numbers, what happened to most of the other
2000 numbers available in 800-555?]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 00:17 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: Bell Canada Multi-Language Operator Support Trial


[from Bell News, 9 Jan 95, content is Bell Canada's]

Our LD assistance comes in 17 languages.

Our customers can now receive assistance in making long distance calls
in the language of their choice.

In a six-month trial which began last December, our operators are
offering 24-hour access to Language Assistance, at no extra charge,
to assist customers in completing their long distance calls.

This month and next, customers will receive information on dialing "0"
for language assistance via a SIM (Short Informational Message) on
their monthly bill.

"It's another example of how we continue to find new services to
delight our customers," says Janet Garrod, of Consumer Market
Management.

The trial will measure customer response and demand for the free
service, assess the cost and benefits of providing such a service, and
identify the most frequently used languages.

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

[sidebar]

Our ethnic customers can receive assistance in the following 17 languages:

Mandarin; Cantonese; Japanese; Vietnamese; Korean; Hebrew; German; Spanish;
Polish; Russian; Portuguese; Romanian; Tagalog; Italian; Hindi; Arabic; and
French.

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Geradts)
Subject: IVR Software Information Wanted
Date: 31 Jan 1995 06:36:54 GMT
Organization: Pacifier Internet Server [phone]


I have been attempting to evaluate many different Interactive Voice
Recognition development platforms.

Can anyone out there share their views on the following products?

Visual Voice by Stylus Innovation
ProVIDE by Telephone Response Technologies
REKOLL by N-Soft
Ring! Application Generator by Ring!
4Voice and Narrator by C3
Voice Applications Language by U.S.Telecom
CallPath DirectTalk/2 by IBM

Any help is greatly appreciated!


Thanks,

Rob

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: DAX Software - RAM Research
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 01:20:54 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


I'm interested in finding people that own the DAX voice/fax
developement software.  Please Email me.


Thanks,

Bart

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

From: [e-mail] (Eileen Lin)
Subject: Telebit Introduces Two V.34 Modems
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 15:43:35 GMT


Contact: Direct Marketing Dept., Telebit Corp.
Tel: [phone] or 800/835-3248
Fax: [phone]
Internet: [e-mail]


TELEBIT INTRODUCES TWO V.34 MODEMS

SUNNYVALE, Calif., Jan. 16, 1995 -- Telebit Corporation, a leader in
the on-demand remote access industry, today announced that its
FastBlazer 8840 modems now support the ITU-T V.34 standard.  The
FastBlazer(R) 8840 is designed for environments where large central
site modem requirements include reliability, comprehensive network
management, high speed and global homologation.

In addition, today the company introduced the TeleBlazer, a V.34 modem
designed for remote users dialing into LANs who want to take advantage
of increased speeds.

Product Features:

Features of the FastBlazer 8840 include:

   - Speeds of up to 28.8 Kbps uncompressed and up to 115.2 Kbps with
     compression
   - Support for V.34, V.32terbo and eight other ITU-T and Bell standards
   - Flash memory for simple upgrades
   - Simple on-site configuration, control and monitoring via an 18-button
     front panel keypad and LCD display
   - Extensive command set and configuration parameters
   - Automatic single-call dial restoral of leased lines
   - Full configuration, control, testing and monitoring of FastBlazer
     rackmount modems via Telebit's ViewBlazer (R) network management system
   - Full compatibility with Telebit's NetBlazer(R) family of dial-up routers
   - Available in standalone and rackmount versions
   - Conformity to worldwide regulatory requirements
   - Extensive global homologation plans

TeleBlazer features include:

   - Speeds of up to 28.8 Kbps uncompressed and up to 115.2 Kbps with
     compression
   - Support for V.34, V.FC and eight other ITU-T and Bell standards
   - Support for 14.4 Kbps fax transmissions
   - V.42bis and MNP 5 data compression
   - Full compatibility with Telebit's NetBlazer(R) family of on-demand
     routers
   - MNP 10 with `Adverse Channel Enhancement' for reliable cellular
     communications

Price and availability:

The FastBlazer 8840 Standalone and FastBlazer 8840 Rackmount are
available at the end of January 1995 and have a list price of $1,199
(U.S.).  Telebit's TeleBlazer is also available at the end of January
1995 and has a list price of $399 (U.S.).

V.34 support can be added to the FastBlazer through a free software
upgrade that is available through Telebit's Customer Service bulletin
board.  The telephone number for the Chelmsford, MA bulletin board is
508-656-9103; to contact the Sunnyvale, CA bulletin board, phone
408-745-3707 or 408-745-3861.

Telebit Corporation designs, manufactures and markets a family of
remote network access products to enable cost-effective extension of
LANs to remote users.  The company has offices in the United States
and Europe and markets its products and services worldwide through
value-added resellers, wholesale distributors and OEMs.  Telebit is
traded on the Nasdaq exchange under the symbol TBIT.

Telebit, FastBlazer, ViewBlazer and NetBlazer are registered trademarks
of Telebit Corporation.

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Bourassa)
Subject: Consultant Wanted in Denver, Colorado USA
Date: 31 Jan 1995 15:51:18 GMT
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.


World-wide manufacturing company is looking for a consultant with
expertise in tariff analysis and telephony cost management.  Major
locations exist in Denver & Miami (USA), France and Australia.

Objective is to analyze existing facilities and service contracts and
make recommendations to reduce global communications costs for voice,
fax, video and data.

Familiarity with tariff 12 issues required.

Interested parties contact:

    Ben Pepper
    Senior Director
    World-Wide Information Systems
    [phone] (US Phone Number)
    [e-mail]  (Internet)

    -or-

    Richard Bourassa
    Systems Analyst
    World-wide Information Systems
    [phone] (US Phone Number)
    [e-mail]  (Internet)

Feel free to submit credentials and contact information via email.


Richard Bourassa, Information Systems ___T_e_l_e_c_t_r_o_n_i_c_s__|/\  __
Telectronics Pacing Systems                      Pacing  Systems     \/
7400 S. Tucson Way, Englewood, CO 80112
ph [phone] fax [phone]          Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 11:14:34 EST
From: Chris J. Cartwright <[e-mail]>
Subject: RBOC Aids Motorola's ISDN Push


In the 1/23/95 issue of {PC Week}, page 55, there is an article that
describes a joint effort between Motorola and Ameritech to bundle ISDN
hardware and services for home and office use.  ISDN BRI starts at
$28/mo and the RBOC will sell Motorla's terminal adapter for $399 or
$19/mo for two years.

Ameritech also provides it's own software for the ISDN and has a
similar program using two T-1's.  This is not an ad, I work for
neither, just want ISDN at home at a price I can afford and expect
others do too.


Chris Cartwright, Technical Engineer   Voice 301.295.0809
Mail  [e-mail]      C-serve 71614,2441

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Levenson)
Subject: Plumber Arrested: Fraudulent Call Forwarding
Organization: Westmark, Inc.
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 01:43:14 GMT


A story in the Monday {New York Times} describes a Philadelphia area
plumber who subscribed to Call Forwarding Ultra.  This is a service
offered by Bell Atlantic which allows subscribers to control
call-forwarding from a telephone other than the one being forwarded.
This plumber allegedly subscribed to the service for several of his
competitors without their permission, and then forwarded their calls
to his telephone.  He then intercepted some or all of their business.
He was found out after approximately one month, when one of his
victims was complimented by a customer for a job well-done -- a job
the victim never did!

The perpetrator is currently in jail pending trial for an un-related
charge of battery, but is now being charged with numerous counts of
wire fraud, theft of business, operating a business under a false
identity, and similar charges.


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


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This same report appeared in alt.dcom.telecom
today submitted to that newsgroup by Jack Decker who concluded by saying
this was a good reason telcos should password accounts, presumably to prevent
fraudulent Call Forwarding among other things. The thing he neglected to
mention -- nor was it mentioned by Dave Levenson here -- was that Call
Forwarding Ultra (or Enhanced Call Forwarding or Remote Call Forwarding as
it is known in other telcos) *does* require a password. If you have Call
Forwarding on your line otherwise -- you have to already have it installed --
then if you further subscribe to 'Ultra' you are given a personal password
or PIN. You dial a seven digit number which is the switch itself, begin
by identifying yourself with your PIN, then give the number you wish to
have (un)forwarded, followed by the number (if turning it on). The change
takes effect immediatly. Needless to say, the switch keeps its own records
on who called it from what remote location, with none of this 'private
entry' stuff permitted. Typically, that number at the switch will not even
answer or respond if the switch cannot tell what number is being used to
call it before it answers. Also, no other custom calling features can be
changed in any way, nor can any of the many other features of the switch
be programmed using that PIN.  So telco does make reasonable precautions
to insure that one person cannot just call up and change the forwarding
for someone else.

What goes around comes around:  Does anyone remember the old anecdote about
the original development of automatic switching involving Alvin Stroger?
Mr. Stroger was an undertaker a hundred years ago; he believed that the
operators on the manual exchange serving his community had been bribed to
divert calls from the public seeking funeral/burial services to his compe-
tition. So the story goes, he developed the switch which came to bear his
name as a way to be certain that manual operators at telephone exchanges
could not wilfully give away his business to his competitors.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #66
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa27089;
          31 Jan 95 20:57 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13300; Tue, 31 Jan 95 15:55:43 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA13287; Tue, 31 Jan 95 15:55:33 CST
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 15:55:33 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #67

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 31 Jan 95 15:55:30 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 67

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "The Mosaic Navigator" by Gilster (Rob Slade)
    WilTel's New Telecom Atlas (Leslie Smith)
    ACC Reports Increase in Billable Minutes (Dave Leibold)
    Canada and Chile Sign Telecom Research Agreement (Nigel Allen)
    NACN Problems With Cell One/Utah (Brianhead) (Doug Reuben)
    Needed: Network Solutions Manager (Lambert Schuyler Jr.)
    Bell Atlantic ISDN, Part II (Hersh Jeff)
    More on Universal International Freephone Numbers (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Gigabit Networking Workshop GBN'95 - Call for Participation (J. Sterbenz)
    Does AT&T 7506 TAD 03A Pass CID to RS232 of Orignating Caller? (ulmo@panix)

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, 31 Jan 1995 14:54:30 EST
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "The Mosaic Navigator" by Gilster


BKMOSNAV.RVW  941201

"The Mosaic Navigator", Gilster, 1995, 0-471-11336-0, U$16.95
%A   Paul Gilster [e-mail]
%C   5353 Dundas Street West, 4th Floor, Etobicoke, ON   M9B 6H8
%D   1995
%G   0-471-11336-0
%I   John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
%O   U$16.95 416-236-4433 fax: [phone]
%P   243
%T   "The Mosaic Navigator"

HTTP (HyperText Transfer Protocol) is the standard for the
construction and use of documents which link to other items on the net
through the use of URLs (Universal Resource Locators).  The World Wide
Web is the term which refers to the interconnected set of documents
which use HTTP.  (World Wide Web is often abbreviated to WWW, W3, or
just Web, although this latter causes confusion with a social issues
information network by the same name.)  Mosaic is an HTTP or W3 client
program, often referred to as a "browser".  In addition, the Mosaic
browser has a graphical interface, and can utilize "viewer" software
to display graphics, sound, and video in conjunction with HTTP
"pages".  There are other browsers, some, like WWW and lynx,
text-based.  Other graphical clients include Netscape, now being built
by one of the original Mosaic developers, and a proprietary part of
the new "Warp" version of OS/2.  Mosaic, itself, exists in multiple
freeware, shareware, and commercial versions, and can be obtained for
MS-Windows, the Macintosh, and X.

For those who have access to the Internet, but do not yet have Mosaic
or the necessary SLIP or PPP access, this book is an excellent guide
to getting set up.  Chapters three and four give quite detailed
instructions for obtaining, installing, and configuring the program.
This includes an explanation of the MOSAIC.INI file for Windows.
Other resources include Mosaic and W3-related newsgroups and mailing
lists.  Chapter six is also a solid guide to the use of Mosaic to
access ftp, telnet, Gopher, and Usenet news resources.

Gilster's "The Internet Navigator" (cf. BKINTNAV.RVW) and "Finding It
On the Internet" (cf. BKFNDINT.RVW) are both excellent works, and the
weaknesses of this one are shortcomings only in light of that
comparison.  The explanations of the World Wide Web, HTTP, and Mosaic,
while good, are not up to the previous standard.  The directions are
not quite as lucid, and sometimes seem to assume more knowledge on the
part of the reader.  Coverage of the actual operation of Mosaic could
be stronger: figures would have benefitted from the use of pointers to
items being selected, and the discussion of Mosaic menu items is
better in the O'Reilly & Associates' Mosaic handbooks (cf.
BKMOSAHX.RVW).  Also, while Gilster does discuss the fact that the
capabilities of HTTP, W3, and Mosaic may be misused for trivialities,
that point is not made strongly enough.  He mentions the frustration
involved with trying to use Mosaic with a slow modem, but not the
growing impact of massive graphic, video, and sound file transfers on
the bandwidth of the net as a whole.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKMOSNAV.RVW  941201. Permission given
to distribute in TELECOM Digest and associated publications.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

Date: Mon, 30 Jan 95 12:08:10 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: WilTel's New Telecom Atlas


Dear Telecom Digest,

    WilTel is excited to announce our New Telecom Atlas.  We would
love to know what you and your readers think about this new service
that WilTel now provides.  My name is Leslie Smith and if you would
like to talk with me about our New Telecom Atlas, I can be reached at
918-588-3645, or at [e-mail].


Thank you very much,

Leslie Smith

            Your Ticket to the "World"
              <URL:http://www.wiltel.com/atlas/atlas.html>

    Have you ever wondered where in the World you could find
International Telecom Information at one location on the Internet?
Well, wonder no longer, because WilTel has laid the "World" at your
fingertips with our New Telecom Atlas.

    Whether you need to know about the South of France or South
Dakota, WilTel's New Telecom Atlas allows you to maneuver around the
"World" with ease.

    The Telecom Atlas provides sojourners overseas with a
clickable map of International Carriers and Telecom Research Centers.
If your trip is not as far from home, the Telecom Atlas also provides
clickable information on Interexchange Carrier Sites, Regional Bell
Operating Companies, Freenets, Research Testbeds, and Value Priced
Long Distance Providers to those of us in the U.S.

    The WilTel Telecom Atlas is part of WilTel's Telecom Library.
WilTel is devoted to ensuring that Telecommunication information is
readily available and easily comprehendable to the public.  If you
would like to learn more about Wiltel and our many services, we can be
reached at http://www.wiltel.com.

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Subject: ACC Reports Increase in Billable Minutes
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 00:26:51 -0500


[from a news release via CNW]

ACC TELENTERPRISES LTD. BILLABLE MINUTES UP OVER 25%

TORONTO, Jan. 24 /CNW/ - ACC Telenterprises Ltd. (`ACC') is pleased
to announce that their billable minutes for the fourth quarter 1994
are up more than 25% over the same period last year. Billable minutes
were reported at 127,245,250 compared to 101,555,897 billable minutes
in the fourth quarter of 1993.

Commenting on the strong growth, Mr. Steve Dubnik, President and Chief
Executive Officer stated, "This increase in traffic is in line with our
expected growth. It is exciting to confirm that our billable minutes are
trending as planned."

The company's U.S. affiliate, ACC Long Distance Corp., has also
reported over 14% growth in billable minutes. Their billable minutes
in the fourth quarter were 144,519,771 compared to 126,109,656
billable minutes in the fourth quarter of 1993.

It's affiliate, ACC Long Distance UK Ltd., reports billable minutes in
the fourth quarter of 1994 were up 215% over the third quarter in
1994. The 11,048,441 minutes in the fourth quarter compares to
3,503,304 billable minutes reported in the previous quarter. The
billable minutes were 21,795 in the fourth quarter of 1993.

ACC TelEnterprises Ltd., together with its sister companies ACC Long
Distance Corp. in the United States and ACC Long Distance UK Ltd. is a
multinational provider of enhanced telecommunications services. The
Canadian company is headquartered in Toronto and provides worldwide
long distance voice and data services to business and residential
customers in Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba, Alberts and British Columbia.
The company operates in 33 metropolitan centres and currently has an
annualized revenue run rate in excess of $100 million.

ACC TelEnterprises Ltd. is traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange and
the Montreal Stock Exchange under the symbol "ACL".

For further information: Barry K. Singer, Vice President, Legal and
Regulatory, ACC TelEnterprises Ltd., Etobicoke, Ontario, Tel: (416)
236-3636, Fax: [phone].

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

From: Nigel Allen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Canada and Chile Sign Telecom Research Agreement
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 20:19:31 EST
Organization: Allen Telecom Policy Consultants, Toronto, Ontario, Canada


Here is a press release from Industry Canada, the Industry department
of the Canadian federal government. Other Industry Canada press releases
are available from the ftp/www/gopher site (debra.dgbt.doc.ca) operated
by the department. I don't work for the government.


File name:01-26-95.b
Internet address: debra.dgbt.doc.ca
File path:  /pub/isc/Industry.Canada.News.Releases/1995
Date archived: Mon Jan 30 08:58:38 EST 1995
Archive name: Industry Canada, Canadian Federal Government
Archived by: [e-mail]

Originator: <see document body>

Industry Canada

CANADA AND CHILE SIGN MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT ON COMMUNICATIONS DEVELOPMENT

     DAVOS, Switzerland, January 26, 1995 -- Industry Minister John
Manley today welcomed the signing of an agreement between Industry
Canada's Communications Research Centre (CRC) and the Chilean
government's Ministry of Transport and Telecommunications to establish
a framework for collaboration in telecommunications research and
development.

     The agreement was signed in Santiago, Chile, today by Trade
Minister Roy MacLaren during the trade mission led by Prime Minister
Jean Chretien.

     The agreement provides the Chilean Ministry of Transportation and
Communications with access to CRC's expertise in communications R&D
including spectrum management, remote telecommunications, networks and
broadcast technologies.

     "This agreement underlines the CRC's international reputation for
excellence in communications research," said Mr.  Manley. "The Centre's
increasing participation in such international collaborations helps
bring Canadian technology and capabilities to world, and translates
into new opportunities for the growth of the telecommunications sector
in the National Capital Region and Canada."

     Under the agreement, CRC will provide technical consulting services
on a cost-recovery basis, technology transfer, exchange programs and set
up conferences and technical symposia. There is no monetary value attached
to the agreement. Any CRC technologies transferred will be subject to
separate licensing agreements.

For additional information, please contact:

Kevin Shackell
CRC  [phone]

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

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Reuben)
Subject: NACN Problems with Cell One/Utah (Brianhead)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 07:10:41 EST


For the past five days, I've noticed that the system serving Brianhead,
Utah (for once I am unsure of the SID! :) ), seems to be unable to deliver
any sort of switch recordings.

When someone calls my 914-643 number, and my phone rings in Brianhead,
and goes unanswered, NOTHING happens! The ringing just stops, and the
line remains open, but callers do NOT get any message at all!

This is a particular problem as coverage is quite transient, and you
can easily find yourself in a dead spot where there is no coverage at
all. If you had been registered in the system 20 minutes prior to
hitting the dead spot, calls will be sent out to Utah, yet since you
are in a dead spot, the switch will not send any ringing tones back to
the caller, and all the caller hears is dead air, ad infinitum!

If the phone is inactive for more than 20 minutes, it usually resets
to the NY switch properly, but the fact that no recording is reported
when the phone is registered in Utah and either "off" or in a dead or
"no service" area is particularly confusing to callers who already
have enough difficulty waiting for the beeps, tones, clicks, and other
messages which they frequently must endure to reach my phone while
roaming. (Although NACN roaming is by far more seamless than most
B-side systems ... the B side in the Northeast laughable in most cases
with inane messages and hold times.)


Doug * Interpage Network Services/CID Tech * [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lambert Schuyler Jr.)
Subject: Needed: Network Solutions Manager
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 15:57:02 -0400
Organization: MindSpring Enterprises, Inc.


NEEDED: Manager - Network Support Solutions (NSS) Consulting

The Company: Recognized internationally as a premier professional
services firm noted for its information systems integration, strategic
consulting, change management and process management consulting
services.  The companys Telecom Industry Consulting Group, is a
leader in providing consulting services to telecommunications
operating companies worldwide.

The Position: The group provides specialized systems integration and
process reengineering consulting services in the areas of network
operations support, material logistics, service delivery and service
assurance.  The Manager - Network Support Solutions (NSS) Consulting
position offers an outstanding career opportunity for a manager with
telecom carrier network operations support systems experience to join
this premier consulting firm.

Professional Requirements: Candidates for the position will have at
least three years of experience in the telecommunications industry.
Such exper ience will have included assignments with direct
responsibility for the p lanning and execution of network support
solutions information systems de velopment projects.  A candidates
experience may have been gained while working with a telecom carrier
or firms that serve the telecom carrier industry such as
hardware/solutions vendors, systems integrators, strategic consultants
or information systems consultants.  A technical undergraduate degree
is expected.

Compensation/Location: The financial package for the position will
include an attractive salary and company provided fringe benefits.
Relocation may not be required.

If interested, please contact:

Gabrielle Griffith  (I am with an Executive Search firm)
E-Mail:  [e-mail]   Fax:  [phone]

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

From: Hersh Jeff <[e-mail]>
Subject: Bell Atlantic ISDN, Part II
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 11:52:00 PST


In TELECOM Digest V15 #63 I wrote:

> My office (located in Eatontown, NJ, area code 908) recently had two ISDN
> lines installed for experimental purposes.  We receive our ISDN from a
> #5ESS.  It was obvious, despite what is written about Bell Atlantic in
> "Reengineering the Corporation," that it is very inexperienced and
> unorganized in providing ISDN service.  All we asked for was two ISDN
> BRI lines with NT-1s.  It took about two months before we were able to
> get the lines installed, and we have already had to replace the NT-1s
> once.  Anyone else have experience with Bell Atlantic ISDN?

     There's another issue I neglected to mention in the original
submission: billing.  As I mentioned, the ISDN lines are used for
experimental purposes, for maybe five to seven hours per month.  Our
usage bills for the latest three billing cycles are as follows (at
$.05 per minute):

November 94: 3228 minutes (about 54 hours)
December 94: 3392 minutes (about 56 hours)
January 95: 3406 minutes (about 57 hours).

All time is charged for circuit switch data calls (BA's name).

In no case did we actually use that much access.  We have been trying
to get call detail from Bell Atlantic for the specific charges (mostly
dialed destination and time of day) to see if we can pinpoint the
trouble.  BA says it cannot provide that type of info, so that right
now we're at a standoff.  (I have trouble believing it can't do this.)
If anyone has any experience with how ISDN is billed and if similar
problems have been experienced, please let me know.  We know we didn't
use nearly this much time.


TIA,

Jeff Hersh [e-mail]

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

From: Judith Oppenheimer <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 11:51:30 -0500
Subject: More on Universal International Freephone Numbers


In reference to John Carl Brown's posting on January 24th:

Everything he says confirms what we have said.

But it doesn't answer the question -- why are the carriers refusing to
support the U.S. users that did make their wishes known?

If it is such a participatory process, why are the U.S. carriers
ignoring the users who are participating?

I would be happy to provide *current and un-edited* documents - timeline,
E.169, and more, to whomever emails their fax number to me.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (James Sterbenz)
Subject: Gigabit Networking Workshop GBN'95 -- Call for Participation
Date: 31 Jan 1995 13:51:26 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories Incorporated


     GIGABIT NETWORKING WORKSHOP GBN'95 - Call for Participation
          2 April 1995 - Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Sponsored by the IEEE ComSoc Technical Committee on Gigabit Networking
            in conjunction with INFOCOM'95

PURPOSE AND FORMAT

The purpose of this workshop is to provide a forum for presenting and
discussing very recent work in gigabit networking and publishing it in
a timely manner. The workshop will consist of short presentations and
discussions of current work in high bandwidth networking, as well as
longer discussion sessions. The workshop will take place from 8:30 AM
until 3:00 PM with lunch provided. There will be an open business
meeting of the Technical Committee on Gigabit Networking following the
workshop at 3:00 PM.

The workshop will consist of a number of short informal presentations
and discussion on current research and implementation, hot topics,
position statements, and controversial issues relating to high
bandwidth networking. End-to-end issues including transport and higher
layer protocols, host and network interface architecture, operating
systems, emerging applications, deployment and management of large
networks, economic and regulatory issues, security and privacy, and
other societal impacts will be of particular interest. A one-page
abstract of the presentation is due on 1 March 1995; all reasonable
proposals will be considered (and possibly some controversial ones).
The length of the presentations will be limited to 10 or 15 minutes
each, with the number of presentation foils strictly limited.

Presentations will appear in the online proceedings of the workshop,
under URL http://info.gte.com/ieee-tcgn/conference/gbn95 or by FTP
from ftp.gte.com/pub/ieee-tcgn/conference/gbn95/. Selected abstracts
of the presentations will appear in _IEEE Network Magazine_
(tentatively May 1995), and presenters may be invited to submit papers
to a special issue of the _Journal of High Speed Networks_ (JHSN).
There will blocks of time reserved for interactive discussion
sessions. Suggestions for topics will be taken in advance (email to
[e-mail] and Cc: to [e-mail]), but will also be welcome
at the workshop.  Controversial topics and outrageous viewpoints are
encouraged. A summary of the workshop discussions will appear in _IEEE
Network Magazine_.

SUBMISSION

The submission deadline for the one-page abstract is 1 March 1995.
Submission should be in plain text by email to the program chair at
[e-mail]; please include the text "GBN'95 Submission" in the
Subject: field. All submissions will be quickly acknowledged; the lack
of an acknowledgment indicates that the author should contact the
program chair to confirm the receipt of the proposal. Notification of
accepted presentations will be made by 10 March 1995, and all accepted
presenters are expected to register in advance for the workshop. At
the time of the workshop, an electronic version of the presentation
foils will be due for inclusion in the online proceedings. Submission
in postscript and/or HTML is encouraged; if these formats are not
possible, plain text will be accepted.

REGISTRATION

Registration for the workshop will be handled as part of INFOCOM'95
registration; information is available:
   on the WWW         http://www.research.att.com/~hgs/infocom95/program.html
   by anonymous FTP   gaia.cs.umass.edu/pub/hgschulz/infocom95/progam.txt
   email request to   [e-mail]

Additional copies of the GBN'95 CFP are available:
   on the WWW         http://info.gte.com/ieee-tcgn/conference/gbn95/cfp.html
   by anonymous FTP   ftp.gte.com/pub/ieee-tcgn/conference/gbn95/cfp.txt
   email request to   [e-mail]

The home page for the TCGN is URL http://info.gte.com/ieee-tcgn, and
has additional information.

PROGRAM CHAIR                                   PROGRAM COMMITTEE
James P. G. Sterbenz                           Nim Cheung, Bellcore
GTE Telecom. Research Laboratory           Dave Feldmeier, Bellcore
40 Sylvan Road MS-61,                         Bryan Lyles, Xerox PARC
Waltham, MA 02254 USA                          Ira Richer, MITRE
[phone]                              Dick Skillen, Northern Telecom
[e-mail]                         Richard A. Thompson, Univ. of Pittsburgh
http://info.gte.com/jpgs                     Shukri Wakid, NIST


James P.G. Sterbenz        Senior 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

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Does AT&T 7506 TAD 03A Pass CID to RS232 of Orignating Caller?
Date: 31 Jan 1995 06:13:25 -0500
Organization: URL:http://www.armory.com/~ulmo/ (see rivers.html for PGP key)


An early reply would be appreciated ...

Today I'm ordering my AT&T 7506 TAD 03A and ISDN service with NYNEX.
Does this particular 7506 pass the CID of each caller to the RS232?  I
want to plug my computer in and have it look into my customer database
and pop up the record for the customer before I even know the phone is
ringing.

I'll program it.  I just want to know if the firmware allows it, and how.

Thanks.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #67
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00804;
          31 Jan 95 23:41 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19693; Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:09:13 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19685; Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:09:08 CST
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:09:08 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #68

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:09:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 68

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    WAN Compression For Data Networks (Jim Williams)
    Book Review: "LANtastic Quick Reference" by Talbot (Rob Slade)
    MCI Bureaucratic Blunder (Richard Wildman)
    Hidden Features in Panasonic Telephones (Douglas Pokorny)
    Business/Residential Long-Distance/800 at 12.9 Cents/Minute (Tom Fellrath)
    Digital PBX Transmission Standards, Devices (Peter J. Kerrigan)
    CCITT TCAP Message Format (Hari Kalva)
    The Cost of Technology (James Bellaire)
    Question About CT2 / Cellular Service (Aries Hackerman)

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, 31 Jan 1995 20:49:12 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: WAN Compression for Data Networks


Some general comments regarding compression. First do you know about
the Motorola 326X FAST V.34? It has SDC at 28.8 with 85Kb sync thruput,
and up to 128 async thruput.

Motorola also has a 56Kp DSU/CSU with SDC that has 256Kp thruput on a
DDS circuits It also has two TDM ports for ASYNC or SYNC traffic up to
19.2 that allow you to piggy back async on top of your SNA traffic.
They sell for less than $1500ea.

Most compression is done via software in routers.  Most like Cisco
partnership with a compression company such as Magnalink.

When adding a compression stand alone device to a network ie they fit
between the router and the DSU, and are no problem.

For more information on compression products contact our FTP site at
<ftp.halcyon.com>.  Please feel free to examine other leading edge
technologies listed in this FTP list.

If you have any questions please call me at 1-800-837-4180.


Regards,

Jim Williams


                       CODEX 3500 SERIES
                3512-SDC BANDWIDTH EXPANDER DSU
                -------------------------------

Overview:

Data Communications managers are increasingly faced with requirements
for higher data transmission speeds, shorter response time and lower
telecommunication budgets as networks migrate from traditional
terminal-to-host legacy applications to those supporting LAN
internetworking. The Motorola Codex 3512 SDC Bandwidth Expander DSU is
ideally suited to this changing environment. The 3512 SDC Bandwidth
Expander provides Synchronous Data Compression (SDC) on HDLC/SDLC
framed data in one port while two additional ports support the lower
bandwidth requirements of polled, legacy data and/or restoral
requirements. The 3512 Bandwidth Expander is an intelligent,
high-speed digital access device providing up to four times the
available bandwidth using existing low cost DDS-I or DDS-II secondary
channel type leased-line facilities.

The 3512 SDC Bandwidth Expander DSU opens new dimensions in network
design, flexibility, productivity and cost reduction by providing
benefits such as:

* Compression up to 4:1.
* Reduction of bandwidth requirements without reducing
  performance.
* Extends the useful life of existing telco facilities and
  equipment.
* Reduction in file transfers and quicker response time.
* Flexibility for future applications and network migration.

The 3512 Bandwidth Expander DSU is available in standalone and
rackmount configuration and offers all the features, performance,
functionality and reliability of the 3512 family of digital
leased-line DSU/CSU's.


Product Highlights:

* Transmits Synchronous HDLC/SDLC framed data at rates up to 256
  Kbps over 56 Kbps point-to-point digital leased-lines providing
  cost-effective, superior performance LAN-to-LAN internet-
  working.

* Three Ports Standard. One compression port for transmission
  speed reaching up to 256 Kbps (Port 3). The two remaining
  uncompressed ports, each supporting speeds up to 56 Kbps.

* Port Two of the 3512 SDC Bandwidth Expander supports operation
  as an intelligent A/B switch for restoral of failed WAN links
  at rates up to 72 Kbps over analog dial circuits, and up to 256
  Kbps over switched digital services (e.g. Switched 56).

* Flexibility in network design with support for Point-to-Point
  and Multipoint Time Division Multiplexing (TDM), port sharing
  (MSU) and mixed TDM/MSU. High bit rate efficiency provides up
  to 55.2 Kbps available bandwidth in TDM modes with 56 Kbps
  service. Mixed compression and TDM is supported.

* Integral asynchronous to synchronous conversion of non- compressed
  data is supported up to 19.2 Kbps. Limited distance modem operation
  is supported for point-to-point private wire circuits in DDS-I and
  DDS-II SC modes.

Benefits:


1. The 3512 SDC Bandwidth Expander provides rapid pay back
   by providing the bandwidth of more expensive fractional T-1
   services over conventional digital services to 56Kbps.

2. The 3512 SDC lets you build networks that support existing
   applications today with a migration path for future
   applications to be efficiently absorbed into an existing
   corporate network.

3. As a three port digital access device, the 3512 SDC Bandwidth
   Expander is a modular and flexible low-end data mux supporting
   mixed legacy terminal-to-host applications and LAN traffic
   over a single circuit.

4. The 3512 SDC Bandwidth Expander lets you continue your optimum
   throughput even when your primary digital leased-line fails.
   The 3512 SDC Bandwidth Expander features an intelligent A/B
   switch for optimum restoral at rates as high as 72 Kbps over
   analog dial circuits or 256 Kbps over switched digital
   circuits.

Since it is unlikely that throughput demands will diminish or that
communication budgets will increase, you should investigate the 3512
SDC Bandwidth Expander. Motorola Codex offers a total solution by
providing an economical and cost effective digital service up to 256
Kbps at a fraction of the cost of competing products. The 3512 SDC is
simple, reliable and economical.


SPECIFICATIONS

Service Types

* Supports digital data services in the U.S. and Canada
  conforming to AT&T Technical Reference 62310: Inter-LATA
  carriers including AT&T (DATAPHONE(r) Digital Service and
  Accunet(r) Spectrum of Digital Services), MCI (Digital Data
  Service) and US Sprint (Clearline DDS) as well as service
  offerings from the Regional Bell Operating Companies and
  independents

Operating Mode

* Full-duplex, point-to-point and multipoint; compressed channel
  point-to-point only

Digital Aggregate Interface

* DDS-I type facilities: 2.4, 4.8, 9.6, 19.2 and 56 Kbps
* DDS-II SC type facilities: 3.2, 6.4, 12.8, 25.6 and 72 Kbps
  providing primary channel rates of 2.4, 4.8, 9.6, 19.2 and 56
  Kbps respectively plus secondary channel

Data Format

* Synchronous: serial, binary
* Asynchronous: serial, binary 6 - 9 bit including parity bit
* Compression Port: HDLC/SDLC framed data (NRZ or NRZI coding)

Data Encoding

* Bipolar, return to zero, alternate mark inversion

Port Timing

* Network, internal, external or station

DSU Timing

* Network, internal or external (external for DDS-I only)

DTE Port Interface

* Front panel selectable EIA 232-D   or V.35 on
  ports I and 2; V.35 on port 3
* 25 Pin DB-25 connector (port 1); EIA 232-D alternate DB-26
  subminiature connectors (ports 2 and 3)

DTE Port Rates:

        Ports 1 and 2:

        * Synchronous: 1.2, 2.4, 4.8, 7.2, 9.6, 14.4, 16.8, 19.2,
          21.6, 24.0,   28.8, 32.0, 38.4, 48.0 and 56.0 Kbps 7
        * Asynchronous: 2.4, 4.8, 7.2, 9.6,   14.4, and 19.2 Kbps

        Port 3:

        * Synchronous: 1.2, 2.4, 4.8, 7.2,   9.6, 14.4, 16.8,
          19.2, 21.6, 24.0, 28.8, 32.0, 38.4, 48.0, 56.0, 64,
          112, 128, 168, 192, 256 Kbps
          NOTE: Port rates less than 9.6 Kbps not supported in
          compressed mode
        * Asynchronous: 2.4, 4.8, 7.2, 9.6, 14.4, and 19.2 Kbps
          NOTE: Asynchronous data not supported in compressed
          mode

Network Management

* Network management support by the Codex 9800 and 9300
* Direct LPDA-2 interface to IBM NetView_ with Codex DualVIEW
  option
* Monitoring via Novell NetWare(tm) with WANVisible(tm) NLM
* Management Protocols Supported:
        - Codex Proprietary Protocol
        - Link Problem Determination Aid (LPDA) Revision 2 (Ports
          1 & 2 only; Port 3 in direct mode only)
* IBM Software/Protocol Compatibility:
        - NetView Version 1.3 or later
        - ACF/NCP Version 4.2 or later
        - Lines configured for either SDLC or BSC
* Network control channel:
        - Data format: Asynchronous, serial, binary, compatible
          with Motorola Codex Network Management Systems (NMS)
        - Data Rate: Selectable 75, or 150 bps
        - Line overhead in DDS-I derived secondary channel mode:
          113, 181 and 800 bps with 9.6, 19.2 and 56 Kbps service
          respectively

Power Requirements:

* 3512 SDC Standalone:
        110 or 230 VAC nominal; 47 to63 Hz
* 3512 SDC Nest Card:
        110 or 230 VAC nominal; 47 to 63 Hz -48 VDC
* Environment
        - Operating temperature: 320 to 1220 F. (0 to 500 deg C.)
        - Non-operating temperature: -400 to 1580 F.  (-400 to
          700 C.)
        - Operating relative humidity: 10% to 95% non-condensing
* Physical Dimensions
        - 3512 DSU/CSU Standalone:
                Height: 2.3 in (5.8 cm)
                Width: 6.6 in (16.8 cm)
                Depth: 9.6 in (24.4 cm)
                Weight: 2.5 Ibs (1.1 kg)
        - 3500 Mini-Nest Enclosure:
                Height 7.0 in (17.8 cm)
                Width 19.0 in (48.3 cm)
                Length 10.0 in (25.4 cm)
                Weight (empty) 22 lbs (10.0 kg)
* Certification
        - UL Listed and CSA Certified
        - FCC Part 15 Class A Compliant
        - FCC Part 68 Registered
        - Bell Canada Approved

------------>   For further information on prices, warranty
                extensions, upgrades, and service, please
                contact:
                        Router Solutions
                        5527 Preston Fall City Road
                        Fall City, WA 98024 USA
                        800-837-4180 (USA and Canada)
                        206-644-6082 (other locations)
                        Fax: [phone]
                        Email: [e-mail]

                Please check our FTP site for additional product
                literature and current prices:

                ftp.halcyon.com  /pub/local/routers

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 13:10:25 EST
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "LANtastic Quick Reference" by Talbot


BKLNTSQR.RVW  941206

"LANtastic Quick Reference", Talbot, 1992, 0-934605-78-5, U$14.95
%A   David Talbott
%C   1580 Center Dr., Santa Fe, NM   87505-9746
%D   1992
%G   0-934605-78-5
%I   Onword Press
%O   U$14.95 800-842-3636
%P   164
%T   "LANtastic Quick Reference"

While LANtastic has made a name as a simple, minimally intrusive,
peer-to-peer network for sharing disks and printers, its documentation
has become increasingly complex.  This book can serve as a reminder of
the various command and function options.  For basic commands, this
may be enough: for more advanced items, it can serve as an introduction
to the correct section of the program documentation.

The book is divided into three sections: User, System Manager, and
Installer.  The last is a bit brief, being merely a listing of
ArtiSoft network interface card settings, and the command-line
switches and options for the basic network drivers.  The lack of any
mention of NDIS is unfortunate.

Ironically, the author seems to be extremely proud of the indexing job
on the book.  There *is* an index, but it is quite brief, and hardly a
selling point.  Nevertheless, this book is doubtless well worth the
price for those working with and managing LANtastic networks.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKLNTSQR.RVW  941206


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Wildman)
Subject: MCI Bureaucratic Blunder
Date: 31 Jan 1995 21:45:38 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Fort Collins Site


This is a sad tale of bureaucratic bungling at its worst. I have been
an MCI customer since the initial choose your long distance caller
days; we recently had a run in with MCI bureaucracy which has soured
us on MCI, and convinced us to change to another carrier.  It is truly
a case for the books.

For some reason, U.S. West or MCI changed the way we were being billed
in October.  Neither knows why or what happened, and neither will
admit to any fault of their own.  Rather than receiving our long
distance billing on U.S. West bills, MCI begin to bill us separately,
or so they thought.  We finally inquired why we were not receiving an
MCI bill for long distance calls.  Nobody would admit to a thing, but
conversations with MCI revealed that they had been sending it to an
old address -- one we had not lived at for five years.  But the drift of
the conversation was that we were at fault for not paying the bill we
had never seen.  They said they would send the bill to the correct
address.  No bill came.  We got a call from MCI Financial Services in
St. Louis giving us warning that the bill had not been paid, and that
we would have to deal with a collection agency shortly.  We told them
we had not seen the bill.  Not their problem -- they had sent it.  I
suggested they send it by registered mail, so that at least we and
they would know what's going on.  Nope, can't do that -- it is your
responsibility to pay the bill -- MCI sends their bills by first class
mail -- all that is legally required.  I even offered to pay for
overnight registered mail.  No go.  Asked to speak with a supervisor,
but I was hung up on.

Finally got hold of a young man who seemed inclined to listen to what
was going on.  Yes, he too thought something did not make sense.  For
a couple of decades, no billing problems, but all of a sudden, one
day, we stop paying our bills.  But, sorry, it has been assigned to
financial services, and there was nothing he could do -- his hands
were tied.  Only after a very lengthy conversation did we learn that
we could pay the bill by credit card (one time only though) by calling
a certain number.

We have to rely on MCI having the actual amount of the bill correct,
because to this day, we have not seen any billing for the two and half
months in question.  Given MCI's recent performance, we do not have a
lot of faith, but did it anyway, just to get rid of them, and the
harassing phone calls.

My best guess at what happened traces to a $35 billing mistake made by
U.S. West last May.  That too required several telephone calls, and a
copy of a cancelled check with U.S. West endorsement on the back to
convince them a mistake had been made.  However, the amount kept
showing up on our bill each month until October, because, we were
told, it could not come off our bill until they found where the error
was made!  October was the last month we received a billing from MCI
on the U.S. West bill, and it was only for part of the month.  So,
suspicions are that an error made by U.S. West in finally correcting
their bill to us created the problem with MCI, and started the
dominoes cascading.  If this is true, it still does not explain why
MCI has things so screwed up, nor why they would screw over what had
been a long-time very good customer for them.  And I would not bet two
cents that this whole ugly episode if over.

It's a brave new world -- Kafka must be smiling.

Disgruntled, and no longer an MCI customer.


R W - Fort Collins, Colorado

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

From: [e-mail] (Douglas Pokorny)
Subject: Hidden Features in Panasonic Telephones
Date: 31 Jan 1995 15:49:13 -0600
Organization: Bradley University


Most Panasonic Telephone/Answering machine combos can have various
features turned on and off by pressing the program key followed by
several digits on the keypad, and hitting store.  (This is done
without specifying a memory location for a stored telephone number.)

An example of this is the ability to turn on and off the "15-second
beep" which occurs when recording telephone conversations.

The user's manual which comes with these phones only contain partial
lists of these codes.  (e.g., they tell you how to turn the beeping
on, but not off.)

Does anyone know of a comprehensive list of "hidden features" for
various models of Panasonic telephones?


Douglas R. Pokorny       Happily running:
[e-mail]   OS/2 3.0 & Workplace Shell
                          MS-Windows NT 3.5
This mesage posted with   Linux 1.1 & OpenLook X-Windows
OS/2 3.0's SLIP software  PC-DOS 6.3 & MS-Windows 3.11

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

From: Tom Fellrath <[e-mail]>
Subject: Business/Residential Long-Distance/800 at 12.9 Cents/Minute
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 12:50:26 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


I just came upon this when investigating ways to cut costs on basic
everyday services like telephones.

There's a company that offers 12.9 cents per minute on ALL long-
distance calling -- both inbound 800's and outbound (1+ calling).
When I called them, they told me that this program was available to
anyone, be it residential or business phone customers.

I don't know what you think of 12.9 cents, per minute, but I was on
what I thought was a GREAT business program for my home phone where I
was paying roughly 16 cents a minute.  By switching to this, my $100
monthly phone bill is going to drop to $80!  That's 20 percent savings
off what I THOUGHT was a good program.

I don't even have to wait until after business hours to get the low
rates!  This program is 12.9 cents ALL THE TIME, calling to ANYWHERE
IN THE UNITED STATES.

If you want more information, please reply with your fax number.  I
saved what these people sent me and would be happy to send it along to
you.  If you don't have any accessibility to a fax machine, please
give me your address and I'll send printouts along to you.

Take a look!  This is the best long-distance program I've ever seen.


Tom Fellrath      [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Tom, I am wondering why you did not give
us the name of the company and their address/phone/fax number so people
could contact them directly. By chance, are you a commission sales agent
for this wonderful company with their great program?  And do you mean to
tell me there are no catches at all? No long term contracts, no monthly
minimum requirements? Very interesting ... but why don't you want people
to contact them directly?  Or are *they* the ones that don't want to be
contacted directly? <smile> ... most MLM programs are like that. Readers,
if any of you get anything from Tom on this, please share it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Peter J. Kerrigan)
Subject: Digital PBX Transmission Standards, Devices
Date: 31 Jan 1995 12:53:00 -0600
Organization: Joe's Bar and Grill


I would like to a more sophisticated Voice Mail interface to my
Digital PBX (Intertel GMX-152D), than I currently can with an analog
port.

I really want access to the signaling and call progress info that's
available on the digital lines only.  Intertel has no clue how this
could work (they only know that model X set plugs into model Y port).

Do PBX's use generally accepted standards for digital transmission
(such as Bellcore's ISDN) or is it roll-your-own?

I looked in lcs.mit.edu:/telecom-archives, no mention of digital telephony.


Peter J. Kerrigan   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Digital telphony is an area that does not
have the coverage it should have in the archives, sad to say. Maybe I
will get some good files on the topic to include there some day.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Hari Kalva)
Subject: CCITT TCAP Message Format
Date: 31 Jan 1995 19:04:49 GMT
Organization: Columbia University Center for Telecommunications Research


Hi TCAP experts!

I am working on a CCITT(White book) TCAP application. I need some help
in the TCAP white book message format. I would like to know the purpose of
the DIALOG portion of TCAP message.

Also, I would like to get a HEXDUMP of WHITE BOOK TCAP message.


Thanks in advance,

Ajay Vasanadu   NewNet Inc.  Monroe, CT
Please reply to: [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 04:03 EST
From: [e-mail] (James Bellaire)
Subject: The Cost of Technology


I was looking throught the front pages of the local telco directory
for Marion, IN (an Ameritech town) when I came across the price list
for "custom services."  They charge $7.50 for Caller-ID and offer free
*67 per call blocking to all customers.  I don't want to get into a
discussion of how much your telco charges for Caller-ID or any other
service.  I was just thinking, how much does it cost them?

The cost of offering caller ID to the telco is the software that
handles the procedure, the hardware that allows that software to work,
memory space for that software to reside, maintainance costs for techs
that could be fixing something else if CID were not there, etc.
Obviously the marketing idea is to spread the capital and upkeep costs
across the user base, so a high price for a new service is expected
with prices falling when it is accepted and widely used.  So cost plus
profit = price charged.

Now imagine if CID became a basic service, similar to tone dialing.
Every line would be given it "free of charge."  Of course the basic
rate service may need to be bumped up a little in price, since CID
does cost the telco something.  An area with a 10% subscription rate
would need to charge 75c to all customers to 'break even.'  An area
with a 5% subscription rate would only have to boost the bill 37.5c.
So your non-technical "it rings, I answer it and ASK who is calling"
neighbors will subsidize the highly technical "my PC VoiceMail takes
all blocked and out of area calls; it even blows a whistle and hangs
up when I get the CID of teleslease!" type of phone customer.

The cost of the software is another interesting question.  The telco
gets to pay the price set by the writers.  How much did it cost the
writers?  This is where we can get into lots of numbers, including
salary for years in development, benifits paid to the software techs,
etc.  But I digress ...

The cost of an item is the price you are willing to pay.  The price of
the item is set by the person who owns it.  If the owner AGREES to
give the item to you an a lower price, or free (the best price except
when someone pays you to take it from them) you are lucky.  And the
old owner gets to write down the price he offered you in his income
column.

If you don't pay the price, you don't get the item.  If you take the
item without paying the price, you are a thief.  And the old owner
gets to complain about losing the price he offered you, not his cost,
but the price he would have sold it for.  If you wouldn't have bought
the item at the owners price, even though you disagree with it, IT
DOESN'T MATTER.  You are still a thief if you take it.

If the old owner claims an outrageous price, above that whith they
would normally charge, for a stolen item then they are a thief.  It
doesn't make the original thief any better of a person.

Each person must own his own failings, each company its own reputation.
If you don't like the way a company does business, go somewhere else.
If you can't, buy stock until you can take over the management.  Until
then be your own person and do right as you should.  If another's
wrong makes it ok for you to do wrong to them, then your wrong makes
it ok for someone to do wrong to you.

If you rob the phone company don't complain when someone robs your
house, after all your thief was just stealing from a thief that stole
from the telco!

Something to ponder as you lie down your head tonight.


Goodnight,

[e-mail]     James E. Bellaire

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

From: [e-mail] (Aries Hackerman)
Subject: Question About CT2 / Cellular Service
Date: 31 Jan 1995 04:08:20 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


Hello all,

It's common nowadays that several carriers operate on the same telecom
services. For example, cellular operators of CT2 standard.  Since I'm
a kind of 'newcomer' in providing telecom services (cellular) I'd
like to know how it works in the sharing methods between two /more
operators. That question relates to these subjects:

1. Operation;
2. Project;
3. Interconnection Agreement;
4. Charging / Billing.

Illustrations:

1. Operation:    The building and maintenance of the base stations
   Is it 50 - 50  or other method?

2. Interconnection Agreement: suppose subcribers of other operators
   use 'our' base stations  while those operators do not have
   agreements with us. What's the common method used to solve this
   kind of situation?

3. Billing / Charging: in case there are 'flat rate users' and
   'pulse rate users'.

Please reply to '[e-mail]' since we don't have
'direct' news service, yet.

I'm particularly interested in providing CT2 service.

Many many thanks in advance!

If you have any useful information about CT2, it will be very helpful.


Aries

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #68
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01298;
          1 Feb 95 0:25 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20741; Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:46:43 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20734; Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:46:41 CST
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:46:41 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #69

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 31 Jan 95 19:46:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 69

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    GEnie Services Offers Free Japan Access Until Further Notice (Finkenstadt)
    Job Posting: Aspect Telecom, CTI Product Marketing Manager (James McDonald)
    FAQ'S re: Connectivity Options ([e-mail])
    Federal Judge Rules Against FCC - Historical Precedent (Bill Sohl)
    Clock Slips Again (Martin McCormick)
    Emergency Cellular Phone (Testmark Laboratories)
    Ericsson GH337/EH237 Cellular Modem I/F (Alfredo E. Cotroneo)
    Metro Mobile (CT/RI/MA) Added to the NACN (Doug Reuben)
    Product to Prevent PBX Phone Fraud (Paul Murray)
    Electro 95 Electronics Conference, June 21-23, Boston (Paul R. Baudisch)

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, 31 Jan 1995 18:04:16 -0500
From: Andy Finkenstadt <[e-mail]>
Subject: GEnie Services Offers Free Japan Access Until Further Notice


January 23, 1995 -- GEnie Services is offering free access to its
online service to all current and new GEnie members in Japan to assist
in restoring the lives of Kobe and Osaka earthquake victims and
establish a communications vehicle both in Japan and around the world.

Effective immediately and until further notice, GEnie will waive all
usage fees as well as the standard connect fee for all GEnie users in
Japan.

"The tragedy in Japan has struck all of us.  Although too small a
token of our desire to help, we hope that free access to the worldwide
interconnectivity of the GEnie network and specifically our Japanese
roundtable will help concerned citizens around the world keep in
contact with affected locals", said Mark Walsh President of GEnie
Services.  "We hope that life soon returns to normal and wish only
that we can help the process."

The Japanese roundtable is an online meeting place for users with an
interest in Japanese affairs.  The forum is accessible to GEnie users
around the world.

GEnie Services, which became operational in 1985, is one of the
leading online information services with subscribers around the world.
GEnie had been available in Japan since December 1988.  GEnie Services
is a part of GE Information Service, Inc., which is headquartered in
Rockville, Maryland.

For more information about GEnie, send electronic mail to
[e-mail], visit the GEnie gopher (gopher to gopher.GEnie.com),
the GEnie web (use an URL of "http://www.GEnie.com").


[e-mail]   Andy Finkenstadt, GEnie Sysop, GEnie Postmaster
[e-mail]  personal account: [e-mail]
Andrew Finkenstadt    [e-mail]    Gaithersburg, MD
301-975-9890

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

From: [e-mail] (James McDonald)
Subject: Job Posting: Aspect Telecom, CTI Product Marketing Manager
Date: 31 Jan 1995 23:45:09 GMT
Organization: Aspect Telecommunications, Inc.
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Aspect Telecommunications, the market leader in stand-alone Automated
Call Distribution systems, is announcing the following position:

Product Marketing Manager, Computer-Telephony Integration, San Jose, CA

ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS OF THE POSITION  (Include special duties and
responsibilities)

This senior level Product Marketing Manager will:

Perform a catalyst role for Aspect's long-term computer-telephony
product strategy and direction.  Define market forces, opportunity,
and metrics, and paint a long-term CTI product vision for Aspect with
ROI analysis and business case justification. Define business
expansion and market development strategies for Aspect's CTI product
line. Develop marketing requirements for CTI products within the
framework of the long-term product vision, and define a roll-out plan
for delivering the individual products to market. Develop product
positioning, packaging and pricing strategies, and champion the
product launch process for CTI products.

QUALIFICATIONS (Include technical skills, education and experience):

BA/BS; MS/MBA a plus. This person must possess strong technical and
business analysis skills in order to quickly assess and remain abreast
of the state of the CTI industry. This includes synthesis of any
promising new technologies, new applications of technology, standards
activities, changes in buyer behavior and expectations, strategic
vendor positioning or moves, etc. They must also must possess
excellent interpersonal skills to quickly gather and distill
information, to build relationships with strategic vendors outside of
Aspect and with many key people within Aspect, and to evangelize and
champion their CTI-related ideas within Aspect.

(Minimum requirements.)
Seven or more years experience in one or more of the following areas:
product marketing, product management, strategic planning, business
development, systems integration, and/or international marketing for
advanced telecom or data products.

(Preferred qualifications.)
Knowledge and experience with CTI products and with systems integration
in multi-vendor environments.

Please send resume to:

Phyllis Ball
Aspect Telecommunications, Inc.
1730 Fox Dr.
San Jose, CA 95131

or by E-mail in ASCII or Microsoft Word for Windows 2.0 format
(uuencoded) to:

[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: FAQ'S re: Connectivity Options
Date: 31 Jan 1995 02:00:45 GMT
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


This posting may be freely distributed to Internet and commercial
online sites.

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: [e-mail] (Bill Sohl  Budd Lake)
Subject: Federal Judge Rules Against FCC - Historical Precedent
Date: 31 Jan 1995 17:33:27 GMT
Organization: Planet Access Networks - Stanhope, NJ


I offer the following to the telecom newsgroup as it indirectly
relates to an entire series of postings related to the allegation that
operation/use of radio receivers/scanners that have been modified is
illegal.  From the post below relating to the problems the FCC is
having just enforcing its laws/regulations against actual pirate
broadcasting, is there anyone that can even perceive the FCC has any
resources to worry about the thousands of people using and/or
modifying radio scanners to receive cellular telephone broadcasts?  I
think not.

As before, don't kill the messenger.  I point this out to illustrate
the practical side of life and the law as opposed to those that
suggested illegal activity was going on by modifying radios.  Bottom
line is ... no one cares, least of all the FCC.

Begin post from misc.legal.moderated newsgroup
In another newsgroup, Stephen Dunifer ([e-mail]) wrote:

Victory for Micro Power Broadcasting - Historical Defeat for the FCC
    On Friday, January 20 Federal judge Claudia Wilken refused to
grant the Federal Communications Commission a preliminary injunction to
stop the micro power broadcasts of Stephen Dunifer and Free Radio
Berkeley.  Stating serious constitutional concerns as her reason, Judge
Wilken denied the request, ordered the FCC to exhaust administrative
remedies and to rule on Dunifer's appeal of their $20,000 fine before
seeking any further court action.  This ruling sets a historical
precedent: it is the first time the FCC has been denied an injunction to
stop the broadcasts of an unlicensed radio station.  The Commission will
have to address the issue of the constitutionality of their regulations
when ruling on Dunifer's appeal.  Any further court proceedings are
delayed until the FCC acts on the appeal which has languished in
Washington for more than a year.  In the meantime the government's attempt
to enjoin broadcasting by non- licensed micro radio has been put on hold.

    Luke Hiken, attorney for Stephen Dunifer, stated, "This is the
second time a Federal court has recognized the constitutional implications
of micro radio technology.  We hope the FCC will recognize the importance
of facilitating the use of this technology for the benefit of the American
people instead of denying its existence and obstructing its use."

    Speaking on behalf of the National Lawyers Guild Committee on
Democratic Communications, Peter Franck commented, "The CDC hopes that the
court's refusal to enjoin micro radio is the beginning of a recognition by
the country that any hope for democracy depends on free access to the
airwaves.  Micro power broadcasting has the potential for creating a
'green movement' of low-cost, easy-to-use media.  It is as totalitarian to
require expensive, hard-to-get licenses for micro radio as it would be to
say you can only speak from a soap box if it is made of gold."

    Stephen Dunifer said, "Judge Claudia Wilken's decision affirms the
validity of our legal position.  Further, this victory is a credit to four
years of work by the National Lawyers Guild Committee on Democratic
Communications and my attorney, Luke Hiken, on behalf of the micro power
broadcasting movement.  Unlike FCC attorney, David Silberman, I do not see
irreparable harm resulting from micro power broadcasting.  Instead, I see
an immeasurable benefit for all citizens if the micro power broadcast
movement prevails.  For too long, media access and the tools of
communication have been concentrated in the hands of corporate and
essentially anti-democratic interests.  If any harm results, it will be
to those monopoly interests."

    For further information contact:  Free Radio Berkeley - (510)
644-3779, [phone] or Luke Hiken, attorney at law - [phone].
Email: [e-mail] or [e-mail].  Send request to
[e-mail] for information packet.  Legal briefs and documents are
available at our ftp site - ftp.crl.com.  Directory path is
ftp/users/ro/frbspd/legal.

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


Bill Sohl  K2UNK     (Budd lake, New Jersey)      ([e-mail])

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

From: Martin McCormick <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clock Slips Again
Date: 31 Jan 1995 19:27:51 GMT
Organization: Oklahoma State University  Stillwater, OK


I am pretty sure that we have a chronic case of clock slippage
somewhere in the interface between our campus' Ericsson MD110 and the
Southwestern Bell trunks.  I would like to prove it once and for all.
It occurred to me that a modem sending a steady carrier such as is
used to establish a 300-baud connection would be a perfect signal
generator.  It could be placed on a line off-campus and then called
from on-campus.  An oscilloscope placed on an analog campus line
should show clock slips as sudden phase shifts in the carrier.  Is
this a valid test?  If so, we could show the phase shifts through such
a line and then demonstrate that no such problems occur on campus or
between two Southwestern Bell lines.

    Any suggestions are appreciated since the feeling is that
there is really nothing wrong because the lines all sound clean and
voice calls don't get dropped.

    With a 2025hz tone, a clock slip should advance or retard the
carrier 90 degrees which should truly destroy the phase component of a
data transmission.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
OSU Computer Center Data Communications Group

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 18:00 EST
From: Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]>
Subject: Emergency Cellular Phone


I once heard of a cellular phone that was intended primarily for
emergency use, something to carry in a car for instance.  One could
purchase it, have it authorized, and pay no monthly fee.  If one used
it, they paid a fairly high per minute airtime that was automatically
charged to a major credit card.  Does anyone know of a product like
this?


John Combs, Project Engineer, TestMark Labs, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alfredo E. Cotroneo)
Subject: Ericsson GH337/EH237 Cellular Modem I/F
Date: 31 Jan 1995 14:56:13 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


I am looking for information on availability of cellular modem I/F for
the Ericsson GSM GH337 model, and for the European TACS version EH237.
For both models the modem I/Fs are not apparently on sale (yet) on the
Italian market.

An Italian reseller also told me that in it is not possible (yet?) to
operate any modem/data communication over the Italian GSM network; I
made some experiment myself sending a modem signal over the voice
channel, but had no success, apparently for the losses induced by the
quantization/compression on GSM.

I would be most interested in knowing your experiences -- good or bad
 -- with the use of the GSM version of this phone, for both voice and
data (?).

Please cc by e-mail to : [e-mail], since I do not
get a regular news-feed.


Thanks,

Alfredo Cotroneo   Milano, Italy

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Reuben)
Subject: Metro Mobile (CT/RI/MA) Added to the NACN
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 13:23:46 EST


After years of holding out, Metro Mobile CT/RI/Western and Southeastern
Mass (collectively known as Bell Atlantic's Northeast service area)
has been added to the NACN.

The NACN, or North American Cellular Network, is the A-side's automatic
call delivery service, initiated by McCaw Cellular and some of it's
roaming partners, to provide increasingly seamless coverage throughout
the US and Canada.

Prior to Metro Mobile's addition to the NACN, Metro Mobile CT and
Western Mass customers had the use of most of their features as well
as call-delivery to Cell One/NY, ComCast/NJ-PA-DE, Metro Mobile/RI-SE
Mass, Cell One/Boston, and CO/Boston's Concord, NH "partnership"
service with Atlantic Cellular. So the addition of the NACN won't make
too much of a difference in terms of added coverage near Metro
Mobile's territory.  Moreover, Metro Mobile, unlike CO/NY, will assess
a roam charge for most (all) markets outside of it's properties,
Boston, and NY.

Additionally, the link between NY and CT (and everywhere else) seems
to lack the functionality of a typical NACN link. I've noticed that
ALL features normally available to a customer on his/her home system
are also available on a visited system (although some switches won't
allow this.)

Thus, Cell One/Boston customers can *successfully* set up and remove
voicemail from most NACN systems, as well as get call-waiting, yet on
Metro Mobile's switches, the same Boston customer will find that none
of these features will work.

Additionally, Metro Mobile customers roaming in NY can not, for example,
forward calls to voicemail, selectively unforward unconditional
forward calls (by using *723), etc., even though these same features
are currently available to Boston customers roaming in NY, and even
though both Boston and CT use the same type of switches (Motorola
EMX-2500).

I've asked CO/NY for years to put in the *723 code so I could use
forwarding in NY without killing voicemail, but they were never able
to implement it, so it seems as if the same old link to CT is still in
place, but somehow Metro Mobile is now "on" the NACN in some limited
way. (If they were "fully" connected, I'd expect to be able to use my
features in NY or SF or wherever to the same extent that I can use my
Boston them from my Boston account.) Additionally, the standard NACN
Do Not Disturb codes (*350/*35) will NOT work in NY, instead, the
older Motorola codes (*28/*29) are required.

In any event, this finally allows most roamers to get automatic call
delivery in the Rhode Island system, which has been slow to get any
connectivity outside of Boston and CT in recent years. Any NACN
customer should now be able to receive calls in RI, use (some)
features, etc.  RI customers should now be able to receive calls in
NY, although they will pay a $3 daily and $.99 per minute. If you are
a RI customer, and roam into NY a good deal, get Boston account, which
offers no daily roam charge, and 44 peak/29 off-peak. You still have
to pay Boston's outrageous home airtime for call-delivery though.
Maybe just get a NYNEX account instead and be done with all these
silly charges from Metro Mobile and Cell One/Boston, both of whom seem
to want to nickel and dime their customers as much as possible. (I
still can't see how Boston customers put up with home airtime charges,
plus roaming charges, plus a daily roam charge, plus a $2 Boston
charge, just to receive phone calls!  :( )

Note that Metro Mobile's addition and lack of some features does NOT
affect Litchfield, CT, which has been on the NACN since October 1994
(or earlier), and seems to be run through CO/NY's switches. (They are
both McCaw owned and have the same messages on their switch/error
announcements.)


Doug Reuben              [e-mail]              (203) 499 - 5221
Interpage Network Services -- E-Mail/Telnet to Alpha or Numeric Pagers & Fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Murray)
Subject: Product to Prevent PBX Phone Fraud
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Paul Murray)
Organization: The National Capital FreeNet
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 12:26:29 GMT


Pat,

A short while ago, I posted an item enquiring about phone fraud, extent of
the problem, etc.

You asked for details, in your editorial message following my posting.

As I am an agent of the company which owns the technology, I wanted to
get their OK before releasing information. They have given that OK.

Here is a brief summary:
(note that I'm a layman and not a techie)

The Call Control System

CCS is a controlled access gateway which provides an additional layer
of security to the fraud vulnerable components of a PBX system.  By
validating the call origin using the Calling Line ID (CLID) and an
authorization code, the CCS limits access to the DISA ports, maintain-
enance ports and voice mail systems of a PBX.

The CCS is a combination of Canadian software and hardware. There are
three components to the system: Call Control Manager (CCM) software;
System Administration Manager (SAM) software; and Call Control
Interface hardware.

The intial application was developed for a long distance reseller. To
date this application has not had any unauthorized access. The traffic
runs over 15 million calls per month.

The company that developed the system is now offering the technology
to the general narketplace. Acquistion cost to users will run in the
$20,000 range for the system.

This is the general concept. If you would like to know more, I would be
pleased to follow up.

We think this product will have appeal in the US market (and anywhwere
else that phone fraud is a problem) and would be pleased to have your
feedback, etc ...

Look forward to hearing from you (question from a nephyte Internet user -
do you "hear" from someone using this medium??)


Best regards,

Paul Murray
Targeted Communication Management, Ottawa Canada


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

From: Paul R. Baudisch <[e-mail]>
Subject: Electro 95 Electronics Conference, June 21-23, Boston
Date: 31 Jan 1995 22:18:32 GMT
Organization: The Internet Access Company


Electro '95 is a major electronics conference and exposition to be
held in Boston, June 21 - 23, 1995.  The show, sponsored by the IEEE
in alliance with the IPC (Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging
Electronic Circuits), will highlight important trends in surface mount
technology and contract manufacturing.  Over 8,000 attendees are expected.

Marjorie Clapprood, a popular Boston talk show hostess and 1990 candidate
for Lieutenant Governor of Massachusetts, will deliver the keynote address
on June 21.  She will speak about the business climate in the Northeast and
its impact on the electronics industry.

For more information, please visit our web site at:

              http://www.netmarquee.com/electro/electro.html

or contact Kathryn Piersall at [e-mail].

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #69
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02733;
          1 Feb 95 2:54 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA24385; Tue, 31 Jan 95 22:11:48 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA24377; Tue, 31 Jan 95 22:11:46 CST
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 22:11:46 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #70

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 31 Jan 95 22:11:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 70

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    NYNEX Offers Unlimited Weekends (Stan Schwartz)
    Cellphone Car Antennas - Passive Repeaters Any Good? (Charles Beatty)
    SONET Telephony Engineer Needed ASAP ([e-mail])
    Billing Data Formats LD Carriers <-> RBOCs (Antony Upward)
    Help Wanted With Nokia 6050 GSM Car Phone (Jurgen Morhofer)
    For Sale: Motorola Codex 6525 (Benoit Maneckjee)
    AT&T 500 Number Problems (Matthew Spaethe)
    AudioText Applications (Richard Cayne)
    Another Look at the 'Old Days' (Dale Neiburg)
    Test Line Directory (Steve Coleman)
    Re: Cellular in Israel (Steve Samler)
    What to Look For in Choosing an LD Carrier? (Steve Chinatti)
    Strange Stuff (Stan Schwartz)
    Looking For High-Speed Wireless Tech (Roger Bergstrom)
    Looking For Chip Modem V22 ([e-mail])
    Using a Laptop Modem With ATT Public Phones (Thomas Hinders)
    Planning to Start a Pager Network (Thu Ra Tin)
    Pac-Tel New Standard Plus Phones (Dan Srebnick)
    Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines (Alan Sterger)
    Re: Bell Atlantic ISDN, Part II (Dan Brown)
    Last Laugh! Career Opportunities With the RBOCs (David McCord)

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, 31 Jan 1995 17:37:51 EST
From: Stan Schwartz <[e-mail]>
Subject: NYNEX Offers Unlimited Weekends


As per the ad in today's {Long Island Newsday}, this is NYNEX
Cellular's current New York area promotion:

   One Year Contract:    $29.99/month
                          30 minutes included (peak or off-peak)

                         .69 peak/.45 off-peak beyond 30 minutes

          HERE'S THE KICKER:

                         Free weekend calls through July. (home region)

Not only is NYNEX the first in the NY Metro area to offer the unlimited
weekend plans that the rest of the country offers, but their rates are
lower than Cell One and their off-peak band begins at 8pm, rather than
9pm.

Once again, I am forced to re-think my cellular choice!


Stan

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

From: [e-mail] (Charles Beatty)
Subject: Cellphone Car Antennas - Passive Repeaters Any Good?
Date: 31 Jan 1995 23:03:55 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


I am considering buying one of those passive repeater antennas for my
car to get my portable cellphone signal out of the vehicle. You know
the type, a piece inside the glass with a small horizontal antenna, no
wires, about $60 from Hello Direct.

Are these things any good. I use the phone in urban, suburban, and
rural areas. Any comments?

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

From: [e-mail] (imi)
Subject: SONET Telephony Engineer Needed ASAP
Date: 31 Jan 1995 03:28:29 GMT
Organization: imi


Major project in Dallas, TX needs High Level SONET Engineer to
conduct JAD sessions, Analysis and Design to assist Major LDS company.
Phase I starting in Feb. - please contact us ASAP.

IMI Systems, Inc.
800-828-0180

Press #3 for Dallas Office
Press #113 for info pertaining to opportunities ...

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 17:36:34 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Antony Upward)
Subject: Billing Data Formats LD Carriers <-> RBOCs
Organization: KPMG Management Consulting


I am looking to understand how LD carriers pass billing data to RBOCs
for inclusion on subscribers local statements.

I believe there is a standard data interchange protocol between LD
carriers and RBOCs for this data.

Can anyone supply details of this protocol.


Many thanks,

Antony Upward = Voice: [phone] = Internet: [e-mail]
Fax: [phone] = 24 Devon Road, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4E 2J8
KPMG Management Consulting, Business Systems and Technology
Suite 3300, Commerce Court West, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5L 1B2
Voice: [phone] = X.400: /C=CA/S=UPWARD/G=ANTONY/P=KPMG/A=MARK400

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

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Date: Tue, Jan 31 1995 12:50:36 GMT
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Help Wanted With Nokia 6050 GSM Car Phone


Recently I bought a Nokia 6050 GSM car phone with built-in
hands-free-kit and I experienced some trouble with my antenna. Before
switching to GSM I had a NEC P3 (ETACS version; the same system that
is used in UK and Austria too) with a Hands-Free-Kit and external
antenna. During installation of the new Nokia phone I connected the
existing antenna, that always had worked fine with my NEC P3, to it.

When making phone calls everything works fine if I use the handset but
in case of using the hands-free option the called or calling party on
the other side hears some very loud interference-like sounds mixed
together with my voice. First I thought that the hands-free section of
my phone would be defect but then by case I tried to turn off my
antenna leaving the antenna cable connected to my phone and surprise,
surprise, everything was perfect. I called Nokia Customer service but
their representitive did not understand very much about GSM phones as
they are still not very popular here in Italy.  For now I attached a
small FM-antenna to cover the ugly knob that comes out of my trunk,
but I'm afraid to burn my amplifier (8W) without a proper antenna.

Who has any idea of what happened and what I should do?  Please e-mail
to [e-mail].


Thanks in advance,

Jurgen

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

From: [e-mail] (Benoit Maneckjee)
Subject: For Sale: Motorola Codex 6525
Date: 31 Jan 1995 17:33:16 GMT
Organization: NLnet


Spare Unit, Never Used.  Originally purchased from Motorola Canada in 1992.

SPECIFICATIONS:

Modulus 18 Slot Enclosure with 1 Power Supply
6525 CPU Card (Switch) with 2 80K WAN Ports, 4 high speed ports
Network Port Card w/ 6 high speed ports
PAD port card with 6 19.2K ports
V 2.10 SW dor 6525
6500 SN?SDLC Firmware (applies to all high speed ports)
Complete with all documentation & original invoices
Frame relay ready with firmware upgrade

Willing to part with entire unit or spare parts.  Am willing to trade
for a router or Unix Workstation.

Originally paid CDN $17,000 wholesale from Motorola; will part with it
for much less - need cash.

Please EMAIL serious enquires only to:

[e-mail]


Benoit Maneckjee    President, SiNET Corporation

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew Spaethe)
Subject: AT&T 500 Number Problems
Date: 31 Jan 1995 23:50:10 GMT
Organization: UMR


My 500 number isn't scheduled to be ready until Feb 3, but I've been
trying it pretty much everyday.  Well, AT&T completed the call today
(the local switch has been accepting 1-500-367-XXXX for sometime) and
the only billing option was calling card.  Well, I tried that, and
someone other than me answered the phone.  I have no idea who it was,
but I guess I'll have the number when I receive my calling card bill!


Matt :)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you have gotten a lot further with
it than I have here. My 500 number was supposed to be turned on yesterday,
January 30. Still no go as of Tuesday evening, January 31. The AT&T rep
suggested calling the Illinois Commerce Commission and asking them to
ask Ameritech to unblock 500. A call to the ICC got me the response that
'so far as they knew' (the ICC), there was nothing yet tariffed for 500
here. AT&T said try using it via 800-225-5288 (CALL-ATT), but guess what?
That didn't work either. Since my long distance service is defaulted to
AT&T I tried double zero, and ask the operator to get it for me. After
asking someone what to do, she tried dialing it and it went nowhere. She
said it was 'blocked' in her computer and would not 'leave'.

I am sure the AT&T billing department is more effecient and that I will
be billed for this month anyway, just as I was for last month. :(   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard Cayne)
Subject: AudioText Applications
Date: 31 Jan 1995 09:23 -0500
Organization: Concordia University


Please send details on audiotext applications currently in use by
retailers to better serve their clients. Am interested in contacting
these organizations to explore how effective are their systems.


Regards,

Richard
email address: [e-mail]
Tel: [phone]     Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 13:12:34 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Another Look at the 'Old Days'


In TELECOM Digest, v15/58, the Moderator wrote:

> When I was in high school, 1956-60, the school gave us the 'option'
> of using ball-point pens instead of fountain pens, although the latter
> were preferred.

In my high school days (1959-63), ball-point pens were also allowed,
fountain pens preferred.  Curiously, during my later university years
I first encountered some classes where fountain pens were required for
exams.

> large city where television stations could be received. A few people
> had television sets as early as 1946-47. Our family got one in 1949;
> it had a two or three inch screen that was totally round with a very
> large magnifying glass attachment which hooked on the front of it. It

Our first set was a '46 model, as I recall.  It was an RCA with a
screen about eight inches diagonal, in a cabinet about three feet
long, a foot and a half deep, and about the same height.  If memory
serves, it weighed about 100 pounds -- but by the standard of the
time, RCA called it a "portable".

It was one of very few sets I've ever seen with channel 1 on the
tuner.  That channel space (44-50 MHz) was originally intended for
low-power stations to serve smaller towns, but was quickly taken away
for FM broadcasting, which was then moved to 88-108 MHz.

> Five digit numbers were common in communities which had automatic dialing
> systems in those days but only one exchange in the community. Since the
> exchange name was always the same, it was assumed when dialing. In your

When we moved to a new house in Washington, DC, in 1953, we still had
a six-digit number (actually 2 letters/4 digits: KEllogg 1528), but
very soon after it received an extra digit and became KE7-1528.

Ten years later, my parents retired and moved to a little town in the
western "corner" of South Carolina.  They had a modern seven-digit
number (646-nnnn, previously released as MIlton 6-nnnn: I have no idea
who "Milton" was), but since the entire town was on the same exchange,
only four digits needed to be dialed to reach anyone else in town.  I
don't believe seven-digit local dialing became mandatory until about 1970.


Dale Neiburg, STC        National Public Radio
Phone:  [phone]     635 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20001  Internet: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Channel 1 was gone from television sets by
around 1949-50 I guess. There is a national organization which provides
educational (but some say infomercial) television to school students on
closed circuit called 'Channel One'; you may have heard of them.  I have
a General Electric portable color television which still goes up all the
way to Channel 83; so you can guess how old it is. Most folks are unaware
there is a HUGE gap in the frequency spectrum for television between
Channels 6 and 7. Where Channel 6 ends at about 88 megs, Channel 7 does
not start until about 175 megs, way up in VHF. About thirty years ago
when FM radios were still sort of new (they had been around for twenty
years, but not for over fifty years like now) a religious station called
WYCA went on the air in Hammond, Indiana, around 88-90 megs someplace.
We have discussed *them* here in the past, a few years ago when thier
station was the cause of many complaints to the FCC. In those days, around
1962-63 they had the nerve to tell people, 'if you do not have an FM
receiver, you can still listen to the Word of God daily on this station
by putting your television set on Channel 6 then moving the fine tuning
dial until you hear our signal.'   How's that for brass?   <g> By the
way, 'Milton' was Milton Berle, one of the first people to appear on
your 1946 television set. <another g>   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Coleman)
Subject: Test Line Directory
Date: 31 Jan 1995 20:39:21 GMT
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


Does anybody know of an FTP site where a list of test lines can
obtained?  I am looking specfically for 102 type test lines by
NPA-NXX.

I know that Pacbell and GTE in Southern California use NPA-NXX-0002 as
a standard for the 102 test.  In Northern California Pacbell uses
NPA-NXX-0020 for the most part.  USWest also uses the NPA-NXX-0020
format in most parts of Oregon and Washington.  If anybody knows a
standard format for other regions, I would also appreciate that
information if the test line directory is not available.


Thanks in advance,

Steve Coleman   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 14:44:59 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Cellular in Israel


Celcomm is in NYC; their fax is 212 752 1157.  The international
division of SWBell is in the UK.  I have a phone number 44 483 751 756.

By the way, SWBell has most of their headquarters in San Antonio now.
Most everybody who was in St. Louis is now there.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Chinatti)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 10:43:24 -0500
Subject: What to Look For in Choosing an LD Carrier?


Well, I've been following this and some of the other related
newsgroups for a while, and I've finally decided to try to pick a good
LD carrier to cut down on my LD bills.  I use about $60+/mo. in LD for
one residential line, so I don't expect any earth shattering savings,
but I figure that I shouldn't pay any more than I have to.

I know from reading articles here that I can do much better than the
big three, and I realize that I'll have to do a little leg work for this.
The big problem is that I'm not sure exactly what I should be looking
for, specifically what questions to ask and what pitfalls I should
look out for. I've heard of LD resellers, six second increment billing;
are there any other important issues?  Should I be concerned with who
the resellers are reselling from?  Is there a good starting point for
finding LD carriers that don't advertise much (my Yellow Pages lists
only two companies in the Long Distance heading)?

How about LD calls not carried by my LD carrier (i.e. in my area code,
covered by Bell Atlantic)?  Is there anything that I'm not asking that
I should be?  Also, I'll be adding a cellular phone soon, and is there
any way that I can get a better rate by virtue of having two accounts
with an LD carrier?  Thanks in advance for any information that anyone
can provide.


Steve Chinatti    <[e-mail]>


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I would refer your questions to that
genius Marilyn Von Savant -- the smartest person in the world with
an extremely high IQ whose column appears each week in {Parade Magazine} --
but the last time someone asked her the same question you are asking here,
namely which long distance company to pick, she admitted that even she
was unable to answer that one.  Put the names of several carriers in
a hat. Close your eyes, reach in and pick one. Live with it for a few
months, then try one of the others.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stan Schwartz)
Subject: Strange Stuff
Date: 31 Jan 1995 14:58:31 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


I was driving home last night and saw this sign on a bar:

 "Tonight:  Live music with 'Star 69'"

I wonder if any other CLASS service has its own band.


Stan

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Looking For High-Speed Wireless Tech
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 16:02:29 PDT
Organization: Unisource Business Networks Sweden AB


LKAB, a northern Swedish mining company, is planning to use remotely
operated loaders in the production levels of the underground iron mine
in Kiruna. The loaders will be fully automated and operated and
monitored by operators above ground.

Each loader will be equipped with up to 4 CCD-cameras.

For the moment we are investigating the possibilities to transfer data
from and to the remote machines. Since the loaders are mobile we've
considered some kind of some broad-band wire-less technology
(spread-spectrum).  The data transfer is divided into three
categories, the transfer of digitalized video signals the transfer of
status information from the loader and the transfer of steering
information from the operator to the loader.  Anybody out there heard
of:

  - the possibility for high-speed wireless transmission of data and
    video?
  - any suppliers of such a system?
  - any similar works or studies?
  - conferenses?

Please mail any information to [e-mail].

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Looking For Chip Modem V22
Organization: E.I.G
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 01:37:38 GMT


Hello,

I'm looking for a modem chip who can do V22 and his alimentation
(power) have to be 3.3 Volt.

Thanks if you can E-mail me the answer.


[e-mail]    Perret Cedric.

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

Date: 31 Jan 1995 21:43:21 EDT
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: Hinders, Thomas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Using a Laptop Modem With ATT Public Phones


The instruction for using the Data Port on the ATT Public phones are
confusing (dialing the line waiting for the modem to answer).

Why can't you dial-through?

Thanks in advance ... reply directly and I'll summarize and re-post.


Tom Hinders  [e-mail]  Lotus Dev

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

From: [e-mail] (Thu Ra Tin)
Subject: Planning to Start a Pager Network
Date: 31 Jan 1995 18:45:45 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access  [phone]  [Login: guest]


I have been contacted by a brother-in-law of the Deputy Trade Minister
from a southeast Asian country about setting up a pager network in the
country.  The country has been closed for the last 30 years, and about
four years ago, they opened up as a market oriented economy.  Currently,
there are no pager services there.  I need to find a company that can
set up the whole turnkey pager systems for a country.  If anybody on
here is interested, please contact me as soon as possible.  My E-Mail
address is <[e-mail]> or my phone number is [phone].


Sincerely,

Thu Ra

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: Isle-Net [phone]
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 13:53:18 -0500
Subject: Pac-Tel New Standard Plus Phones


I'm the owner of a couple of Pacific Telesis (Pac Tel) "New Standard
Plus 2-Line" phones.  They appear to have been manufactured in Hong
Kong by TeleQuest in 1984.  I require a replacement receiver for one
unit.  I cannot seem to locate anyone in either firm who can refer me
to a parts department.  The service center phone number in the manual
was changed long ago.  Does anyone here know how I may obtain a
replacement receiver for this unit?

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Sterger)
Subject: Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines
Date: 31 Jan 1995 05:43:30 GMT
Organization: Primenet


In article <[e-mail]>, Daniel Ritsma <[e-mail].
edu> says:

> I am working for a small radio station that is now using two 8kHz
> lines to feed four tansmitters (AM).  On one line we feed three
> transmitters since they are for buildings next to each other; the other
> line is for a building some 150 blocks from here.

Are STLs out of the question?


Regards,

Alan Sterger     [e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan Brown)
Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic ISDN, Part II
Date: 31 Jan 1995 17:02:43 -0500
Organization: Subversive Student Publications un-inc.


In an earlier posting Hersh Jeff <[e-mail]> writes:

> In TELECOM Digest V15 #63 I wrote:

>> My office (located in Eatontown, NJ, area code 908) recently had two ISDN
>> lines installed for experimental purposes.  We receive our ISDN from a
>> #5ESS.  It was obvious, despite what is written about Bell Atlantic in
>> "Reengineering the Corporation," that it is very inexperienced and
>> unorganized in providing ISDN service.  All we asked for was two ISDN
>> BRI lines with NT-1s.  It took about two months before we were able to
>> get the lines installed, and we have already had to replace the NT-1s
>> once.  Anyone else have experience with Bell Atlantic ISDN?

EFF has actually had decent luck with ISDN service from Bell Atlantic,
though, it hasn't been particularly high volume. We've had a line for
occasional use with our Picture-tel system.

We are in Downtown DC.  When the line was originally installed, we had
it installed and usable in about the same ammount of time as we would
have had a normal telephone line. No complaints.

We did have some trouble (seems like one of the B channels was down)
but were able to get service for it on a Saturday afternoon.

We recently moved, and, again, the install went off as planned, no
troubles. We're not probably more than a few blocks from a CO ... so
YMMV accordingly.

I do have a few gripes on other services from Bell Atlantic, such as
our RCF which has been up and down (currently down, supposed to be up
tomorrow AM) a couple times ... first time maybe because of paperwork
shuffle, this time because they are moving over to a "new and enhanced
digital switching center" at the downtown CO where our old lines
(202-347-xxxx) go/went into.


Later,

Dan
(Dan Brown [e-mail])

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 11:27:13 -0800
From: [e-mail] (David McCord)
Subject: Last Laugh! Career Opportunities With the RBOCs?


Passed along FYI (For Your Insomnia?) .....

  From: "Mark D. Baushke" <[e-mail]>
  From: [e-mail] (Fred Baker)
  Subject: Human Intrusion

  found on com-priv...

At a symposium at MIT earlier this year, a representative of the
Communications Workers of America (CWA) began a presentation bemoaning
the loss of union craft jobs among telcos by drawing on the chalkboard
a sketch representing the telco C.O. of the future:

       +--------------------------------------------------+
       |         ***                                      |
       |        (o o)                      +-----------+  |
       |          ~                        |  ( ) ( )  |  |
       |        /-+-\                      |           |  |
       |       /  |  \                     |           |  |
       |      o   |   o    @@\         /   |    (  )   |  |
       |         / \       ++ \=======/    |           |  |
       |        /   \         /\     /\    |           |  |
       |       /     \       /  \   /  \   |           |  |
       |      ==     ==     =    = =    =  +-----------+  |
       +--------------------------------------------------+

In this picture, there is a single man, a dog and a computer.  The
man's job is to feed the dog and the dog's job is to bite the man if
he touches the computer.


[e-mail]     Network Wizardry   International Network Services
+ 1 415 254 4229 voice      on demand       Mountain View, California, USA
+ 1 415 967 3247 fax                                   Thank you Sensei!!!

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #70
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04212;
          1 Feb 95 4:12 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26827; Tue, 31 Jan 95 23:39:17 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA26821; Tue, 31 Jan 95 23:39:14 CST
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 23:39:14 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #71

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 31 Jan 95 23:39:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 71

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Earthquake in Area 206 (Ry Jones)
    Cellular Telephones Built Into Watches (Timothy Benson)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs ([e-mail])
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Matthew P. Downs)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Nick Sayer)
    Re: North Korea Holds US Representative Over $10K Phone Bill (Ben Combee)
    Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers (John Lundgren)
    Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers (Wes Leatherock)
    Re: Old Phone Number Format Question (Tony Harminc)
    Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles (John Lundgren)
    Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles (Patton M. Turner)
    Re: 500 Numbers and CID (John Lundgren)
    Last Laugh! Telecom and Pasta (Paul A. Migliorelli)

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] (Ry Jones)
Subject: Earthquake in Area 206
Date: 31 Jan 1995 03:21:12 GMT
Organization: NW NEXUS, Inc. -- Internet Made Easy [phone]


Two days ago a small tremor hit NPA 206. I called someone on the other
side of Lake Washington on my cell because the land lines were
overloaded. I kept the phone off the hook for about ten seconds after I
had already connected on the cellular and finally got a dialtone.
Maybe Mt Rainier blew? :)

Interesting that in the few seconds after the tremor enough people
were already on the phone to overload it.


[e-mail] net.

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 10:58:03 EST
From: Timothy Benson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Cellular Telephones Built Into Watches


    I am a MBA student and I am currently doing market research on
the combination cellular telephone-wristwatch product.  Does your
company offer this product or something that would be considered a
competitor to this product?  Do you know where I might obtain some
information about a product like this?

Your assistance is appreciated.


Tim

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

From: [e-mail] (Amer310)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: 31 Jan 1995 20:50:53 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Amer310)


Regarding Access Charges, I own a small long distance company so I
have to be somewhat of an expert. We pay roughly 50% of gross revenue
for access charges. The amounts range from 1.7 to 8 cents per minute
on each end of the call. Each Bell company or independent has different
pricing for in state and out of state calls. There is also a differnce
in some states for originating vs terminating calls.

There is no such thing a free access period!

Let me know if you have any other questions.


Jeff

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

From: Judith Oppenheimer <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 10:25:43 -0500
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs


David Lewis of AT&T wrote:

> Is it just me, or do these numbers (which I'll take on faith for
> now) demonstrate a massive inefficiency and misallocation of costs in
> the current cost structure of telecommunications?

> If 95% of traffic is local (I'll define as "intraLATA"), Then 95% of
> costs (fixed and variable) are due to local traffic.  But the majority
> (say, 80%) of LEC revenue is from access charges.  Therefore 80% of
> revenue is paying for 5% of cost, and 20% of revenue is paying for 95%
> of cost.

> Does this make sense?

Local should be charged higher because it is expensive.  You provide
unlimited free calling for a flat fee instead of charging on a call by
call basis.  Of course you lose money.  Local access charges are
profitable, and are on a call by call basis.  LEC's don't want to lose
that revenue.  With bypass and local exchange competition it could be
tough.

Remember the costs associated with access.  A LD call is dialed (say
international), the local switch has to do all the work to validate
the number and then pass it off to the pick.  The pick "just routes" a
number.  (oversimplification.)  But the LEC doesn't get paid for all
the incomplete calls, all the dial back calls, etc and that costs
money.

So local service pays for itself (barely) and profit comes from access
charges which is also an expensive proposition.  (Some local companies,
especally rural, don't even handle long distance.  They just pass it
off to someone else to do.)  There is verification, routing and don't
forget billing to do.  It is expensive.


Judith Oppenheimer

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: 31 Jan 1995 13:38:12 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


I don't understand the difference ... it's all real money ... instead
of being able to lower my rates, they have to increase them in order
to purchase more switching capacity, pay more in employee wages to
track the fraud, buy more computers in order to analyze all calls that
are occurring, etc.

When does this become "unreal money"?  If my monthly minimum could
have been $9 instead of $20, that sure the hell is real money to
me ... maybe not to the cellular company, but to me it is.


$.02

Matt

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

From: [e-mail] (Nick Sayer)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: [phone], log in as 'guest'.
Date: 31 Jan 1995 06:53:43 UTC


Barry Margolin <[e-mail]> writes:

> So if fraudulent calls increase the load on the network, the carrier
> will have to increase the capacity to accomodate it.

Can anyone actually document a case where a carrier of _any_ sort, be
it cellular, local, long distance, or _airline_ for that matter has
actually had to increase capacity because of said fraudulent use?

Anyone?

> This costs money, but because the calls are fraudulent there's no
> corresponding income to pay for it.  This is precisely the same as any
> other kind of theft: the vendor fails to receive income when someone
> gets something that the vendor paid for.

That's as may be, but that conclusion proceeds from a rather tall
assumption.


Nick Sayer <[e-mail]>   N6QQQ @ N0ARY.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NOAM
[phone], log in as 'guest'  URL: http://www.kfu.com/~nsayer/

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin L. Combee)
Subject: Re: North Korea Holds US Representative Over $10K Phone Bill
Date: 31 Jan 1995 06:42:03 -0500
Organization: ROASF Atlanta
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, Alan Shen <[e-mail].
edu> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Jan 1995, Paul Robinson wrote:

>> 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.

> Why didn't they just bring a satellite phone with him? Or was he out
> of range? $10K for 23 calls ... is a LITTLE too much for me ...

Apparently, the State Department didn't want to include North Korea in
their Friends & Family calling circle.  :)


#define NAME     "Ben Combee"
#define E-MAIL   "[e-mail]"
#define URL      "http://www.gatech.edu/acm/combee.html"

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers
Date: 31 Jan 1995 04:57:17 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Carl Moore ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I am originallly from Wilmington, Delaware.  For many years, what
> became the {News-Journal} newspapers were on what became 302-654-5351.
> (Please don't call that number; it was changed long ago!)  Originally
> (and I had to read about this since I am too young to remember that
> far back) it would have been printed as "Wilmington 4-5351" or simply
> "4-5351" with Wilmington being understood; I believe you had to ask
> the operator if you wanted to reach such a number. "Wilmington" was
> replaced by "OLympia" (OL for short) when it came time for customers
> to be able to dial directly.  Then, in 1966, Diamond State Telephone
> stopped printing exchange names in the Wilmington phone book, and
> existing numbers of form OLx-xxxx began to be printed as 65x-xxxx.

I have several wooden coat hangers that I inherited with four or five
digit numbers of the dry cleaners on them, probably from back in the
50's.  Then later, all the phone numbers were five digits preceded with
NEwmark as the word.  Now they are just 63x-xxxx.

> TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:

> Does anyone remember when all the military bases around the USA had
> their own special arrangements?  Camp McCoy in Wisconsin, for example,
> was just 'Camp McCoy' to the long distance operator; it had four digit
> extensions but no actual 'main listed number'. It was just 'Camp McCoy,
> extension xxxx' via the long distance operator.  Ditto Fort Benjamin
> Harrison in southern Indiana and Great Lakes Naval Base.   PAT]

I worked on a switchboard when I was in Gernmany, and I remember the
Autovon lines that we had.  I don't know why, but they were always
low in volume.  They worked but everyone had to yell in the field
phones to get thru.  Maybe that's why they were so weak: because the
phones were field phones.  We had phantom lines that were weak, but
some were better than the Autovon lines.  Then there were the lines
that were on the microwaves from missile site to missile site.  They
were always hollow sounding or singing.  I'm glad that things are a
lot better nowadays.  I really hated getting stuck with that stupid
copperweld steel field phone wire.


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]
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 07:45:40 GMT
Subject: Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers


Quoting Carl Moore <[e-mail]>:

> I am originallly from Wilmington, Delaware.  For many years, what
> became the {News-Journal} newspapers were on what became
> 302-654-5351. (Please don't call that number; it was changed long
> ago!)  Originally (and I had to read about this since I am too
> young to remember that far back) it would have been printed as
> "Wilmington 4-5351" or simply "4-5351" with Wilmington being
> understood; I believe you had to ask the operator if you wanted
> to reach such a number.

       Five-digit numbers were once quite common for dial service in
all but very large cities.  It wasn't that "Wilmington" was
understood; that was the whole telephone number, and it was in
Wilmington.  Since there all dialing was local, the concept of a name
or prefix didn't exist.  For long distance calls, you reached a long
distance operator, told her what city and what number you wanted, and
she plugged into either a ringdown or straightforward trunk to the
inward operator in that city, rang on it, if was a ringdown trunk, and
passed the number to the inward operator by voice when she answered.
The inward operator dialed the number (typically with a rotary dial on
the keyshelf) to connect with the desired number.  (If there were no
direct trunks to the called city, the operator had to go through other
cities on the way to get there; routes to popular destinations were on
a keyshelf bulletin; if not there, she connected to a rate and route
operator and inquired as to the route.)

> Does anyone remember when all the military bases around the USA
> had their own special arrangements?  Camp McCoy in Wisconsin, for
> example, was just 'Camp McCoy' to the long distance operator; it
> had four digit extensions but no actual 'main listed number'. It
> was just 'Camp McCoy, extension xxxx' via the long distance
> operator.  Ditto Fort Benjamin Harrison in southern Indiana and
> Great Lakes Naval Base.   PAT]

        The military bases were probably classified as exchanges for
toll purposes and so you reached them over a toll trunk, same as a
long distance call to any other exchange.  Military bases always had
special arrangements for connecting to both the exchange and toll
network and had their own operators (and switches, where the military
post had dial service).

        But talk of the newspaper in Wilmington and unusual
arrangements reminds me of the time when I was working for The Daily
Oklahoman in Oklahoma City (2-1211 and also L.D. 343; do you remember
toll terminals?) and I had occasion to call Phillips, Texas, about a
fire.

        Phillips was a company town of a Phillips Petroleum Company
subsidiary near Borger, Texas, where they had one or more chemical
plants.  I had the number in Phillips and I placed a call with the
long distance operator.

        She went to rate and route (see above) who gave her the
routing of "TC Borger" (toll center Borger).  So she connected with
Borger and asked for Phillips.  The inward operator responded "your
ticket reads Borger 666, a PBX."  So this was a case where it really
was a PBX with extension numbers.

        This was probably around 1949 or 1950.


Wes Leatherock
[e-mail]
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This reminds me of when the operator in
North Bay, Ontario was the inward operator for all the little towns
northward along Imperial Highway 11, clear up to Hearst. When you called
any of those points, the long distance operator always got a report from
Rate and Route which indicated North Bay. So your operator dialed something
and presently there came a response over the wire "North Bay!" and your
operator would ask for the number in Hearst, for example, but the other
end would say 'just a minute, I will ring the operator in Hearst for you
and you give her the number you want.' You'd hear this 'kerchunk' sound
as she was ringing, and sooner or later "Hearst" came on the line to ask
for 'number please?'. That is, unless you called after about 10 pm at
night ... call that late, and North Bay had a different answer for your
operator, who seemed astounded to hear such a thing:

"Is this an emergency call to Hearst, Ontario?"

(your operator would repeat the question to you, and you would say no.)

"Well operator, we are not supposed to ring her after ten o'clock at
night unless its an emergency. She goes to bed at ten. If it's an
emergency I will ring her, but we are not supposed to call until after
seven in the morning. Seven is when we give her a wake up call."

Then there was Alma, Quebec. Alma served as the inward for several
places in the far northern reaches of Quebec but connections were made
over *AM radio links*. Rate and Route would give your local operator the
notation 'other place' to mark on the ticket and a number to dial which
reached Alma Inward. If your operator thought it strange that the 'phone
company' in Hearst closed down overnight, she thought it even stranger
when the operator in Alma answered, always first in French then immediatly
in English saying 'Alma Radio'. Your operator would ask for one of those
places and the Alma operator would answer almost indignantly: "oooh!
madamoiselle! They are not going to answer me now! They only promise to
listen to zee radio between seven and nine oclock.  Do you want me to try
anyway? Maybe they will answer."

So giving it a try, she would go on the radio circuit from her switchboard
and with sometimes horrible static in the background when she was not
transmitting, she would try to raise them. First in French then in English
over and over, four or five times calling for whatever small village it
was 'this is Alma on Channel 1, do you copy me'.  Then she would go try on
Channel 2.  Finally she would say there was no response from them, and
almost as an afterthought, 'madamoiselle, where are you calling from?'

The operator would tell her she was in Chicago.

"Shee cah go? In zee United States? Operator, you call me back at seven
o'clock, I will see that they talk to you then."

Long ago times, indeed. That would have been in the middle 1950's.   PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 95 15:40:17 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Old Phone Number Format Question


[e-mail] wrote:

> Philips, the Netherlands company, was not very well known in
> the United States before World War II.  During World War II, after the
> Netherlands was occupied by Germany, their American operation became
> separate under the name North American Philips Company, which used the
> trade name Norelco.

Just to add another piece to the puzzle: in Canada the Norelco
trademark was not owned by Philips but by The Northern Electric
Company Ltd., which made radios, wire and cable, telephone equipment,
and even appliances like refrigerators.  Northern Electric was
majority owned by The Bell Telephone Company of Canada (now Bell
Canada), and was renamed Northern Telecom in the mid 1970s.  It is now
best known for its DMS switches and related telecom equipment.

In Canada, the Philips electric razors and such are sold under the
Philishave name.


Tony Harminc

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles
Date: 1 Feb 1995 03:04:52 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Mark Fletcher ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 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 grateful.

> Please reply via direct e-mail to [e-mail]. I will post my
> findings and a summary for all interested.

It sounds like you have a good idea, if what you need is 100 pairs of hard
copper.  Check the numbers and see how the costs look for a period of time,
and you might be saving a lot real quick.

If you can use some groups of 24 circuits, then T-1 gear could be another
answer to saving some money.  Or instead of running your own cable, you
could run fiber instead.  Or radio gear could also eliminate the dependence
on the telco altogether.

I would get one of the above and implement it, and not go completely
independent of the telco until I was sure that the fiber or radio was
going to be a reliable substitute.  Maybe keep 1/3 of the telco lines
just in case.


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] (Patton M Turner)
Subject: Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 03:17:26 GMT


You can rent space on the poles under conditions imposed by the PUC
and or City.  Usually the telco owns the poles, telco pays something
like 40 % of cost and the CATV firms 10%.  You only need a few inches
of space on the pole, but remember to consider maintainance costs and
restoration if the pole gets knocked down.  Also as a non-common
carrier you won't get the cooperation the telco gets if you have
inductive noise problems.

Have you thought of T1s or mucrowave?


Patton Turner  KB4GRZ  [e-mail]  FAA Telecommunications

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: 500 Numbers and CID
Date: 31 Jan 1995 04:42:44 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Mark Stieger ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Here's something I haven't seen asked in here. When nationwide Caller
> ID is available, and someone calls you through a 500 number, will
> their CID information be passed, or will the 500 number (or some ATT
> number show up?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't know, and let's talk about it
[deleted]
> gets installed here. Meanwhile of course, AT&T promptly billed me for
> the service on January 24 -- on my local Ameritech bill -- so much for
> how it is out of their control until Ameritech cooperates.    PAT]

I think here in Pac*Bell land, the Calif PUC requires that if the
subscriber had a loss of service greater than 24 hours, they can
remove the loss from their bill.  Like if the phone is out two days,
they can subtract 2/30 of a month's bill.  Of course, that doesn't
include other charges like toll calls.  So if you get service on the
30th, you might be able to get away without paying the loss between
the 24th and 30th.  I'm assuming that the regulatory laws are somewhat
uniform from state to state.


John Lundgren - Elec Tech - Info Tech Svcs
Rancho Santiago Community College District
17th St. at Bristol \ Santa Ana, CA 92706
[e-mail]\[e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 31 Jan 1995 09:16:05 EST
From: Paul A. Migliorelli <[e-mail]>
Subject: Last Laugh! Telecom and Pasta


Have any of you heard the Kraft macaroni and cheese ad with the little
child singing that he "wants the blue box", and that he has the "blue
box blues"?  Most interesting indeed.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #71
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02347;
          2 Feb 95 21:54 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16185; Thu, 2 Feb 95 16:45:19 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16177; Thu, 2 Feb 95 16:45:17 CST
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 16:45:17 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #72

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 2 Feb 95 16:45:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 72

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Protect Your Privacy" by Stallings (Rob Slade)
    International Alliance Service Liability (David Ujimoto)
    CFP: 3rd International Workshop on Feature Interactions (Nancy Griffeth)
    Canadian (Northern Tel) in India? (Rohit Sharma)
    Adoption of New Technologies (Seth Baum)
    NYNEX's Competition in the NY Metro LATA (Stan Schwartz)
    Atlanta Toll-Free Calling Zone Growing? (Paul Beker)
    Who Are the Telephone Pioneers of America? (Jonathan Prince)
    Cellphones on Your TV (Timothy D. Shoppa)
    Infrastructure for Internet Service Provider (Rustom Vachha)

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, 02 Feb 1995 12:47:47 EST
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Protect Your Privacy" by Stallings


[It didn't start out this way, but this seems to be the start of a
"mini" series of reviews on the topic of PGP.  Garfinkel's review is
due to be sent in another two weeks, Schneier's a week after that;
Peachpit has one due out in February while Zimmerman's own, I found
out yesterday, is due out in April. - rms]

BKPRTPRV.RVW   941214

"Protect Your Privacy", Stallings, 1995, 0-13-185596-4, U$19.95
%A   William Stallings [e-mail]
%C   113 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ   07632
%D   1995
%G   0-13-185596-4
%I   Prentice Hall PTR
%O   U$19.95 [phone] FAX [phone] [e-mail]
%P   302
%T   "Protect Your Privacy"

This is the first-released of at least three books on PGP (Pretty Good
Privacy), the encryption and authentication package by Phil Zimmerman.
It covers the concepts of encryption, public key encryption,
authentication and key management, as well as the installation and
operation of PGP on MS-DOS and Macintosh platforms.  There is also
some overview of front end shells for DOS and Windows, plus helpful
supplementary information on password/phrase choice key servers, and
where to get PGP.  (The promise of coverage for Windows, UNIX, OS/2
and Amiga in the promotional literature is overkill, but these
interfaces will be almost identical to those covered.)

Stallings' material is generally very clear and well written.  Many
times, however, concepts are introduced early in the book but not
explained until much later.  This is particularly true of key
management.  In most cases, I can assure the reader not to worry --
all will be made clear, eventually.  (In some few cases, the
explanation may remain confusing until you actually run the program.)

The book echoes the assertion by many that PGP has become the de facto
standard in Internet privacy and authentication.  Certainly no commercial
product has anything like the same range of use.  Full acceptance of
PGP, though, has been hampered by the version incompatibilities and
the legal difficulties caused by the US weapons (!) expert control
laws.  Given the touchy nature of this subject, it is not terribly
surprising that both Stallings, and Michael Johnson in the access
document, comment only briefly on the subject.  These passages are
somewhat calming, but hardly calculated to inspire confidence.

Solid background on the technology, if sometimes disjointed.  Terse,
but serviceable documentation on the program.  Readable and informative.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKPRTPRV.RVW   941214. Permission granted
for distribution in TELECOM Digest and associated publications.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

From: [e-mail] (David Ujimoto)
Subject: International Alliance Service Liability
Organization: Toronto FreeNet
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 20:25:53 GMT


I have a question regarding liability and international telephone
carrier alliances which hopefully someone can answer.

Given the development of international telecom alliances and their
provision of specialized services for business, I am wondering about
the extent to which telecom carriers would be liable for lost messages,
contracts, product ideas and the like.

[I realize that in general, telecom companies are protected from such
liability and that international tariff agreements also protect
carriers.  But given the fact that the carriers know or ought to know
the importance of these networks to business, doesn't the carriers'
exposure to risk increase?]

Assuming that there is carrier liability for these problems, where
would such liability be prosecuted?  Would it be in the originating
country?  The terminating country?  Or where the breach occurred?  Or
is this question redundant because service providers expressly
contract out liability?

Any help that can be provided in this matter would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks in advance!


David Ujimoto

[e-mail]   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A few years ago Illinois Bell had that
awful fire in Hinsdale, Illinois which knocked much of their network
off line for several days and some of it was off line for almost a
month. They claimed they had no liability to subscribers for lost
business as a result of the outage, and for the most part they were
backed up in this opinion by the court when various subscribers sued
them. I think telco's contract with you -- which is the tariff -- says
telco's liability is limited to the amount of money you paid for
service which they were unable to provide.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Nancy Griffeth)
Subject: CFP: 3rd International Workshop on Feature Interactions
Organization: Morristown Research and Engineering
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 20:35:51 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 telecommun-
ications 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: [phone],
e-mail: [e-mail].

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

From: [e-mail] (Rohit Sharma)
Subject: Canadian (Northern Tel) in India?
Date: 1 Feb 1995 20:32:32 GMT
Organization: University of Alberta Electrical Engineering Department


Why is it that there is virtually no Canadian telecom equipment supplier
(e.g Northern Telecom) trying to market any products in India?
Northern's research arm BNR recently set up a joint software venture
with TCS (an Indian Software co.) to produce software for BNR's
cellular research, but there is no sign of N.T. making its presence felt
along with the other telecom multinationals trying to get a piece of the
rapidly expanding Indian telecom market? These multinationals include
Alcatel, Ericssons, Siemens, Fujitsu.


rohit    [e-mail]    or  [e-mail]
Photonics Division,   Telecom Research Labs  - Edmonton, Alberta.

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

From: [e-mail] (sb)
Subject: Adoption of New Technologies
Date: 1 Feb 1995 21:23:48 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link


I'm writing an article on how the average consumer will react to the
proliferation of possible technologies, services, and products which
he/she will be exposed to in the coming years as he attempts (or is
forced into entering) the onramp to the information superhighway.
What's gonna work: movies on demand?  Internet access?  HDTV?  Home
shopping?  Specifically, what are the demand drivers for new
technology products/services, and what combination of factors makes a
product/serivce suceed or fail?  Do any key drivers emerge as
especially important for technology products, versus say consumer
durables?

As background, I would appreciate mail responses to "[e-mail]"
which yield:

1)  Pointers to other articles/books that deal with this topic;
2)  Knowledge of any recent papers/study;
3)  Internet links that might be of use;
4)  Knowledge of any experiences that any users have had;
5)  Anything else that springs to your mind regarding this topic;


Thank you for your time.

Seth Baum    [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 03:16:23 EST
From: Stan Schwartz <[e-mail]>
Subject: NYNEX's Competition in the NY Metro LATA


I received the new dial-in number for AOL's new AOLNet service today,
which is in the 516-393 exchange.  I did what I normally do when I
don't recognize an exchange, which is to dial NXX-9901.  In NYNEXland,
this will usually tell me the name of the C/O, and I can then judge if
it will REALLY be a local call.  To my surprise, here's what I heard
when I dialed 393-9901:

"Hello, You have reached the Cablevision Lightpath 5-E switch, serving
the 516-393, 439, and 465 Exchanges"

Cablevision, the local cable tv operator was written up in Long Island
Newsday last week as major local competition for NYNEX.  While they
said that Cablevision already had its own switch installed, I didn't
realize that the changes were already made!


Stan

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Beker)
Subject: Atlanta Toll-Free Calling Zone Growing?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 05:03:28 GMT


I heard a very brief report on one of the local radio stations that
Southern Bell was planning to increase the size of the "local Atlanta
calling zone by 50%" by "adding 34 new exchanges" to it ...

Of course, no further details were given, such as: will Southern Bell
raise rates for everyone in Atlanta? (probably) ... where are these 34
exchanges (any 706 exchanges)? ... etc.

I have a feeling that this is an effort to bring all of 404 into a
single, toll-free calling zone, which it virtually is already ...
there were several exchanges that were originally slated for 706 at
the time of the 404 split, but were eventually brought back into 404
by public uproar.  Perhaps this where the "34" figure comes from,
although I didn't think there were so many.

Anyone have more details?  Thanks!


Paul Beker - Atlanta, GA    [e-mail]

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

From: Jonathan Prince <[e-mail]>
Subject: Who Are the Telephone Pioneers of America?
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 02:16:08 EST


    I was at a meeting at the Ameritech HQ in Ohio the other day
and I left the meeting for the rest room, and noticed that near the
lobby/cafeteria there was a display of various Ameritech novelty
items (T-Shirts, mugs etc and other corporate propaganda) and also in
the case were a couple stickers for sale.  All of these items were
'for sale' but no one around to buy from, so hence my question.

    I noticed a couple decals for sale that were in the shape of a
triangle, wider than tall, blue with white lettering, seeming to
commemorate (judging from the old style of graphics on the decal) some
organization called the 'Telephone Pioneers of America' (I think that's
what it was called).  What is this organization, or was it, as the
case might be?  A boy/girl scouts for the telephone company?! Of what?

    As someone who has been getting a lot of hands on experience
in the problems of rural internet connectivity these days (in SE Ohio
for the South East Ohio Regional Free-Net) I have become fascinated
with the history of the telcos, the history of the acceptance in our
lives of a machine that we talk to (which in my opinion is almost as
absurd as a machine that we watch for at least six hours a day!).
Anyway, this looks to be an interesting bit of tele-trivia, if anyone
has the answer.

    I didn't get the chance to ask Ameritech, I'll try to find out
at the next meeting.


Thanks,

Jonathan Prince   Rural Action - VISTA
for the South East Ohio Regional Free-Net
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I will give you the answer, and it is not
'trivia' in any sense of the word. And please don't stand up at the next
meeting to ask who are the TPA, because chances are everyone in the room
would be embarrassed for you.  I know I would be. For your information,
the Telephone Pioneers of America is an outstanding organization with
chapters at telcos all over the USA in the Bell Operating Companies and
at AT&T. At the non-Bell telcos, the same organization exists known as
the Independent Pioneers.

TPA has been around for close to a century now. In the very early days,
meaning the period up to about 1930, the TPA was composed of people who
had been employed by (what was then) the Bell System since its beginning.
They were, in effect, the 'charter employees' of the company, or 'pioneers'
in telecommunications. They were the people who started what you take for
granted today. As time went on into the 1920-30's, most of those old
pioneers were either dead, retired or on the verge of retiring from Bell
after forty plus years of employment with AT&T.  The organization then
amended its charter to allow membership by any employee of AT&T or (as
they were called) a subsidiary company who had been employed by Bell (or an
independent) for at least twenty years. I believe that rule still is in
effect, although many chapters of TPA have associate membership programs
for employees with less time on the job.

What do they do?  What is their purpose? They are very involved citizens
in their communities. In their spare time they devise solutions to the
problems encountered by differently-abled (I used to say 'handicapped' but
this is now a politcally correct Digest, since I want to have it distributed
on several major campuses) persons. They have developed methods by which
someone who was completely paralyzed could 'talk' on the phone using a
pencil they held in their teeth. They have developed all sorts of gimmicks
and gadgets for very limited use applications by people who for whatever
reason could not otherwise use the phone. Aside from their marvelous work
in specialized telecommunications applications for handicapped people, they
are good citizens in their community. They assist with voter registration.
They work with people who have AIDS. They take food to old people who can't
get out of their houses. They record books and newspapers on tape for people
who are visually handicapped. They are helping to restore telecom links in
Kobe. To be honest with you, I don't know what some chapter of TPA *doesn't
do*.

Most of their expenses come out of their own pockets. The telcos make corp-
orate contributions, and they raise money through the sale of 'corporate
propoganda' such as coffee mugs an T-shirts with their employer's logo on
them. There are, you see, some people around who are proud to be employed
by telco and who like having artifacts of that sort in their home, etc.

And that's the Telephone Pioneers of America: a splendid bunch of people
with a long and positive role as leaders in telecom.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Timothy D. Shoppa)
Subject: Cellphones on Your TV
Date: 1 Feb 1995 22:41:00 PST
Organization: California Institute of Technology


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Channel 1 was gone from television sets by
> around 1949-50 I guess. There is a national organization which provides
> educational (but some say infomercial) television to school students on
> closed circuit called 'Channel One'; you may have heard of them.  I have
> a General Electric portable color television which still goes up all the
> way to Channel 83; so you can guess how old it is. Most folks are unaware
         ^^^^^^^^^^
> there is a HUGE gap in the frequency spectrum for television between
> Channels 6 and 7. Where Channel 6 ends at about 88 megs, Channel 7 does
> not start until about 175 megs, way up in VHF. About thirty years ago
> when FM radios were still sort of new (they had been around for twenty
> years, but not for over fifty years like now) a religious station called
> WYCA went on the air in Hammond, Indiana, around 88-90 megs someplace.
> We have discussed *them* here in the past, a few years ago when thier
> station was the cause of many complaints to the FCC. In those days, around
> 1962-63 they had the nerve to tell people, 'if you do not have an FM
> receiver, you can still listen to the Word of God daily on this station
> by putting your television set on Channel 6 then moving the fine tuning
> dial until you hear our signal.'

It is still the case that you can pick up the 88-90 MHz FM broadcasts
on a TV with a good 'ol analog tuner.

Similarly, you may be able to tune in many pager services and cellphone con-
versations (or often, more precisely, their IF images) on the upper
reaches of your old UHF TV.  Here in LA the wide bandwidth of a TV
tuner is a disadvantage when doing this, as many cellphone frequencies
conversations fall in the bandpass at any given time.  In more rural
areas, this is not nearly as big of a problem.

I'm waiting for the FCC/phone cops to discover this and ban the sale
of older TV's at yard sales.  I don't think they are currently banned,
as they are not exactly "scanning receivers" -- or has the law been
broadened recently?


Tim Shoppa ([e-mail])


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, well you can't really get cell phones
on your television (in the upper UHF channels now abolished) very well.
The innards of the television are different as you point out. You can set
the dial up there on channel 81-83 for example and twiddle the fine tuner
all you want. You just get bizzarre bits and pieces of things, not even as
much as you get on a scanner. I realize you were to some extent joking
but I'd not get too concerned.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rustom Vachha)
Subject: Infrastructure for Internet Service Provider
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 01:08:15 MST
Organization: Primenet


Hi everyone!

    I am currently exploring the possibility of providing internet
services in the Indian subcontinent, in the near future. What sort of
infrastructure is required? I presume a high speed dedicated telephone
line is a requirement.  Are there different types of high speed lines?
And more importantly, how can I get them from the telephone company
(local/long distance)?


Thanks in advance,

Rustom    [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #72
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa02904;
          2 Feb 95 22:33 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18746; Thu, 2 Feb 95 18:11:14 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18740; Thu, 2 Feb 95 18:11:12 CST
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 18:11:12 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #73

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 2 Feb 95 18:11:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 73

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    SW Bell Urged to Cut Phelps' Phone Lines (Capital-Journal via Kevyn Jacobs)
    Book Review: "Fundamentals of Telecommunication Networks" (Rob Slade)
    MCI to Launch First Nationwide Sonet/ATM Network (Jim Collins)
    POCSAG to Be Upgraded to APOC (John Bell)
    7/8ths Heliax Sources Needed (Michael P. Deignan)

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: Kevyn Jacobs <[e-mail]>
Subject: SW Bell Urged to Cut Phelps' Phone Lines
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 07:34:33 CST


 From the {Topeka Capital-Journal) Topeka, Kansas
Front page, Friday, January 20, 1995

S.W. BELL URGED TO CUT PHELPS' CHURCH PHONES

By STEVE FRY
The Capital-Journal

A prominent Topeka businessman is challenging Southwestern Bell to
pull the plug on telephone service to Westboro Baptist Church because
of what a local lawyer calls the "defaming and harassing" faxes that
emanate from there.

Kent Garlinghouse chief executive officer and chairman of M-C Industries
Inc., has joined with lawyer Jerry Palmer in condemning the telephone
company for not acting to curb the fax messages of Westboro Baptist
Church.

The faxes are sprinkled with words such as "fag," "sodomite," "pig"
and "whore."

The pastor of Westboro Baptist is the Rev. Fred W. Phelps Sr. Its
congregation is composed primarily of members of his family. The
congregation is best known for its anti-gay picketing. The picketing
that began on local street corners has increasingly turned up in
locales across the nation, drawing widespread media attention.

Garlinghouse said the picketing has become so embarrassing he is
reluctant to acknowledge he is from Topeka when he meets people while
out of town on business.

He and Palmer contend it is Southwestern Bell's civic duty to take
action against what they deem is an abuse of telephone service.

"I think Southwestern Bell has been a bad corporate citizen in their
failure to use the power they have to abate the serious problem this
community has with these defaming and harassing faxes," Palmer said.

"They're like the rest of the community. They're afraid. They don't
want the litigation, the hassle" with the Westboro church, Palmer
said. Many of Phelps' 13 children are lawyers.

"Southwestern Bell could -- today -- shut off the fax service to
Westboro Baptist Church if they had the will," Palmer said Wednesday.

Anne Marie Hilday, a Southwestern Bell spokesman, said the matter
boils down to a First Amendment issue.

"Southwestern Bell is a good corporate citizen because its efforts are
aimed at serving its customers fairly and without discriminating
against any customer," she said. "However, Southwestern Bell cannot
act as prosecutor, judge and jury in determining whether conversation
between two persons is defamatory and libelous or otherwise illegal."

Garlinghouse said he hasn't been the subject of a Westboro fax, but
was cursed by a church picketer as he entered a west-side restaurant
Sept. 17.

There are more issues than just the church`s faxes, Garlinghouse said,
including church picketers on Topeka streets, entertainers shunning
Topeka and harassment of Topekans attending public performances.

Palmer contends the phone company could shut off service based on a
Kansas Corporation Commission regulation linked to abuse of telephone
service. In that regulation, there is a section dealing with calls
directly to a person that reasonably could be expected to frighten,
abuse, torment or harass that person.

Southwestern Bell's Hilday counters that the regulation is applied
within the law.

Palmer said the regulation should be extended to third parties.  For
example, if A sends a fax to B about Z, the regulation should protect
Z, Palmer said.

On Aug. 11, Palmer filed a complaint with the KCC saying existing
regulations against abuse of telephone service by voice communication
are inadequate to cover abusive facsimile messages about someone who
doesn't actually receive the fax message. The phone company contends
updating the regulation isn't needed and urged the KCC to drop its
investigation.

Palmer, a longtime Phelps target on picket signs and faxes, represents
St. David's Episcopal Church in a civil lawsuit against Westboro.

Instead of cutting off phone service, Southwestern Bell is using the
criminal prosecution route, which is quicker than a civil suit or
administrative action, Hilday said.

Southwestern Bell can place a "trap" on a phone or fax machine to
trace the number of the fax sender. After three offending calls are
received, the information is turned over to law enforcement officers,
who visit the sender to talk about the complaint.

If the fax messages continue, officers can seek prosecution for
violation of the regulation. Upon conviction, the phone company can
disconnect the offender's phone service.

So far, 14 customers have complained to Southwestern Bell about the
Westboro church faxes, Hilday said, but none has agreed to use the
trap method.

The problem with the trap method is it could make the complainant a
target for more fax messages, Palmer said. Even though the complainant
wouldn't receive future messages about himself, many outlets for the
messages would, Palmer said.

By using the regulatory route, everyone benefits because Westboro
fax messages would end, Palmer said.

Using a trap to identify the Westboro church as the fax sender is
"absurd," Palmer said.

"That leaves Southwestern Bell, probably, as the only people who don't
know where the faxes are coming from," he said.

Westboro faxes usually have church logo at the top or are signed by
Phelps, Palmer said.

In October, Shawnee County District Judge Michael Barbara found Phelps
in contempt of court based, in part, on a fax issued by the minister,
Palmer said.

It isn't clear when the KCC will complete its investigation of
Palmer's complaint, said David Schlosser, KCC spokesman. Researchers
are trying to determine whether other states offer third-party
protection.

"I think it's embarrassing," Garlinghouse said of the Westboro
anti-gay campaign. "It does not make me proud to be a Topekan. It's
amazing how many people around the country are familiar with the
Phelpses.?'

 From The {Topeka Capital-Journal} Editorial Page
Sunday, January 22, 1995

Phelps faxes: Bell, it's your call.

Sidebar: Some believe the phone company has the capacity to pull
the plug on the cult of contempt's faxes

Sidebar: This is not free speech.  It is high-tech harassment.
It is reaching out and touching someone with defamation and mass
character assassination. If you feel Southwestern Bell should
stop this madness, call the company and tell it to.


Southwestern Bell, you have been duly challenged.

It's your call now.

Several knowledgeable Topekans believe you have the power, the right
and, indeed, the obligation to end the torrent of scornful, libelous
fax messages sent by the Westboro Baptist Church over the last few
years.

The challenge is this: Do you stand up for your customers, for the
law, for Topeka and for decency?

If so, you won't stand alone. The community will stand with you.  To
those few fortunate ones who have escaped viewing the faxes from Fred
Phelps' family: You just would not believe the mean-spirited bile that
flows from Phelps' church through area fax machines -- reckless
allegations of sexual improprieties and other misdeeds, public and
private; doctored cartoons and other copyright infringements meant to
embarrass particular individuals; and name-calling and threat-making
intended solely to terrorize.

This is not free speech. It is high-tech harassment. It is reaching out
and touching someone with defamation and mass character assassination. And
it must stop.

Some of the victims are public officials. Some are community leaders. Still
others are private citizens with the misfortune of being discovered by the
Cult of Contempt.

Most importantly, they are all human beings.

They don't have to live with this.

The Phelpses have an absolute right to wallow their lives away in the
sewer of their creation. But the good people of Topeka have no such
obligation. The good people of Topeka have a right to peace and harmony.

The local band of haters is disturbing that peace in every way it can,
taking glee in each new wound it makes.

But it is now time for healing.

Some, including local business owner Kent Garlinghouse and attorney Jerry
Palmer, say Southwestern Bell can begin the healing process.

They believe Bell can and should prevent further abuse of its telephone
customers by discontinuing phone service to Phelps' church.

The question is not whether Southwestern Bell is a good corporate
citizen. It is. The only question is, can it be better?

It just might.

Perhaps to its credit, the phone company has thus far treaded lightly.
It has legitimate concerns about denying phone service to anyone based
on how the phones are used.

Unfortunately, that caution -- which many of Topeka's other institutions
have shown -- is outdated. The Phelpses' willingness to stretch the
bounds of reason has made it so.

In addition, Bell clearly has an obligation to do everything possible
to prevent abuse of its customers.

The present situation calls for firm action.

Palmer argues the phone company has the power to shut off phone
service to the church under Kansas Corporation Commission regulations.
Palmer also says the KCC regulations need to be beefed up -- to
protect not just the recipient of the faxes, but the subject of them.

Bell says it simply can't take the action Palmer is prescribing.

Yet, it would seem otherwise.

Regulations clearly allow the phone company to discontinue service that is
used "for a call or calls, anonymous or otherwise, if made in a manner
which reasonably could be expected to frighten, abuse, torment or harass
another"

Can there be any doubt that the above describes the Phelps family of
faxes?

It's time to stop pussyfooting around.

If you feel Southwestern Bell should stop this madness, call the company
and tell it to. Tell Bell to protect the law-abiding, peace-loving customers
it enjoys in this area.

And once Bell steps forward to end this tele-terrorism, the rest of the
community should step forward with it.

That means further action by the city government and law enforcement commun-
ity to bring a resolution to the pickets, by the same family, that are
intended to torment and disrupt Topeka's cultural and religious life.

And it means other good citizens and corporate citizens stepping forward to
defend one another -- to take back Topeka.

The community puts it to you, Southwestern Bell. Are you the one to call on?

             ====================================================
Reprinted with permission of TCJ Editor Mike Ryan
Phone Conversation, 01.21.95


 From The {Topeka Capital-Journal}  Letters to the Editor
Sunday, January 29, 1995

Southwestern Bell Telephone has heard your calls, Topeka. But the
message we've received is mixed.

On one hand, we've heard from those of you who want us to unilaterally
disconnect a customer's service for allegedly sending harassing
facsimile messages. On the other hand are those who fear that such
unilateral action by a telephone company could amount to an abuse of
power. They support existing procedures, which involve safeguards for
the suspension of any customer's service. They view these procedures
as necessary to protect all customers from inappropriate limits on
their speech.

We understand and appreciate the concerns expressed by both sides of
this troublesome issue. We hope the community appreciates our deliberate
approach to considering the interests of all customers.

We have heard complaints from customers claiming they have received harassing
faxes. We stand ready to implement the established procedures to address their
concerns. However, as a regulated telecommunications provider, we have a gen-
eral obligation to serve everyone who requests service in our operating area.
Therefore, before we suspend a customer's service we must have facts.

At a minimum, the source of the offensive fax must be clearly established.
The author of a fax might not be the person abusing the service of the
complaining customer. For example, we need to make sure someone else
hasn't received the fax, then retransmitted it to the complaining
customer. To do that, we put a "trap" on the complaining customer's
telephone line. But we can't do that without the written approval of
the recipient.

Once the sending customer has been identified we can advise him or her
and law enforcement authorities that the faxes are not wanted by the
recipient. We also will let the sender know that if they continue to
send faxes to the complaining customer, their telephone service may be
terminated.

Although no customer complaining of unwanted faxes has yet to provide
the necessary authorization, we are following up with customers who
indicated a willingness to authorize a trap in response to {The Capital-
Journal's January 22 editorial.

In addition, we are investigating the December 19 court ruling by
Judge Barbara that may establish grounds for enforcement action under
our tariffs.  If that's the case, it could ultimately lead to
suspension of service.  We are obtaining court records, and will
carefully review those and take any appropriate action.  We are also
exploring procedures that could be implemented to deal with the
problem of harassing faxes.  There are various calling features,
including Call Blocker, that may help.

In short, Southwestern Bell Telephone is committed to taking what we
think is a responsible approach -- one that meets our obligations to
all of our customers. But we need their commitment, too. Without that,
we are limited in our ability to solve their complaints.

We are listening, Topeka -- to both sides of the story.

Melanie S. Fannon, President-Kansas, Southwestern Bell Telephone, Topeka


[all above reprinted with permission of {Topeka Capital-Journal}.]

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

Date: Wed, 01 Feb 1995 13:35:18 EST
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Fundamentals of Telecommunication Networks"


BKFNTLNT.RVW  941128

"Fundamentals of Telecommunication Networks", Saadawi et al, 1994, 0-471-51582-
5, U$69.95
%A   Tarek N. Saadawi
%A   Mostafa H. Ammar
%A   Ahmed El Hakeem
%C   605 Third Avenue, New York, NY   10158-0012
%D   1994
%E   John G. Proakis
%G   0-471-51582-5
%I   John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
%O   U$69.95 800-CALL-WILEY 212-850-6630 Fax: [phone] Fax: [phone]
%P   485
%S   Telecommunications and Signal Processing
%T   "Fundamentals of Telecommunication Networks"

This work is intended as a text for a two-semester course at the
senior or graduate level.  The organization is slightly odd, with
discussions of data link and routing coming before flow control and
access contention, but the content is basically sound.

The material, and particularly the chapter end questions, show a
decided preference for the engineering curriculum.  Those wanting
practical information may wish to pursue other sources.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKFNTLNT.RVW  941128. Permission given
for distribution in TELECOM Digest and associated publications.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

Date: Wed, 1 Feb 95 07:41 EST
From: Hardwire <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI to Launch First Nationwide Sonet/ATM Network


      networkMCI Services
      Jim Collins
      214-918-5569

            MCI TO LAUNCH FIRST NATIONWIDE SONET/ATM NETWORK

         Network Will be First To Combine Advanced Switching and
              Transmission Technologies for Commercial Use


           DALLAS, TX, January 30, 1995 - MCI today announced that in
March of this year it plans to activate the world's first nationwide
"virtual" high-speed commercial telecommunications network, combining
advanced information age technologies known as Synchronous Optical
Network (SONET) And Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM).

    Marking a major milestone in the development of the
information super- highway, the new network will be capable of
combining voice, data and video transmissions together at 155 megabits
(155 million bits of information) per second over MCI's high-speed
backbone network, currently operating at 2.5 gigabits (2.5 billion
bits) per second -- the equivalent of transmitting the entire U.S.
Mail list of names and addresses across the country in less than a
minute.

    "This network is the first-of-its-kind to combine both of
these advanced telecommunications technologies in one seamless
commercial operation nationwide," said John Gerdelman, president of
networkMCI Services.  "SONET and ATM will allow voice, data and video
signals to be transmitted over the same channel simultaneously, and
are vital components of the innovative multimedia applications and
information services that we are developing."

     As communications technologies converge, MCI customers will
continue to have available to them an increasing array of new
services, from advanced telemedicine applications and rapid image
transfers to remote data access and online shopping -- at the touch of
a button.

    Last year, the company introduced networkMCI BUSINESS, the
first software application combining important business tools, such as
electronic mail, fax messaging, document sharing, videoconferencing
and information services, in a single product.  MCI also launched it's
HyperStream ATM service, currently the Fastest on the market, and is
the only carrier offering SMDS.  This now gives MCI the lead in
providing the nation's most complete data services.  Other recent MCI
innovations include internetMCI, a portfolio of services giving customers
easy, high-speed access to the rapidly growing and increasingly popular
Internet.

    MCI continues to invest in the latest telecommunications
technologies, such as SONET and ATM, faster than other long distance
carriers.  Recently, the company added ATM capabilities and plans to
provided SONET to its Developers Lab in Richardson, Texas, bringing
the power and intelligence of these technologies to outside developers
for the first time.  The Lab, which MCI refers to as "the twenty-first
century garage," offers developers the opportunity to test innovative
applications in a live network environment.

    According to Gerdelman, MCI's goal is to create the "network
for the information age," and provide not only access to information
services, but content as well.

        "With SONET you gain certain benefits in terms of reliability
and overall network performance," said Gerdelman.  "ATM gives us the
advanced switching capability for multiple signal transmissions.
Combine the two and you have the foundation of a network that is well
positioned to generate new revenue from these emerging markets."

        MCI plans to boost its transmission speed to 10 gigabits (10
billion bits) per second in early 1996, and is currently introducing
new fiber optic technologies that will allow 40 gigabits (40 billion
bits) per second transmissions in the near future.

        "If you think transmitting the entire U.S. Mail list in one
minute is fast, just wait," said Gerdelman.  "At 40 gigabits we'll be
able to do it in only 4 seconds!"

        MCI, headquartered in Washington, D.C., has expanded 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
revenue of over $13.3 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.  networkMCI Services
is the division responsible for developing MCI's information technology
and operating its global intelligent network.

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

Date: Wed, 1 Feb 95 11:02:18 GMT
From: [e-mail] (John Bell 3313 ADV)
Subject: POCSAG to be Upgraded to APOC


To everyone interested in POCSAG, and new more advanced terrestrial
paging systems for communications in tommorrow's  world:

An overview of APOC, the upgrade to POCSAG, is now available by EMail.
If you are interested, please send a request to me ([e-mail].
philips.nl) stating the reasons for your interest.

This is  a summary  of the  ascii  document,  which  is about
31000 bytes long.

 --------------- Start of Summary ---------------

The need for a new paging protocol is reviewed and the basic
philosophy of the APOC code defined.  The essential characteristics of
APOC confirmed by PCIA in 1993 are greater capacity, battery life and
POCSAG compatibility than other codes (POCSAG, ERMES, FLEX) while
offering superior or at least equal call success performance. A
migration path from POCSAG to High Speed APOC is outlined. The results
of a pager network financial model comparing costs per subscriber is
shown, also supporting the commercial advantages of APOC.

 --------------- End of Summary ---------------

Please distribute this to list servers, bulletin boards etc.  that
should know about this -- or let me know who else should know.


Thanks in advance,

John

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: 7/8ths Heliax Sources Needed
Date: 1 Feb 1995 10:48:45 GMT
Organization: Population Studies & Training Center


I need to find 350' of 7/8ths 50ohm heliax for an RF application I'm
working on. Cheapest I've been able to find is $4.50/ft.  Anyone have
other source suggestions?


MD

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #73
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa03542;
          2 Feb 95 23:30 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20735; Thu, 2 Feb 95 19:33:15 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20729; Thu, 2 Feb 95 19:33:12 CST
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 19:33:12 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #74

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 2 Feb 95 19:33:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 74

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    More Tidbits on AT&T True-Connections (NPA 500) (John Shelton)
    Panasonic Cellular Phone (James L. Wiley)
    Re: Hidden Features of Panasonic Phones (Steve Samler)
    Re: Neighborhood Phone Books (Wm. Randolph Franklin)
    Caller ID Block Fails (Wm. Randolph Franklin)
    Multiple ESN's per NAM (Update) (Chris J. Cartwright)
    503 NPA Split? (Dan McDonald)
    New Area Code For Oregon (Paul Buder)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Alan Shen)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (David Hayes)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (David Sacerdote)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (John Dearing)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Eric Nelson)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Scott Lorditch)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Steve Midgley)
    Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is (Mark Peacock)
    Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is (Greg Monti)
    Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is (Carl Moore)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks including Compuserve and 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 Shelton)
Subject: More Tidbits on AT&T True-Connections (NPA 500)
Date: 1 Feb 1995 19:25:54 GMT
Organization: dukepower


I talked with AT&T yesterday and learned:

More exchanges have been added to their set.  You can now
request numbers from:

  288 346 367 437 442 443 445 446 447 448 449 488
  673 674 675 677 679

My favorite, 500.FOR.EVER, was already taken.

Even though the install and vanity fees are waived during this sign-up
period, if one requests a *change* (better vanity number) they will
impose the $10 install and $25 vanity fees.

AT&T claimed that as of yesterday (31-Jan-95) "All" LECs had agreed to
provide access, so I should be able to use this from anywhere in
continental US.  (I'll be pleased if it gets worked out in three months.)

A friend who has AT&T, but lives in an Alltel neighborhood says AT&T
cannot provide her this service.  Neither AT&T nor Alltel could explain.
Yes, her AT&T calls *are* billed on the local phone bill.

For the deluxe plans which offer sequencing, I'm told you can program
the number of rings to try for each number.  That's very important.

My service will be turned on 15-Feb-95.


John


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Like heck it will be turned on February 15!
AT&T told me mine would be working January 21, then they said January 24.
After that date passed, the due date was January 31 ... you guessed it;
it still is not working as of today, Thursday, February 2 in the evening.
I call them they say call Ameritech; I call Ameritech and am told to call
AT&T. I call the Illinois Commerce Commission; they claim no knowledge of
any 'agreement' reached between AT&T and the telcos. Now for the past
couple days they won't return my calls. Supposedly my number is working
if the caller knows to dial 1-800-CALL-ATT for starters, just like the
cumbersome 700 service, but when I tried it that does not work either.
I did not sign up for this service so my callers could hunt down a pay
phone which allows 800 calls so they can punch in all those extra digits,
even if that part of it did work, which it appears not to. Just now I
called AT&T again about it; this time I got a woman who first said calls
to 1-500 were not going through but 0-500 should be working 'just fine'.
She put me on hold awhile and came back to report she had talked to 'the
specialist' and was told 'everything was working fine' for Ameritech
customers. Silly bunch of people! I told her to cancel my service and
whenever they get their act together to give me a call back and I will
think again if I need the service or not.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (James L. Wiley)
Subject: Panasonic Cellular Phone
Date: 1 Feb 1995 17:02:49 GMT
Organization: Air Force Flight Test Center


I am looking for a owner's manual for a Panasonic Cellular Phone model
EF-6110EA.  Also any modifications anyone knows about for this Phone.

Where is a good place to get accessories -- batteries, cords, etc.


Thanks,

James L. Wiley   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 11:59:01 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Hidden Features on Panasonic Phones


I don't know about the hidden features, but I have one of these that
seems to be able to turn itself off.  The answering machine is left on
in the morning and often is off when I come home.  I suspect that
there is some hidden feature that turns off the phone.  Maybe if you
call and press # or * (thinking it is a voice mail system) it turns
off.

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

From: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)
Subject: Re: Neighborhood Phone Books.  Caller ID block fails.
Date: 02 Feb 1995 02:31:36 GMT
Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)


In article <[e-mail]> on Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:13:54
EST, PAT says:

> ... There are about thirty 'neighborhood' books, with their
> own yellow pages in the back of the book. These are just
> subsets of the larger book, extracted by address groupings
> within a given area of the city, and all published by telco.

NYNEX extracts by exchange, which makes the neighborhood directories
so incomplete as to be useless.  I live in Loudonville, but have phone
482-xxxx since the Loudonville prefix, 456, is full (I guess).  482 is
mostly Albany, and the Loudonville neighborhood directory omits me,
even tho the big white pages give my address as Loudonville, and give
my Loudonville zip code.  I once complained to Nynex about being
omitted, and they said that since my phone was logically in Albany,
I'd have to pay to be included in the Loudonville directory.  Maybe I
could have protested, but life's too short.


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/homepages/wrf

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

From: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)
Subject: Caller ID Block Fails
Date: 02 Feb 1995 02:31:36 GMT
Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)


Nynex just admitted that 500 people who have caller ID block, are, in
fact, having their phone numbers transmitted.  First, they denied that
this was happening, then they said that only one person (a private
detective) was affected, then they 'fessed up.


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/homepages/wrf


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did the report say if they are all on the
same exchange, or how the problem came up and if it has been fixed?   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 11:18:00 EST
From: Chris J. Cartwright <[e-mail]>
Subject: Multiple ESN's per NAM (Update)


I posted a few weeks ago about Cell One in MD (SID-00013) offering
FlexPhone to their customers.  To recap *it is* multiple ESN's per
NAM.  Up to three ESN's can have the same NAM.  The cost is your
regular service for one phone plus $18 for two NAMs, or plus $30 for
three.

The service _seems_ ;) to work as follows; The phones cannot call each
other even if they are in different cells.  Roaming is supposed to be
disabled on all but the phone with the primary ESN.  This is almost
true, when I used the second ESN in roam every other call was blocked
with a message that said you would have to use a credit card or third
party billing to place a call.  If I pressed send again (same number
dialed) the call would go through.  I'm not sure of this is a function
of the cell system you are roaming in or if the information from your
home system is getting confused.

If calls are placed in the same cell at the same time by both phones
one of the phones will get a fast busy.  No calls can be made from the
other phone while the first is in a call.  CellONE says that calls can
be made from seperate cells at the same time but reccomends against it
since they aren't sure what will happen if both phones wander into the
same cell at the same time (to be fair this came from a salesman since
the tech folks seem to be hidden away fairly well).  I haven't had a
chance to check this one out but as soon as I figure out how to be in
two places at once.

I haven't seen a bill for this but I'm wondering if I should argue the
fact since my secondary *can't* roam those calls shouldn't be
billable.  If anyone has questions I'd be happy to test things out if
you can resonably describe your test case.  E-mail is preferred and
will get a faster response.


Chris Cartwright, Technical Engineer
Voice 301.295.0809
Mail  [e-mail]
C-serve 71614,2441


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The tech people are always hidden away where
no one can reach them conveniently; not without being perfectly obnoxious
and very pushy with the front line people. As for 'being two places at one
time' you don't have to be. Wherever you are, just take both (all) of your
cell phones and turn them on. Have them all sitting there then from a
separate line dial the cellphone number. Now, you will have both phones
in the same cell at one time obviously, and can test the results for your-
self. Also, use the cell phones to dial out two or more calls at the same
time. Since they are all with you, they'll all be in the same cell, right?
Please report the results here.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan McDonald)
Subject: 503 NPA Split Planned?
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 10:38:16 PDT
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


I've heard rumors of a split in the 503 area code (Oregon).  Can
anyone confirm or deny these rumors?

Daniel J. McDonald                 home: [e-mail]
Telecom Designer                   work: [e-mail]
Industrial Design Corporation      pots: 1.503.653.6919


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A recent newspaper article seems to
indicate this is true. See the next article in this issue.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Buder)
Subject: New Area Code For Oregon
Date: 02 Feb 1995 09:41:20 -0800
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


According to the {Oregonian}, Portland's daily newspaper, Oregon will
be moving from one area code to two in 1996.  The PUC is soliciting
comments from the telephone companies as to whether it should be a
geographical split or whether simply new lines will end up in the new
area code (blechh!).  The article says US West, the Baby Bell here,
hasn't responded yet.


[e-mail]  Not affiliated with teleport.

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

From: Alan Shen <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 00:26:40 -0800
Organization: University of Washington


On Wed, 25 Jan 1995, Victor Hu wrote:

> 1.  Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or
> 14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression?

28,800 bps uncompressed. RAW SPEED.

> 2.  What kinds of host supports 28.8K?  I only connect up to my
> university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max.

It's not dependent on the host, but if the other modem supports that
speed. To connect at 28.8Kbps, the other modem must support it too.
Here at our university's computer, we can only connect at 14.4, but
supposedly, they are installing 28.8 V.34's by this summer.

> 3.  What is the speed of fax machines?

99% of the stand-alone fax machines out there (the non-fax/modems)
only support speeds of up to 9600bps. And actually, that's plenty of
power for Group III. Others, very few though, can go up to 14,400bps
on the standard V.17. Most fax-modems support that speed.

> My impression of my new modem:

> 1.  The Supra has a nice display (external version for the PC) that
> shows the mode of transmission.

I have a PM14400FXSA with a 12-character LCD. Sure beats LEDs doesn't it!

> 2.  However, I found that it required a different initialization string
> than that suggested as default for modems that are Hayes compatible.

Some modems work okay with just a standard init string and a simple
ATZ.  I finally figured out one that works with 300bps - 14,400bps. Do
a little tweaking and some experimenting. You'll figure one out too soon!

If you have any more question, feel free to e-mail me.


([e-mail])   Daniel Kao

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

From: [e-mail] (David Hayes)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: 02 Feb 1995 17:41:21 GMT
Organization: On-Ramp; Individual Internet Connections


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

> 1.  Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or
> 14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression?

The modem is capable of sending 28.8k without compression. On top of
this, the standard V.42bis compression scheme can achieve up to 4:1
compression, so you could theoretically get up to 115k bits/second. I
observe 2:1 to be more common, though, so expect about the same
throughput as an uncompressed 56kbps leased line.

> 2.  What kinds of host supports 28.8K?  I only connect up to my
> university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max.

Anything that's got a fast async serial port. Your university's
computer probably could handle it, but the modems they use limit you
to 9.6 (standard V.32). This is a common situation.

To test your modem, try some of the bulletin board systems in your
area. Many of them upgrade more quickly than large university sites,
because they have fewer modems to upgrade. Note that you can even try
BBS's on which you do not have a login. All you need to see is that
your modem will connect.

>3.  What is the speed of fax machines?

CCITT (now renamed ITU.T) standard Group III fax machines run at 9600
bps.


David Hayes    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David Sacerdote)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 18:10:49 GMT


If you purchased a modem which supports the v.34 standard AND are
using a computer to modem communications speed which is faster than
28800bps it will actually travel across the wire at 28800bps, assuming
no line noise, no error correction, and no compression.  I am also
assuming that you are connecting to another modem which supports the
V.34 standard, or whatever proprietary standard your modem supports.


David Sacerdote

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

From: [e-mail] (John Dearing)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: 02 Feb 1995 05:25:43 GMT
Organization: Netaxs Internet BBS and Shell Accounts


Victor Hu ([e-mail]) wrote:

> 1.  Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or
> 14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression?

The modem-to-modem (across the wire) communications rate will be up to
28.8Kbps assuming a clean connection.

> 2.  What kinds of host supports 28.8K?  I only connect up to my
> university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max.

Let me get this straight ... you only use the modem to connect to the
University computer system which only has 9600bps modems. Then why buy
a 28.8Kbps modem if the other end can't do 28.8Kbps?? Even a 14.4Kbps
modem would have been overkill.

A 28.8Kbps modem will only connect at 28.8Kbps with another 28.8Kbps
modem. Unless/until the University decides to upgrade their modems,
you won't see any improvement.

: 3.  What is the speed of fax machines?

Almost all real fax machines are 9600 bps. There are a few fax
machines that support fax at 14.4. If you connect to another fax modem
that also supports 14.4K then both faxmodems will negotiate a higher
speed. Expect most of your faxes to go through at 9600 bps.


John Dearing    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Nelson)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 20:31:10 MST
Organization: Primenet


A 28.8 kbps will transmit 28.8 kbps if the line can support the
modulation used to get that 28.8k rate.  Data compression can be used
on uncompressed files to increase the throughput, but this has little
value when transferring compressed files.  Additionally, the other end
must have a 28.8k capable modem.

My internet provider does have 28.8k connection.

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Lorditch)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: 02 Feb 1995 14:08:03 -0500
Organization: TZ-Link, a public-access online community in Nyack, NY.


You should set your PC's serial port to at least 56K when using a 28.8
modem to get the effect of compression as well. I often set mine to
115 kbps.

> 2.  What kinds of host supports 28.8K?  I only connect up to my
> university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max.

Many Internet service providers offer SLIP and PPP service using 28.8
modems attached to their terminal servers.

Every modem manufacturer uses a slightly different superset of the
"standard" Hayes command set.


Scott Lorditch   Senior Network Architect
Pepsi Cola North America   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Midgley)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 20:09:02 GMT


With sheepish apologies to the moderator and readers, I amend my
previous post. I must have sleeping sitting down :-)

V.32 is not the protocol spec for 14.4 modems. It's V.42.  Apologies,
apologies.


Steve Midgley    Tailored Solutions

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

Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 09:03:50 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is


Greg Monti writes:

> The story then says, cryptically, that the plan also would "create
> 'permissive and mandatory dialing arrangements' that wouldn't
> jeopardize new competitors".  And that the City of Chicago "opposed
> the stipulation on ground that eleven-digit rather than seven-digit
> dialing requirement was 'onerous' and might predetermine similar fate
> for 312 area code where customers are used to seven-digit intraLATA
> calls."

Greg's adjective "cryptically" is very apt.  What the story does not
make clear is that, under the ICC proposal, the combined 708/630 NPA
area would go to *mandatory* 11-digit dialing in September 1996.  This
is because the 630 code would overlay the 708 geographic area for both
landline and wireless service.  The very real example is: You move to
a new house and request service; your phone number is 630-NXX-XXXX
while your neighbor's number is 708-NXX-XXXX.

The city of Chicago is opposed because they believe this ruling will
set a precedent for when the 312 NPA again runs low on numbers.

By the way, this is not a done deal.  The proposed plan is the
recommendation of the ICC case worker.  The full ICC will consider the
recommendation in February.  Given the noise being raised over
mandatory 11-digit dialing, there may be some significant changes in
the future.


Mark Peacock
Deloitte & Touche Management Consulting
Detroit, Michigan


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Area 312 Chicago is quite unlikely to run
low on numbers anytime soon. So many large businesses and industries -- the
type of companies which would use large blocks of numbers or even entire
prefixes for their centrex, etc -- have moved out of town, there are lots
of spare numbers. 708 is a different matter. It is quite crowded.   PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 9:57:21 EST
From: Greg Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is


Thanks to David W. Tamkin <[e-mail]>, we have a better
interpretation of one of the proposed Chicagoland dialing plans.

A proposal on the table is for mandatory eleven-digit dialing within
one's own area code as of the autumn of 1996.  This is to please the
Gods of Dialing Parity.  Seven digit dialing *between* NPAs was *not*
proposed.


Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division
National Public Radio          Phone:    [phone]
635 Massachusetts Av NW        Fax:      [phone]
Washington, DC  20001-3753     Internet: [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 02 Feb 95 16:49:45 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is


630, as you have heard, is to be used for overlay of area codes 312
and 708.  But I have also seen 630 in use as a prefix in downtown
Chicago.  Here is one such use: Bach's Bookstore, 209 N. Wabash,
Chicago, IL 60601, tel. [phone].

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #74
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04202;
          3 Feb 95 0:33 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21785; Thu, 2 Feb 95 20:16:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA21777; Thu, 2 Feb 95 20:16:03 CST
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 20:16:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #75

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 2 Feb 95 20:16:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 75

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Digital Announces Unix Intelligent Delivery Platform (Philippe Ravix)
    Stand-Alone Fax Box for PC (Yongtao Chen)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Wes Leatherock)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Tad Cook)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Scott Montague)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Terrence McArdle)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (John Levine)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Mike Boyd)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Patton M. Turner)

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, 2 Feb 95 10:21:17 PST
From: Philippe RAVIX <[e-mail]>
Subject: Digital Announces Unix Intelligent Delivery Platform


    DIGITAL ANNOUNCES UNIX INTELLINGENT NETWORK
        SERVICES DELIVERY PLATFORM

February 1, 1995, NEW ORLEANS:

Digital Equipment Corporation today announced a UNIX version of it's
powerful and flexible Intelligent Network Services Delivery platform.

This UNIX platform is the latest addition to Digital's IN Product
Portfolio; a full array of Intelligent Network products which are
running today in live Telecom wireline and wireless networks
world-wide.  Building on proven experience in delivering IN revenue
producing new solutions, Digital has added leadership UNIX and
AlphaGeneration products to produce an unbeatable new IN platform.

Digital also announced several new features that will be available on
both the new UNIX and existing OpenVMS versions of the IN Services
Delivery Platform. Of particular interest to Wireless Network
Operators attending CTIA are:

    * TCAP ITU-T White Book compliance for the support of wireless
      services implementing MAP Phase 2.

    * Support of multiple standards (example ANSI and ITU-T)
      within the same platform enabling creation of services
      requiring IS41-GSM gateways.

In addition, Digital announced price reductions of up to 35% for both
the OpenVMS and UNIX versions.  This includes the entry level platform
which is used for service development or provision of test market or
specialized services.  This entry level platform is now the lowest
priced on the market.

Digital's IN Services Delivery Platforms are based on two key
elements: the AlphaGeneration family of processors -- the fastest in
the world -- plus DECss7, Digital's implementation of world-wide
Signalling System Number 7 protocol standards.  DECss7 is a unique
distributed implementation which provides unsurpassed levels of
availability and scalability.  Digital's UNIX is the first UNIX to
integrate all of the UNIX standards including UNIX System V.

The IN Services Delivery Platform is used today as the foundation for
implementing a large variety of IN systems such as Service Control
Points (SCPs), Intelligent Peripherals (IPs), Mobile Services
Platforms providing HLR, VLR, AUC, EIR, and SMSC services plus
gateways providing inter-standard connectivity services.

The new UNIX version of Digital's IN Services Delivery Platform
provides the same proven functionality as the OpenVMS version
including:

    o NON-STOP AVAILABILITY:

        The IN Services Delivery Platform provides
          software fault tolerance plus the ability to implement
        configuration upgrades without service interuption.
        The platform has passed the strictest availability tests
        in the telecom industry performed by some of the most
        discriminating Network Operators in the world.

    o FULL RANGE OF CONFIGURATIONS:

        A unique client-server based distributed architecture allows
        a choice of configurations to match all levels of performance
        and availability requirements. The range is from an entry
        level platform (to be used in both a lab environment for
        development purposes or a live network environment for
        deployment of pilot or highly specialized services) through
        to fully distributed, high performance, high availability
        configurations.  Applications running on an entry level
        platform are transparently upgradable to a distributed
        IN Services Delivery Platform.

    o POWERFUL PERFORMANCE AND SCALABILITY:

        Digital's IN Services Delivery Platform can handle from two
        to hundreds of SS7 links and thousands of SS7 messages per
        second. Non-stop addition and removal of machines to the
        distributed platform allows capacity to be added as
        requirements evolve.  With the IN Services Delivery
          Platform's distributed architecture, Network Operators can be
          assured of the smoothest path available to grow the platform
        as the subscriber base and service success grow.

    o COMPLETE CONNECTIVITY:

        The IN Services Delivery Platform is fully SS7 standards
        compliant, including ITU-T, ANSI, and TTC.  In addition,
        many country variants are supported. Different SS7 standards
        can be mixed on the same platform enabling the development
        of inter-standard services and gateways. There is a full
        array of physical connectivity options. For platforms
        deployed as Intelligent Peripherals, ISDN protocols and
        connectivity are supported including ISUP.

    o EFFICIENT SERVICE DEVELOPMENT:

        Applications can be developed in C or C++ languages using
        Digital's leading software development tools.  The IN Services
        Delivery Platform has multiple Applications Programming
        Interfaces at TCAP, SCCP, and MTP levels which can be accessed
        simultaneously; a requirement for a number of new services
        such as GSM Short Message Service Center.

    o MANAGEMENT TAILORED FOR YOUR ENVIRONMENT:

        The IN Services Delivery Platform provides powerful and
        complete management functionality.  The complete platform
        including applications, the configuration, and all of the
        SS7 defined Signalling Point functionality can be managed
        in a consistent way from a tailored management application
        using an object-oriented model.

    o WORLD-CLASS SERVICES AND MISSION CRITICAL SUPPORT:

        Digital has provided IN products and services to the major
        Telecom Network Operators in the world, including full
        round-the-clock telecom network mission critical support
        services for some of the highest service revenue producing
        SCPs in the world.

Digital works with a variety of partners to deliver complete computing
systems tailored to customer needs and is actively building an expanded
global network of value added partners.

Digital's goal is to deliver the highest performance and most
cost-effective platforms for building computer based Intelligent
Network solutions today.  Digital's IN Portfolio enables Software
Providers, Telecom Equipment Manufacturers, and Telecom Network
Operators to produce and implement leading service revenue producing
IN services for today and tomorrow's wireline and wireless networks.

To have more information you can contact:


[e-mail]    Phone : [phone]
[e-mail]    Phone : [phone]


Philippe Ravix                   E-mail: [e-mail]
Digital Equipment Corporation    Phone : [phone]
305 Rockrimmon Blvd., South      Colorado Springs, CO 80919

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

From: [e-mail] (Yongtao Chen)
Subject: Stand-alone Fax Box For PC
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 10:59:53 -0500


I am looking for some kind of "stand-alone fax box" for PC.  The box
should be able to receive and store coming faxes automatically when I
am away from my home, with no need to turn on my computer; and after I
come back, I can turn on my computer and down load the faxes received
from the box to my PC.  Could anybody on net give me some advice about
what machine I should buy, or which company I should contact, or which
magazine I should look for ads?  Any information is very much appreciated.

Please reply to "[e-mail]" or "[e-mail]"


Thanks,

yongtao

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Date: 2 Feb 1995 08:53:50 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway


evan champion <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Recently there has been a lot of talk about having to do ten digit
> dialing to call even local numbers that are in a different phone
> number.

> I have a number of users who are going to be affected by the above
> and am looking for a good explanation for them.  I'm myself am not
> completely sure myself of all the reasons for making the changes to
> out-of-area dialing and would like to get it right the first time :-)

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, it is eleven digit dialing,
> not ten digit if you count the '1' on the front. However, one would
> think that when this becomes universal all over the USA that we could
> in fact get by with ten digits since the '1' would no longer be
> needed; there would be no 'local' calls to distinquish from 'long
> distance'. Since everything that we dial would consist of area code
> plus seven digits, there would be no need for a '1' to indicate that
> 'what follows is an area code' -- everything that follows would be
> area codes!

          In the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, you must dial 10
(not 11 digits) if you are dialing a call to a local number in the
other area code.  (Dallas is in the 214 NPA, Fort Worth in the 817
NPA.)

         One-plus dialing in those exchanges does not indicate that an
area code follows, but that the call is a toll call.  (Of course, now
that an area code is required on all One-Plus dialing, there will be
an area code on all toll calls, but at least in the Dallas-Fort Worth
area the 1+ does not indicate anything but that the call is a toll
call.)

         Note that almost all telephone service in the Dallas-Fort
Worth area is flat rate.  A local call generates no billing whatever
(except for the very few message rate customers).  This is true, I
believe, almost everywhere in the United States except in the
Northeast and in the Chicago area.

         The LECs would dearly love to introduce "usage sensitive
pricing" everywhere, but customers with flat rate service generate such
tremendous protest that even if the commission will consider it, the
state legislature will start considering legislation to make mandatory
message rate charging unlawful in that state.  (The legislature would
probably pass it, too, if the commission itself didn't reject the idea.)

         Complaining and protests about general rate case activity
pale into insignificance compared to the heat generated by proposals to
abandon flat rate pricing.


Wes Leatherock     [e-mail]
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Date: 1 Feb 1995 23:03:27 GMT
Organization: Seanet Online Services, Seattle WA


TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to evan champion ([e-mail]):

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, it is eleven digit dialing, not
> ten digit if you count the '1' on the front. However, one would think that
> when this becomes universal all over the USA that we could in fact get by
> with ten digits since the '1' would no longer be needed; there would be
> no 'local' calls to distinquish from 'long distance'. Since everything that
> we dial would consist of area code plus seven digits, there would be no
> need for a '1' to indicate that 'what follows is an area code' -- everything
> that follows would be area codes!  It would be nice to see the '1' vanish
> under those cirucmstances. Or maybe they will insist on keeping it using
> as their rationale that '1' is also -- by coincidence -- the country code
> for the USA and Canada, and that what we are really dialing is country code,
> area code and seven digit number. As to *why* they are imposing it on calls
> within the same area -- as is supposed to be the case in Chicago beginning
> sometime in 1996 -- I do not know. Various reasons have been given.   PAT]

Chicago is a unique case though.  Chicago will have an overlay area
code, and since someone using a phone within Chicago could possibly
have no idea what area code it is in, this means that all local calls
must dial the area code and number, since phones right next to each
other could be in different NPAs.

In the rest of North America, we are having to dial the area code for
all long distance calls within the area code, so that the system can
handle the new area codes that look like prefixes.


Tad Cook   [e-mail]   Seattle, WA

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Montague)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Date: Wed, 01 Feb 95 15:32:17 GMT
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston


evan champion <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Recently there has been a lot of talk about having to do ten digit
> dialing to call even local numbers that are in a different phone
> number.

Bell Canada chose to have it's Toronto customers dial ten digit LOCAL
calls.  This way, two exchanges can be used within a local calling
area.  Example: If you wanted to dial 1050 CHUM Newsroom in Toronto
(416) from Pickering (905) (a local call) you would dial 416-923-1133.
This would allow the creation of a 923 exchange in Pickering, which
could be used for different customers.  Inversely, to call someone
local in (905), you would dial 10 digits 905-xxx-yyyy to call them
from (416).  This has already been implemented.  The reason: Bell
Canada is concerned that they will run out of exchanges in 416, and
want to keep all 905 open for local calls.  (Or else, 416 would have
to omit certain exchanges that their local calls are made to ... it's
so contrived <g> ... and then when they run out again (which they will)
they'll have to implement the ten digit dialing; let's get it all
over with, they say).  I believe that they now want universal dialing
procedures across area codes for their customers, and subsequently are
implementing this system across area codes that don't necessarily need
it, like the 604-905 boundary.

Always planning for the future, I guess.  BTW, If you Americans want
an example of a world class phone company, look north to Bell Canada.
Great staff, instant repairs, easy access to all services (and tarrifs
:-) ), quickly resolved billing disputes, hardly ever any billing
errors, great business and residential service.  >From the horror
stories in the US, I think some companies could learn alot from Bell
Canada.  (OK, their long distance is a bit more expensive, but it's
worth it.)


Scott

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

From: [e-mail] (Terrence McArdle)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 16:15:21 -0500
Organization: University of Pittsburgh Medical Center


Just for clarification's sake, I assume the phrase "local numbers that
are in a different phone number" means dialing a destination existing
in separate exchange, but the same area code, as the originator?
Calls that cross a LATA boundary currently require eleven digit
dialing, do they not?

And with regard to Pat's note, who is referred to by "they"?
Standards bodies?  Or a general consensus of the major RBOCs?  Or some
other entity?


Thanks,

Terry McArdle         email    [e-mail]
Mgr, Information Systems      work     [phone]
Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 'They' are the people I feel irritated with
at the time!  <g>   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Levine)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 95 07:27:21 GMT


> Local should be charged higher because it is expensive.  You provide
> unlimited free calling for a flat fee instead of charging on a call by
> call basis.  Of course you lose money.

You're making the increasingly unwarranted assumption that local
bandwidth is expensive.  I make lots of umpteen hour long calls
(computer to computer, of course) but since they're within the same
switch, I find it difficult to identify any basis on which this
actually costs the telco more than if I left the phone on the hook.

> But the LEC doesn't get paid for all the incomplete calls, all the
> dial back calls, etc and that costs money.

Sure they do.  FG B and FG D lines are charged for all off-hook time
both incoming and outgoing.  I believe there is in many cases an extra
per-call charge for the info collected and passed by the LEC.

> (Some local companies, especally rural, don't even handle long distance.
> They just pass it off to someone else to do.)

That's right, but they can make a bundle in doing so since they still get a
per-minute charge on originating and terminating LD calls. (Some of my
cousins run a small rural telco in Vermont that passes all of its LD traffic
to NYNEX and AT&T.  Because of their cost structure, they get an incredible
amount for LD calls, something like 10 cents/minute.)


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail]
Primary perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies"

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike_Boyd)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: 2 Feb 1995 13:09:18 -0500
Organization: Concentric Research Corporation


Judith Oppenheimer <[e-mail]> writes:

> David Lewis of AT&T wrote:

>> Is it just me, or do these numbers (which I'll take on faith for
>> now) demonstrate a massive inefficiency and misallocation of costs in
>> the current cost structure of telecommunications?

>> If 95% of traffic is local (I'll define as "intraLATA"), Then 95% of
>> costs (fixed and variable) are due to local traffic.  But the majority
>> (say, 80%) of LEC revenue is from access charges.  Therefore 80% of
>> revenue is paying for 5% of cost, and 20% of revenue is paying for 95%
>> of cost.

>> Does this make sense?

> Local should be charged higher because it is expensive.  You provide
> unlimited free calling for a flat fee instead of charging on a call by
> call basis.  Of course you lose money.  Local access charges are
> profitable, and are on a call by call basis.  LEC's don't want to lose
> that revenue.  With bypass and local exchange competition it could be
> tough.

Sense has little to do with telecom rate making. The current system is
an evolution of an archaic and arbitrary system worked out between the
phone companies (basically the old Bell System, when it was the telecom
world) and regulators (FCC and State PUCs). The first step was to
separate the costs, investments, rate base, etc., between the state
and federal jurisdictions.  The FCC then set interstate rates designed
to recover the costs allocated to interstate servivce, and the state
Public Utitlies Commission set rates to recover "intrastate costs".
Interstate services originally were interstate toll. In the good old
days, regulators and the phone companies kept local rates low by
allocating the costs to toll. Growth in LD competition, bypass, etc.,
made this more and more difficult, and made it necessary to shift costs
to local.

Now, the FCC regulates the access charges LECs charge IXCs to originate
and terminate interstate tolls calls. The FCC has also instituted a
Subscriber line charge (SLC) to recover some of those "interstate costs"
directly from the end users. This is the $3/month on your residential phone
bill.

Intrastate costs were recovered from local service and from intrastate
toll.  In the late 80's, intrastate access charges were added. These
are charges to IXCs for originating or terminating intrastate (interLATA)
toll calls.  Because of the way that the costs are separated jurisdictionally,
and given the subsequent wide discretion of the PUC in setting rates, intra-
state and interstate access charges for a given LEC may vary greatly. For
example, terminating a minute of switched traffic from IXC "A" to end
user "Z" may cost the IXC 3 cents if the call is interstate and 8 cents if
it is an intrastate call.  Given a "revenue requirement" for intrastate
services, the PUCs are faced with the dilemma of juggling rates between
access and local, between residential and business, etc.  Set access
rates too high, the IXCs bypass the network. Set local too high, you don't
get reelected or reappointed. While specific costs are a consideration, rate
making is a highly charged political game.

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

From: [e-mail] (Patton M Turner)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 03:41:08 GMT


[e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn) writes:

> All fees charges for LD termination can normally be found in the
> Feature Group tariffs.  Normally, LD carriers fall under (last I
> heard) Feature Group 'D' tariffs due to their method of termination.
> You can request a copy of these tariffs from each of the RBOC's or
> from the PUC in any State.

Feature Group D accounts for at least 99% of interLATA calls, but FGB
trunks can still be found.

> BTW, the method of charges is entirely different for LD service in the
> cellular industry.  With cellular, it is not unusual for local cellular
> carriers (RBOC's or otherwise) to provide FREE or flat rate termination
> charges to LD carriers.

Why not, if they extend the T1s to your MTSO?  It's that many less
erlangs going out on the other (paid) trunks.  I assume the B carriers
probally must provide this for free or are limited to some max rate by
Da Judge (that's Greene, not Ito :-))


Patton Turner  KB4GRZ  [e-mail]  FAA Telecommunications

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #75
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa12167;
          3 Feb 95 14:05 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04134; Fri, 3 Feb 95 09:03:21 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04124; Fri, 3 Feb 95 09:03:19 CST
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 09:03:19 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #76

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 3 Feb 95 09:03:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 76

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Bruce Albrecht)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Rob Boudrie)
    Re: GSM SIM Implementation ([e-mail])
    Re: U.S. 800 Subscribers and Freephone Issue (Linc Madison)
    Re: Technical Help Needed With Pending Litigation (Mark Fraser)
    Re: Cell Phone Programming - Follow-Up (Glenn Shirley)
    Re: Automatic Page Application Off of NT-SL1? (Rob Lockhart)
    Re: GSM SIM Implementation (David Mclauchlan)
    Re: CID Question (Mike Pollock)
    Re: Long Distance Caller ID/Cellphones? (Daniel Cayouette)
    Re: Old Phone Number Format Question (Michael Dillon)
    Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers (Kimmo Ketolainen)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Carl Moore)
    Reminder: Send in Those Biographical Sketches (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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 03 Feb 95 00:00:23 CST
From: [e-mail] (Bruce Albrecht)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?


Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 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.

> [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.

I'm not condoning the actions of cellular phone time thieves, they are
exactly that.  However, the phone companies have been known to grossly
inflate the value of things stolen from them (for example, placing the
value of documents in the tens of thousands of dollars, when they could
be ordered from the appropriate departments for less than $100).

My question is that if they are truly losing hundreds of millions of
dollars a year to fraud, why aren't they switching to known technologies
(e.g., GSM based) which have per call authentication using a random
number query with an encrypted key response, when such systems have
been available for several years in other parts of the world?  If they
really are losing $300 million or more a year, it must be cheaper to
replace every single cellular phone with a more secure system than to
let these losses continue to escalate.

If most of this amount is funny money, "lost profits" that they never
really expected to generate, and use of excess capacity, then are the
phone companies crying wolf?  Are we currently in the position where
the phone companies are like the suburban/rural household that never
locks their doors "because crime never used to be a problem", and now
screams for more police because they keep getting burglarized, but
still never lock their doors?

My main concern over cellular telephone fraud is that because it is
partly due to decisions made by the phone companies, and that it's
probably been exaggerated, that our government is either going to
respond with excessive legislative and/or regulatory reaction to a
technical problem, or with no action at all.  Either way, it sends the
wrong message.


Bruce Albrecht ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Boudrie)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: 3 Feb 1995 06:36:13 GMT
Organization: Center For High Perf. Computing of WPI; Marlboro Ma


> sci.chemistry, comp.os.  linux.announce, or even alt.angst!  [Except
> of course, when an AT&T PR man told the media that people from the
> "network" (meaning comp.dcom.telecom) who were communicating and
> complaining about the USA Today 800/900 incident were people who were
> interested in "getting something for nothing".  (Remember that Pat?)]

I remember this very well.  I originally reported the AT&T misbilling
to Adam Gaffin, {Middlesex News} (Framingham, MA) technology reporter.
Adam did a good job of getting his facts straight (and even quoted me
accurately), though AT&T spokescritter Rick Brayall obviously does not
understand what the Internet/Usenet is.  He actually refered to Usenet
as a "clandestine network". (or some similar term).  Adam Gaffin correctly
mentioned that AT&T's Bell Labs were connected to the network.

Most amusing was Brayall's assertion that people should not have called
that number since it was never listed or advertised.


rob boudrie    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder where Adam has been lately? We
used to get some very nice articles from here here once in awhile, but
not for a long time now.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tuomo)
Subject: Re: GSM SIM Implementation
Date: 03 Feb 1995 00:56:44 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Tuomo)


> 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? :-)

There is a classical answer to this -- is the distance between your ear
and mouth shorter tha that of a credit card?  How about the size of
your shirt pocket, inner pocket of a sport jacket /suit?

If you look at how the phones have evolved (ove five years ) they are
getting flatter and lighter but not necessarily smaller in diameter,
so that you can still hold one to your face and talk (with the exception
of a few of course ).


Tuomo

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

From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: U.S. 800 Subscribers and Freephone Issue
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 22:40:23 GMT


Judith Oppenheimer ([e-mail]) wrote:

> As Bob discusses, the US number 1-800-FLOWERS would also be available
> internationally (assuming the company was willing to pay for incoming
> international calls) as +800-1-FLOWERS, and a hypothetical Irish
> number 1-800-FLOWERS could be dialed internationally as +800-353-FLOWERS.
> Since each country code would have its own domain within the overall
> +800 number space, no collisions would be possible.

> Of course, even this simple scheme could still run into the number
> scarcity problem, since it presumes only a single free-phone area code
> for each country. So perhaps the only fool-proof plan is to just use
> +800-<country-code> as a prefix to the entire national toll free
> number, area code and all.

> Under this method, the US and Irish examples above would become +800 1
> 800 FLOWERS and [phone] FLOWERS, respectively.

There is also the problem that freephone numbers in Ireland are not in
"area code" 800, they are dialed with the "special access code" 1800.
That's 1800, *not* 1-800.  The difference is that a hypothetical 800
area code would be dialed as (0800).  Of course, Ireland won't ever
put into service an area code 800; my point is that the 1800 access
code is not treated the same as an area code.  In the US, '800' is
treated the same as an area code.  In Ireland, 1800 is a special code
like 153 for directory inquiries or 112 for emergencies.  At any rate,
that's what Telecom Eireann will tell you.

(I'm not sure if 153 is the correct number or if 112 is in service yet.)

My thoughts on the more general subject:

(1) +800 XXX XXXX is too absurd to even contemplate.  A seven-digit
numberspace is far too small.  Even eight digits is questionable.

(2) With an eight- or nine-digit number, numbering spaces (not
necessarily transparently related to the country code) could be
reserved for existing subscribers.  This seems a desirable option.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark Fraser)
Subject: Re: Technical Help Needed With Pending Litigation
Date: 03 Feb 1995 05:37:12 GMT
Organization: Wimsey Information Services


I can't provide evidence or anything concrete, but was given reason to
believe that Northern Telecom's switches may be vulnerable via the
Signaling System 7 path.  Rumor had it that the SS7 implementation was
partly responsible for the massively expensive software rewrite that
was begun a couple of years ago; ISDN has been curiously delayed in NT
territory; support of some "user" data packet functions over the "D"
channel were/are absent apparently, and there seemed to be quite a lot
of smoke generated whenever questions on these topics were raised.  On
SS7, calls from here [Vancouver] to Ottawa curiously generated
ringback and answers, even, within hundreds of milliseconds of dialing
the last digit [well, seconds for an answer] during the period when
SS7 was *NOT* going to be introduced for "a long time".  Tweren't MF
signaling that got THOSE fast results ... I'd be inclined to follow
that route.


Mark

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

From: [e-mail] (UL ENG)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Programming - Follow-Up
Date: 03 Feb 1995 02:11:34 +1100
Organization: Stanilite Electronics Pty. Ltd. Sydney, Australia


[e-mail] (Alex McPhail) writes:

> 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.

As I work with the air interface side of cellular systems I have
programming information about numerous different makes of phones.
These have always been aquired when new phones have been given to
myself and the other engineers here for testing or to take to foreign
countries with our systems.

As far as I know there has never been any non-disclosure type
agreements signed or even mentioned for any of these (but I'll have to
check the data sheets to check there's not something there).  While I
have no intention of giving anyone this information is there anyone
out there who know what the legal situation is?  Is non-disclosure
inherent in the information?  Should they (the cellular phone companies)
have got me to sign an agreement? Have the techies at the local service
providers broken the law giving me such information? Or is this information
just freely available to everyone?


Thanks in advance,

Glenn


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, its not quite *freely* given. You
can purchase technical literature on most cellular phones which will
tell you everything. For example, Radio Shack Technical Support in
Texas has manuals on all the phones they sell which they will be happy
to part with for fifteen dollars or so; have your major credit card
ready when the operators who are standing by take your call. Motorola
has the same kind of technical stuff available for purchase.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (RLockhart)
Subject: Re: Automatic Page Application Off of NT-SL1?
Date: 02 Feb 1995 23:21:55 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (RLockhart)


Ken Stone <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I have an application where I need to generate a numeric page when a
> phone number is dialed.  We have an emergency number here on site that
> when called rings a series of "red phones" around the site at key
> people's desks.  What I would also like to do is generate a page to
> these same people when the emergency number is dialed.

If this is truly an emergency situation requiring a page, then you'd
probably be better off sending an alpha page.  There is no standard or
relatively reliable method of sending a numeric page by computer.  At
least using the alpha page entry protocol, you'll know you got the
message *to* the paging system.  Using DTMF to blind-dial a numeric
page, relying only on delays to get the message into the terminal,
won't give you any positive handshake.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (david mclauchlan)
Subject: Re: GSM SIM Implementation
Date: 03 Feb 1995 11:33:55 +1030
Organization: ADAM Pty Ltd


I'm not so sure guys. When I subscribed to Optus Digital here in
Australia (GSM) and received my SIM card, I was given the credit card
sized part left over from when they punched out the actual SIM chip. I
have a Nokia phone which uses the Micro-SIM, but if I wanted to use
say the Motorola 7200 Gold which uses the credit card sized SIM, I can
replace the Micro-SIM in the credit card sized holder with no problem.
Plenty do that here I believe.


Fidonet: 3:800/805    CompuServe:100236,420
David McLauchlan   Internet: [e-mail]
[e-mail] (preferred)

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Pollock)
Subject: Re: CID Question
Date: 02 Feb 1995 18:28:41 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Dave Levenson ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Stan Schwartz ([e-mail]) writes:

>> I have recently begun using TotalTel as a secondary LD carrier (by
>> signing up for secondary service and a calling card).

>> 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.

> This is just a guess on my part, but this sounds very similar to the
> service we get using Cable & Wireless.  Could it be, perhaps, that C&W
> and TotalTel are both reselling WillTell service?  WillTell is the
> company most often described in this digest as providing Inter-LATA
> delivery of ANI via CID, or something like that.

TotalTel USA maintains their own network; they are not a reseller.

On both inbound 800 and outbound direct dial service, TotalTel takes
ANI info and translates it to CID, so if you call someone over
TotalTel, even if your area is not CID-capable, your ANI info will be
captured and translated and will show up on the callee's CID box.


Mike

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

From: daniel cayouette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Long Distance Caller ID/Cellphones?
Organization: BNR Ltd., Ottawa
Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 17:03:57 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Don
Skidmore) writes:

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

>> 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?

> If not, a lot of us are going to be out of luck.  I am counting on the
> new rule to improve my experience re your next question -- hope it's
> not in vain.

The DMS-100 has had SS7 capability since the 1985-87 time-frame
through the MSB7 and now through the LPP peripherals.

>> Can anyone address how the new rules affect cell-phone calls?  All
>> cellphone calls report "out of area" around here.  Presumably this is
>> because the cellphone customer has to pay air charges for all calls.
>> Will they have to pass CID info under the new rules?

Refer to the 'Notice of Proposed Rule Making' that discusses Wireless
and PBX E911 in http:

//fcc.gov:70/0/Daily_Business/1994111/ntcc4002.txt - CC-docket No. 94-102.

Industry comments are scheduled for Feb 8 '95.  To paraphrase a bit,
'... there currently is no uniform means for ensuring that this
information [CID and location info from wireless terminals] reaches
emergency services personnel.' The FCC has set some basic guidelines
and is asking the industry to come up with such a standard to meet
these guidelines.


Daniel Cayouette       Ottawa, Ontario   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Dillon)
Subject: Re: Old Phone Number Format Question
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 1995 00:10:44 -0500
Organization: Okanagan Internet Junction, Vernon B.C., Canada


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

> Quoting Andrew C. Green <[e-mail]>

>> The following question appeared recently in the Old Time Radio
>> Digest mailing list, and seems tailor-made for an answer from this
>> forum.

>> From: "Richard M. Weil" <[e-mail]>

>> The number for the store in Rockford was curiously 8-22-47.  I'm
>> too young to know anything about 5 digit phone numbers.  Is that
>> how it was back then in small cities?

Too young, eh?

In the early 1970's I lived near Moonstone, Ontario in Canada. At the
time we got phone service from the Moonstone Telephone Company which
was bought by Bell in 1972 I believe. Before Bell came in, our number
was 33-W-21. The way it was explained to me was that 33 was our line
number, i.e. the 33rd wire coming into the exchange. Each line had two
sides to it, the J side and the W side (ADSL?) and our ring was 21,
i.e. two longs and a short. I remember visting the switchboard with my
mother, who was a friend of the night operator and the plugboard was
wood, with large black plugs just like those seen in old photographs.


Michael Dillon                                    Voice: [phone]
Network Operations                                  Fax: [phone]
Okanagan Internet Junction                     Internet: [e-mail]
http://www.junction.net  -  The Okanagan's 1st full-service Internet provider

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

From: [e-mail] (Kimmo Ketolainen)
Subject: Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers
Organization: Turun yliopisto - University of Turku, Turku, Finland
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 1995 16:54:00 GMT


A related note: the Finnish GSM network operator Radiolinja is giving
away four and five digit phone numbers for private cellphones on their
network. The full format, thus is 950 xxxx or 950 xx xxx (what a waste
of numbering space?). To acquire a number of this lenght one has to be
a shareholder of the company. One share costs 5000 FIM, about 900 USD.


Kimmo Ketolainen University of Turku            home [phone]
Yo-kyl=E4 84 A 10  [e-mail]      shoe [phone]
FIN-20540 Turku  http://www.utu.fi/finland.html work [phone]

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

Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 4:00:19 GMT
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing


Wes Leatherock <[e-mail]> writes:

> One-plus dialing in those exchanges does not indicate that an
> area code follows, but that the call is a toll call.  (Of course, now
> that an area code is required on all One-Plus dialing, there will be

Contradictory!  Leading 1 DOES mean area code follows.  On another note:
Maryland and the Washington DC area also have the ten-digit-for-local-to-
different-area-code scheme (you discussed Dallas/Fort Worth, and another
message discussed the 416/905 border near Toronto).

[e-mail] (Tad Cook) writes:

> In the rest of North America, we are having to dial the area code for
> all long distance calls within the area code, so that the system can
> handle the new area codes that look like prefixes.

With the leading 1 before area code.  But some states (California,
Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, and at least optionally in New
Hampshire) the published instructions say to dial just the seven digit
number for long distance within area code.  What had to go away was 1
+ seven digits.  (There are some non-Bell points in Pa. that are
using the 1 + NPA + 7D for toll-within-NPA calls.)

[e-mail] (Scott Montague) writes:

> implementing this system across area codes that don't necessarily need
> it, like the 604-905 boundary.

What 604/905 boundary?  604 is British Columbia.  Did you mean 905/705
and/or 705/807?

By the way, I wrote of the ten-digit scheme (see above) for some local
calls originating in Maryland and going to other area codes.  But other
local calls from Maryland (to Pa., Del., W.Va. and to one exchange in
eastern-shore Va.) still are just seven digits.  The ten-digit scheme was
implemented in the DC area to relieve a prefix shortage there, and
replaced the seven-digit scheme; and you have that ten-digit scheme near
Toronto for similar reason.

[e-mail] (Terrence McArdle) writes:

> Just for clarification's sake, I assume the phrase "local numbers that
> are in a different phone number" means dialing a destination existing
> in separate exchange, but the same area code, as the originator?
> Calls that cross a LATA boundary currently require eleven digit
> dialing, do they not?

I think you meant "local number in a different area code".  LATA boundaries
don't always follow area code boundaries.  I think 609 in New Jersey is
split between two LATAS, with long distance within 609 being just seven
digits.

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

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Reminder: Send in Those Biographical Sketches
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 08:30:00 CST


This is just a reminder to all that the Telecom Archives now has a
section called 'profiles' where reader/participants who have chosen
to do so have a short biographical sketch of themselves on file for
other *participating* readers to see.

The way it works is this:  You send the two or three paragraph sketch
of yourself to '[e-mail]'. This can be something like
who you are, your educational and professional background, your age
and personal interests, etc.  It gets installed in the profiles section
of the Archives and you in turn get the needed password to access that
directory and read about the other telecom people who have submitted
the same.

The profiles directory is *NOT* accessible using FTP or other services.
It can *only* be accessed using the Telecom Archives Email Information
Service, and then only by supplying the correct password within the
text of your email. In return, you get the desired profiles of other
participants sent back to you by the email server. This is designed to
protect the privacy of all who wish to participate. You must provide
data about yourself in order to read the data of others.

This is intended as a 'human resources' sort of thing; a way for people
in the telecommunications industry to get in touch with others with
desired job-related skills. It is also intended for Digest readers to
get aquainted with others who write in the Digest from day to day.

I install these profiles as quickly as possible when they are received
and by return mail you get a reply from me when your profile is in
place along with instructions on how to access the other profiles. Quite
a few readers have sent these in; how about you?


PAT

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #76
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa18722;
          3 Feb 95 21:20 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20407; Fri, 3 Feb 95 16:46:16 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA20401; Fri, 3 Feb 95 16:46:13 CST
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 16:46:13 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #77

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 3 Feb 95 16:46:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 77

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Online with Procomm Plus for Windows 2" by Wolfe (Rob Slade)
    MCI Strikes Again (Mike Jenkins)
    NIST Workshop on Synchronization in Telecom (Marc A. Weiss)
    MCI Gave me a Deal (Glen Ecklund)
    France Telecom as a Real Caller ID Provider (JeanBernard Condat)
    Re: Adoption of New Technologies (J.P. Wollersheim)
    Adoption of Technology Products ([e-mail])
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Evan Champion)
    Facsimile Protocol Analyzer Demo Program Available On-Line (Mike Rehmus)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (rta)
    Re: Stand-alone Fax Box For PC (Kyle Cordes)
    Re: Old Phone Number Format Question (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: Fri, 03 Feb 1995 13:48:42 EST
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Online with Procomm Plus for Windows 2" by Wolfe


BKOPPL2W.RVW   941212

"Online with PROCOMM PLUS for Windows 2", Wolfe, 1995, 0-471-10612-7, U$22.95
%A   David Wolfe [e-mail]
%C   605 Third Avenue, New York, NY   10158-0012
%D   1995
%G   0-471-10612-7
%I   John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
%O   U$22.95 800-CALL-WILEY 212-850-6630 Fax: [phone] Fax: [phone]
%P   370
%T   "Online with PROCOMM PLUS for Windows 2"

If you find the documentation for Procomm Plus for Windows 2 to be
difficult, this may present an alternative.  Wolfe's material is
technically sound, but the utility is sometimes questionable.  Chapter
three, "Telecommunications Principles", is correct but disjointed.
Chapter nine, on writing Procomm scripts, gives much detail on the
script editor but nothing on the "Aspect" script language, itself.

Quite acceptable replacement documentation if you don't need the
script language.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKOPPL2W.RVW   941212. Permission
granted for distribution in TELECOM Digest and associated publications.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Jenkins)
Subject: MCI Strikes Again
Date: 3 Feb 1995 20:46:45 GMT
Organization: Washington University School of Medicine


The moral of the story is DON'T MOVE.

Last April, we moved from St. Charles, Missouri to Hillsboro,
Missouri.  Not far, only 65 miles.  I had contacted SouthWestern Bell
to get a new number, a local number.  No problem.  Our long distance
carrier for the previous three years was Telcom*USA.  I had explained
that I wanted this to remain as it was.

In Hillsboro, we got our first bill.  Along with a bill from MCI for
long distance calls.  We had NEVER contracted with MCI.  Our LD
company was bought by MCI, but bills us separately.  First I called
SouthWestern Bell, then MCI, then SWB, ...  Turns out the previous
"owner" of the phone number had used MCI, but had neglected to stop
the service when she moved.

Six months and 30 phone calls later, I contacted the PSC.  With that
kind of help, it appeared to be straightened out ... until last month.
With the SWB bill came another MCI bill -- in a chopped-up version of
my wife's name (the original name we had the old number under!).

I called MCI.  "No problem, we'll fix it right away."

I did tell them that if I got another bill from them, I'd call the PSC
and, probably, the State's Consumer Affairs Division for an in-depth
investigation.  Which I will.  Eight months of listening to two companies
declare "It's not my fault.  Call the <other> company."

What happened?

1) Southwestern Bell dropped the ball in not closing the previous user's
   accounts when the number was closed.  They did not inform the LD
   carrier.

2) Southwestern Bell didn't check the billing statement to notice TWO
   different names on the statement.

3) MCI missed the boat.  When I called, they seemed to think nothing
   of the fact that the long-distance service was not in my name.

4) Telecom*USA, when informed of the whole proceedings, declared that I
   had a "$5 minimum usage" charge on my acount.  When in reality, I didn't.

5) Southwestern Bell AND MCI don't compare notes when user's start
   complaining about mis-billing.  Only when state agencies get in the
   act, do they begin to resolve the problem.

Is it over?  I don't believe it will end until the PSC gets involved again.

This is a time that makes me wish there were two local companies.  That way
the competition would force them to be as caring of their users as they are
about their money.

On the other hand, I believe that Murphy was an optimist.


Michael W. Jenkins                             Computing Support Services
Dept of Internal Medicine             Washington Univ. School of Medicine
Old Childrens Annex, Room 621                         St. Louis, MO 63110
314/362-8238

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

Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 10:04:36 MST
From: [e-mail] (Marc A. Weiss)
Subject: NIST Workshop on Synchronization in Telecom


            NIST TIME AND FREQUENCY DIVISION WORKSHOP ON
            SYNCHRONIZATION IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS
                     FEBRUARY 22-24, 1995, BOULDER, CO

                  SEMINAR REGISTRATION FEE -  $850


WHO SHOULD ATTEND

This workshop is designed for engineers, systems analysts, and
technicians who work with synchronization and syntonization of
equipment using timing signals.  There will be a focus on specific
problems from the telecommunications industry.

WORKSHOP TOPICS

Timing Distribution in Telecom;
Needs and History;
Time and Frequency Concepts and Techniques;
Network Noise Sources and Clock Requirements;
Architectures for Network Synchronization Synchronization and Noise;
Measurement in the Network;
Anomalous Behavior Detection and Correction;
New Techniques for Phase Noise Measurement;
Time Transfer: Telephone, Internet, Loran-C and GPS;
Tour of NIST Labs.

GENERAL SEMINAR QUESTIONS            TECHNICAL QUESTIONS

Wendy Ortega                    Marc A. Weiss
TEL: [phone]                TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]                FAX: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]        Email: [e-mail]


Marc A. Weiss, Ph.D.                       Phone:  [phone]
NIST Time and Frequency Division           FAX:    [phone]
MS 847.5, 325 Broadway, Boulder, CO  80303

Working in Math and Physics of Time Transfer, Time Series Analysis &
Algorithms
Specializing in GPS and Telecom

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

From: [e-mail] (Glen Ecklund)
Subject: MCI Gave me a Deal
Date: 3 Feb 1995 17:50:09 GMT
Organization: University of WI, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.


MCI called yesterday, and made me an offer I didn't want to refuse.
50% off on all calls for six months.  After that, 50% off on calls to
MCI customers (no list required) and 25% off (if I recall correctly)
to everyone else.


Glen Ecklund     [e-mail]   [phone] Office, 262-1204 Dept. Sec'y
Department of Computer Sciences        1210 W. Dayton St., Room 3355
University of Wisconsin, Madison       Madison, Wis. 53706  U.S.A.

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

Date: 03 Feb 1995 17:26:25 GMT
From: [e-mail] (JeanBernard Condat)
Organization: FranceNet
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: France Telecom as a Real Caller ID Provider


Bonjour,

In France, a phone number is a list of 8 digit called ABPQMCDU. For
Paris and the towns near Paris, it's a zone code ("1") called Z in the
telecom language. My pro phone number is: 147874083.

If I dial this phone number from my home (to ask my phone answer
machine, e.g.), I can have the indication of my phone call (date, time
of beginning of the phone call, duration, type of pricing) with the
ZABPQ (14787 in my case). The poor MCDU (4083, my direct extension)
will be masked intentionnally.

Today, France Telecom announced that the C.N.I.L. (Commission Nationale
Informatique et libertes), playing as a computer privacies regulatory
group of experts, had been authorized to give at the end of 1995 the
complete phone number on all billing document: 147874083 in my case.

It's marvelous. All month, I can be able to have the complete phone number
of all my girl-friend's friends ... without having to ask them.


Jean-Bernard CONDAT                       [phone], desk 47874949
IPA Groupe SVP                            fax [phone]
[e-mail]     telex 233999 S V P F
B.P. 155, 93404 Saint-Ouen Cedex, France  Pager Kobby: 06 49 09 52

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

From: JP Wollersheim <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Adoption of New Technologies
Date: 3 Feb 1995 19:11:33 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard


[e-mail] (sb) wrote:

> 1)  Pointers to other articles/books that deal with this topic;

Fischer Pry have done a great deal of work in the difussion of
technology.

Very basically, there is a formula that will resemble an S-shaped
curve, and given the first few data points, the model uses a
regression technique to show hot the technology will be diffused into
the marketplace.

The model is as follows:

1) Enter first few data points (called 'f')
2) take ln(f/1-f)
3) do a linear regression on the datapoints, and extend it out
4) do exp(of the datapoints) / 1 + exp(of the datapoints)

Those points are the prediction of how the technology will diffuse
into the marketplace.

If you need any further information, feel free to contact myself.  I
have done work in this and other model areas.


Regards,

JP Wollershim

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

From: [e-mail] (sb)
Subject: Adoption of Technology Products
Date: 3 Feb 1995 20:29:22 GMT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link


Hi, I'm writing an article on consumer adoption of new technologies
over time.  Ideally, I'm looking for sources (online, books, articles,
people, etc), academic and business, that discuss the motivating
factors behind why people do or don't start using new technology
products, and if anyone has any "case studies" of the history of a
product, like radio, or the fax machine, that would be wonderful to
read also.  Other topics are: What makes a product "take off"?  Does
anyone track this sort of stuff for technology products/services?  I'm
aiming to try and get some insight into what'll fly and what won't on
the info superhighway, and this seems like a great place to
begin -- tracking the histories of other products.  If anyone has any
ideas, please email them to me at "[e-mail]".  Thank you for
your time.


Regards,

Seth    [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 20:27:02 +0000
From: evan champion <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Organization: Bell Northern Research


[e-mail] (Scott Montague) wrote:

> Bell Canada chose to have it's Toronto customers dial ten digit LOCAL
> calls.  This way, two exchanges can be used within a local calling
> area.  Example: If you wanted to dial 1050 CHUM Newsroom in Toronto
> (416) from Pickering (905) (a local call) you would dial 416-923-1133.
> This would allow the creation of a 923 exchange in Pickering, which
> could be used for different customers.  Inversely, to call someone
> local in (905), you would dial 10 digits 905-xxx-yyyy to call them
> from (416).  This has already been implemented.  The reason: Bell
> Canada is concerned that they will run out of exchanges in 416, and
> want to keep all 905 open for local calls.  (Or else, 416 would have
> to omit certain exchanges that their local calls are made to ... it's
> so contrived <g> ... and then when they run out again (which they will)
> they'll have to implement the ten digit dialing; let's get it all
> over with, they say).  I believe that they now want universal dialing
> procedures across area codes for their customers, and subsequently are
> implementing this system across area codes that don't necessarily need
> it, like the 604-905 boundary.

It always starts with our neighbours in Toronto :-)

Seriously though, I see the same sort of thing happening in Ottawa-Hull
shortly.  For example, I know that there are Ottawa 613-56x-xxxx and
Hull 819-56x-xxxx which are local calls from each other (a favourite
is a friend of mine who lives at 819-561-xxxx and works at 613-564-xxxx).
I don't think it will be very long before the Ottawa side would like
to take 613-561, and then we'll be forced in to ten digit dialing.

> Always planning for the future, I guess.  BTW, If you Americans want
> an example of a world class phone company, look north to Bell Canada.
> Great staff, instant repairs, easy access to all services (and tarrifs
> :-) ), quickly resolved billing disputes, hardly ever any billing
> errors, great business and residential service.  >From the horror
> stories in the US, I think some companies could learn alot from Bell
> Canada.  (OK, their long distance is a bit more expensive, but it's
> worth it.)

Besides the fact that they are hopeless for doing anything out-of-
the-ordinary (ie: try calling them up and ask to talk to someone about
ISDN or T1 service...), Bell Canada is a pretty good company.  I am
not rushing out to any of the new long-distance phone companies because
Bell does the job for me.  Now, if they would only increase my local
calling area.

And while we're talking about ten vs. eleven digit dialing, I like the
'1' in front of long-distance calls just to denote that I understand
that I will be paying for the call.  No '1' would symbolize a local
phone call, even if it required an area code.


Evan

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Rehmus)
Subject: Facsimile Protocol Analyzer Demo Program Available On-Line
Date: 3 Feb 1995 02:37:54 GMT
Organization: Netcom


We have a ftp site up and operating.  Something of a prelude to our
WWW layout sometime this month.

You can download the file from:

ftp.shell.portal.com.

the file is in pub/mrehmus

Or

URL:
ftp://ftp.shell.portal.com/pub/mrehmus

I will probably get the Fax Emulator demo uploaded tomorrow.

If you have any questions, please contact me at:

Mike Rehmus    Gray Associates
10760 Hubbard Way   San Jose, CA  95127-2624
[phone]  [phone] fax
[e-mail]


Best regards,

Mike

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

Date: 03 Feb 95 00:20:16 EST
From: rta <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs


John Levine writes:

>> Local should be charged higher because it is expensive.  You provide
>> unlimited free calling for a flat fee instead of charging on a call by
>> call basis.  Of course you lose money.

> You're making the increasingly unwarranted assumption that local
> bandwidth is expensive.  I make lots of umpteen hour long calls
> (computer to computer, of course) but since they're within the same
> switch, I find it difficult to identify any basis on which this
> actually costs the telco more than if I left the phone on the hook.

Several issues are being raised here so let me try to sort them out.
For FGD, many tariffs if you break them down, have a 1/3 the cost in
switching, paying for COs and access tandems, 1/3 in transport, the
bandwidth, and 1/3 in Common Carrier Line on the originating or
terminating end, what the carrier pays to support (subsidize) the line
to your home or business. This breakdown is approximate and varies
from LEC to LEC, but it gives you the overall picture.  Only about a
third of the charge is for bandwidth as most of us would interpret the
word. The other element is switching.

Switching and the lines to the customer premises are really what is
expensive.  The lines are not heavily utilized, in the case of many
small businesses and residences. Switches are expensive and are not
set up to support multiple hour calls.  Regular business calls that
get through are typically 4 to 6 minutes in length with residential
calls longer since many are placed to friends and family. Switches
were engineered on the assumption that most calls would be short. As
data usage increases, the switches have to get bigger, an expensive
proposition or the multiple hour data calls will have to shifted to
another technology, such as packet or cell switching where switches
and long distance circuits are not tied up during think time.

Most modern CO switches detect a phone that is off the hook and not
transmitting and genrate an obnoxious tone to get you to hang up.


Jerry Harder   Senior Partner
Renaissance Telecommunications Associates
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Kyle Cordes)
Subject: Re: Stand-alone Fax Box For PC
Date: 3 Feb 1995 11:32:33 -0800
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access


[e-mail] (Yongtao Chen) writes:

> I am looking for some kind of "stand-alone fax box" for PC.  The box
> should be able to receive and store coming faxes automatically when I

The device will probably need a hard drive, memory, and a FAX modem.
It would be nice if it also had a keyboard, screen, and maybe a mouse
so it could have a neat interface.  This is called a computer (sarcasm).
Your box will probably consist of another PC (maybe an old, abandoned
286 ...)  with a FAX modem in it, with some sort of networking hard/software
so you can access its hard drive from your PC.

It sure would be a lot simpler to leave your PC on; cheaper, too.  Is
there a reason you can't do this?  With the monitor off, it consumes
very little power.


Kyle
Kyle Cordes @ Automation Service   [e-mail]

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

From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Old Phone Number Format Question
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 1995 16:00:00 CST


[e-mail] (Michael Dillon) wrote:

> In the early 1970's I lived near Moonstone, Ontario in Canada. At the
> time we got phone service from the Moonstone Telephone Company which
> was bought by Bell in 1972 I believe. Before Bell came in, our number
> was 33-W-21. The way it was explained to me was that 33 was our line
> number, i.e. the 33rd wire coming into the exchange. Each line had two
> sides to it, the J side and the W side (ADSL?) and our ring was 21,
> i.e. two longs and a short. I remember visting the switchboard with my
> mother, who was a friend of the night operator and the plugboard was
> wood, with large black plugs just like those seen in old photographs.

Small world department!  I can remember standing in the Moonstone
Telephone Company office, waiting to make a call to a friend who lived
about a ten minute drive away, but was served from the Bell office at
Port McNichol.  This was 1970 or 1971, and the wait was for an
'outside line'.  There were no payphones in Moonstone but since the
office was right there in the centre of town, you just went in and
asked the operator for your call and paid in cash.

At the time, my friend's farm had been served by Bell (on a 4 party
line) for only a couple of years.  The old open wire on poles was
still visible by the roadsides, collapsed in places.  My friend still
has the surprisingly modern crank phone that Bell left in his house
when they installed the new line and standard 500 set.

Moonstone was one of the last batch of Bell acquisitions of small
rural telcos in the province.  Now there are still a few 'ma & pa'
telcos in Ontario, but they generally have all digital COs (DMS10s,
typically), and are not interested in selling out.


Tony Harminc

------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest V15 #77
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23826;
          4 Feb 95 4:47 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27923; Sat, 4 Feb 95 00:48:33 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA27917; Sat, 4 Feb 95 00:48:31 CST
Date: Sat, 4 Feb 95 00:48:31 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #78

TELECOM Digest     Sat, 4 Feb 95 00:48:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 78

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    How I Fooled Caller ID (John Combs)
    Sprintnet Question (Berton Corson)
    Substitute for BellSouth's Simon (Bob Baxter)
    Most Pressing Problems Facing Network Managers and Planners? (R. Jacobson)
    Video Dial Tone Information Wanted ([e-mail])
    South American Telecom News Wanted (Steve Samler)
    ANSI,ITU Information Needed (Edgar Murillo Montero)
    Directory Assistance Vendor Wanted (Steve Bauer)
    NYNEX Does it Again ... Not! (Tony Pelliccio)
    Can Anyone Recoomend Excell LD Phone Service? (Chris Telesca)
    Caller ID to TouchTones Help Needed (Lars Nohling)
    Memorex PBX Help Needed (Sergei Fishel)
    RS-422 - How Far at 1KHz? (Dave Dolomond)
    ATT 500 Number Working in PacBell-land Today (John Landwehr)
    OKI 1150 Cell Phone Help Wanted (Timothy F. Cooper)
    Very High Speed Wireless Communication Wanted (Yoji Hasegawa)
    Telstra (Australia) Information Wanted ([e-mail])
    ACD/Call Router Information Needed (T.J. Oconnell)
    Seeking Telecom Library (Dermot Wall)
    Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines (Alan Boritz)
    Re: 7/8ths Heliax Sources Needed (Jack Daniel)
    Re: 7/8ths Heliax Sources Needed (Mark Fletcher)
    Re: Who Are the Telephone Pioneers of America? ([e-mail])
    Re: Who Are the Telephone Pioneers of America? (John Skalko)

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, 3 Feb 95 22:16 EST
From: Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]>
Subject: How I Fooled Caller ID


TELECOM Digest Editor mentioned in a recent TELECOM Digest that he
thought a Caller ID box could be fooled if the Calling Party sent a
burst of their own Bell 202-type modem tones the instant the Called
Party answered.  I decided to try this in our lab, and he's right!
Standalone Caller ID boxes that display calling number, or calling
number and name, "listen" all the time, and any time a valid incoming
Caller ID comes in, they display it!  I checked several brands, and
they all behaved this way.  Someone should alert the telcos and
police, so innocent people won't be accused of prank calls.  I can
already think of several evil plots that could be made in movies of
the week.

However, I also had a couple high-end telephones handy which included
the Caller ID feature, and they wouldn't accept a new Caller ID after
going off-hook.  The reason for this is both phones are ADSI Level 3,
and they comply with the exhaustive Bellcore requirements.  An ADSI
Level 2 or Level 3 telephone that accepted Caller ID after going
off-hook would fail some Bellcore tests.  Unfortunately, an ADSI Level
1 or Level 2 device that wasn't a true telephone, e.g., a standalone
Caller ID box, could still be fooled by an off-hook Caller ID burst,
and the design would pass the Bellcore requirements.

In case you're been muttering, "What the heck is ASDI," I'll give a
brief explanation.  The acronym stands for Analog Display Services
Interface, and it is a new type of telephone designed to work on a
standard, analog telephone line.  (POTS line, Plain Old Telephone
Service) There are three "levels" of ADSI:

     Level 1:  Calling name and number after the first ring.
     Level 2:  Calling name and number with call waiting.
     Level 3:  A telephone with a display screen.  (The "D" in ADSI.)

ADSI Level 3 came about because Bellcore did a study to determine how
to sell more features on a telephone line, such as call waiting, or
call forwarding.  (The RBOCs like to sell these extra features as they
are revenue above the standard line charge, and quite profitable.)
The study concluded that many people didn't buy extra features because
they didn't want to fool with code sequences to enable/disable
features, such as *69.  Bellcore's solution was ADSI.  A Level 3
device has a screen that must be 20 characters across by 6 rows, and
can be 40 characters across by more rows.  There are from four to six
"softkeys."  Menu trees of softkeys can be downloaded to an ADSI
phone, and stored in memory as a "script."  The user gets plain
English displays (or the language of your choice), and can press
softkeys to activate telco features, or even order new ones directly
from the phone!

The REAL attraction of ADSI is that ANYONE can have their own ADSI
server!  After all, it's designed to work on analog lines.  In a
couple of years, a screen phone will be used to call the local video
store, scroll through the new releases, and even reserve one for later
pickup.  Or, perhaps one could call Domino's, order a pizza and
toppings.  Just imagine calling a business, and instead of getting the
tedious voice mail prompts telling you to press *1 to do something,
you get a text screen that lets you scroll though a directory of
employees and select who you want!  The high end ADSI phones that I
have tested even have things like pull-out QWERTY keyboards for data
entry, PCMCIA Type I slots, "smart card" slots, and magnetic strip
card readers!

Bellcore deserves praise for this well thought out service, laid out
in several Bellcore standards.  Another smart move on their part is
that they didn't bother submitting the standard to an international
standards body to try to get it adopted.  (We all know how long that
takes.)  Instead, they have been visiting the PTTs of dozens of
countries, and trying to convince them to sign on to the ADSI standard
as defined by Bellcore.  Several European nations have expressed
interest already, as have Pacific Rim nations, including China.

ADSI is being field-trialed by a few RBOCS right now, including
Ameritech in Chicago.  Ameritech is selling high-end Phillips ADSI
screen phones at cost for only $200 each, and primarily marketing it
for enhanced banking features from your home, along with the ability
to easily order/change custom calling features.

It is estimated that there will be between 5 and 15 million ADSI Level
3 screen phones in North America by 1998, and I suspect the higher
number is more accurate.  Once you've tried one, you don't want to
give it up!  It is my opinion that ADSI, along with V.34 modems giving
true 115 kbps data throughput (via compression), could be an ISDN BRI
"killer" one-two punch.  ISDN is STILL not ubiquitous, the local
telcos don't understand it and don't sell or market it effectively,
and it will NEVER be offered in the boondocks where I live. (Mayo,
Kentucky)

In closing, perhaps the Editor will permit a small plug for my
employer.  TestMark Labs is currently the ONLY alternative to Bellcore
itself, if you want your ADSI product tested for compliance to the
full Bellcore requirements.

By the way, even though ADSI works on POTS lines, it qualifies as
PANS.  (Pretty Amazing New Stuff.)


John Combs, Project Engineer, TestMark Laboratories, [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The thing to remember with Caller-ID is
to look at the display *before* you answer, not afterward! Or if you do
go back and review it afterward, do so in a discerning and sophisticated
way. Bogus information sent down the line while you are in the process
of going off hook and getting the phone to your ear probably won't look
quite the same. For example, the time will probably not be shown, since
telco usually sends this. I've never seen a CID box with its own clock.
Even if there is a time sent with the bogus information, look to see if
it is the same time as the real one. It would be highly unlikely you had
two calls in the same 'minute'. Look to see if the one right before the
one currently displayed says 'private' ... at the same minute in time
yet!  Keep your eye on the CID display as you take your phone off hook
and bring it to your ear. Notice it suddenly change?  It is hard to explain
how or why, but after you have had CID for awhile its like when you are on
the phone all day. You *know* what you are supposed to hear next in terms
of ringing tones, etc. You'll get with CID to where you *know* what you
are supposed to be seeing. Something different pops up and if you have
sort of trained your eye to notice things, you *will* see that something
does not look right; you will flip through the entries in the memory
and sort it out. Even if the prankster has the sense to send the time
stamp along, unless he has his clock synchronized with *your* central
office's clock (your office supplies the time, not his) then his bogus
entry may have a time one or two minutes *before* the real one. You would
not have an entry in the display which came afterward but with a time
prior to the one before it, and if you do, that's a giveaway.  After
a few calls with CID, you learn what to expect there and how, etc.   PAT]

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

From: Berton Corson <[e-mail]>
Subject: Sprintnet Question
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 18:29:45 PST


Patrick:

Got a question.  I'm drawing a blank here.  In using Sprintnet, one
types a 'C' followed by a destination to connect to another system.  I
forgot the destination I use to look up Sprintnet local phone numbers.
I remember both passwords were 'PHONES' but the destination escapes
me.  Do you know???


Bert


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It seems to me the mystery word is 'MAIL'.
I think you do 'C MAIL' then the password 'PHONES'. At one time I wrote
an article for the net entitled 'Let Your Fingers do the Walking'. It was
a long, detailed account of all the interesting connections you could get
(at that time) depending on what you entered after the 'C'.  I listed
quite a few test numbers, loop-arounds, manual terminals with operators
you could interactively chat with, etc. I listed in one part of my article
novelty connections you could make to things like the British Telecom
Master Clock, a master clock in Japan operated by whoever Telenet (the
old name for Sprintnet) gatewayed with over there, etc. I included a
bunch of addresses which connected to outdials of Canada Datapak. I
mentioned some addresses which gatewayed into the old Western Union
telex system and similar.

Telenet saw the article and stunk up the place something awful. They
took particular umbrage to the fact that I mentioned that the old PC
Pursuit accounts were not blocked out from reaching those international
destinations. I also mentioned the numeric addresses for the indials
themselves, and told cryptically how 'some hackers' would call into thier
local Telenet indial, do 'C address.of.same.indial.in.rotary.hunt.group'
and then sit there on the line *and provide a bogus Telenet prompt* to
some unfortunate sucker who also dialed in, thus capturing the password
of some unsuspecting user. In other words, let us say there are ten
lines in a rotary hunt incoming to Telenet (Sprintnet) via ummm ... let's
say Chicago-Merrimac office, or Chicago-Irving office. You call in on
line one; do 'C address.of.these.outdials'. Since line one is occupied
naturally -- by you -- your C request would hunt to line two and there
you would sit. Now comes another inbound call and the telco CO parks him
on line two, staring you right in the face looking at him. You see him
give those carriage returns to get Telenet's attention, and *you* answer
him asking for his password. Like a dummy, he types it right in. You say
'sorry, network problems, please disconnect and dial back again.' He
hangs up, you hang up and split. Now you have a password. I kid you not.
More PC Pursuit passwords and Telenet network passwords were stolen by
that gimmick than any other scheme.

Telenet finally wised up and put their incoming lines in one hunt group
and their outgoing lines (outdials) in another group with a network
restriction so users could not connect to the incoming lines. If you
try doing 'C a.dialin.somewhere' now the network responds saying the
address you have entered is not in service for incoming connections
(from persons already on the network). I promised them I would not again
publish 'Let Your Fingers do the Walking' so that's the way it has to
be. Anyway, try 'C MAIL' with user name PHONES and password PHONES.  PAT]

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

Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 12:41:07 EST
From: Bob Baxter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Substitute for BellSouth's Simon


My company is looking for a device that is similar to the Simon unit
put out by BellSouth.  Basically, the Simon is a combination cellular
phone, and personal digital assistant rolled into one.  According to
the customer service reps, Simon is the only device of its type.  Is
this correct?

If anyone has other information, or telephone numbers to call for
information, it would be appreciated.


Virtually yours,    [e-mail]
Bob Baxter        [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Jacobson)
Subject: Most Pressing Problems Facing Network Managers and Planners?
Date: 3 Feb 1995 19:03:46 GMT
Organization: WORLDESIGN, Seattle


What are the two or three most pressing problems facing you now and in
the near future?  Growth?  Access?  Interface for controls?

For a short report I'm preparing, I'd like to hear from network managers
and planners.  Thanks.  Email is fine.


Bob Jacobson    Worldesign Inc.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Video Dial Tone Information Wanted
Date: 3 Feb 95 11:31:21 PST
Organization: Science Applications Int'l Corp./San Diego


I am looking for information on the following topics regarding Video
Dial TOne:

1. FCC grants permission for telephone companies to offer video services.

2. FCC begins rulemaking on Telco video programming.

3. 1984 cable communication policy acts restrictions on Telcos providing video
programming to subscribers declared unconstitutional.

4. Regional Bell Operating Companies are running trials for video dialtone
services.

Please send your responses to my email address ([e-mail])


Thank you!

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

Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 16:29:13 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: South American Telecom News Wanted


Does anyone know of any sources for S. American/Central America/Mexico
telecom/datacom news?  Looking for something that might provide three
to five stories per day.

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

Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 11:32:21 GMT
From: Edgar Murillo Montero <[e-mail]>
Subject: ANSI, ITU Information Needed


I'm looking for SDH, ATM, Frame Relay Recommendations on ANSI, ITU, etc.
Please tell me where can I find these topics.


Ing. Edgar Murillo Montero       Phone:  [phone]
Of. Desarrollos Telematicos      Fax:    [phone]
Radiografica Costarricense S.A.  E-Mail: [e-mail]
P.O. Box 54-1000 San Jose
Costa Rica, Central America

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

Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 16:33:33 CST
From: Steve Bauer <[e-mail]>
Subject: Directory Assistance Vendor Wanted


I am looking for a vendor who can provide me with up to date Directory
Assistance data for the United States that can reside on a LAN and be
accessed by any user.  I'm not sure if a CD-ROM that is updated
frequently is the way to go or an on line connection with a per
request charge.

We have about $3,000 per month in Directory Assistance charges.


Thanks,

Steve

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Pelliccio)
Subject: NYNEX Does it Again ... Not!
Date: 3 Feb 1995 15:56:52 GMT
Organization: Brown University -- Providence, Rhode Island  USA


I just saw mention in the {Providence Journal Bulletin} for February
3, 1995 that the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission has ordered
NYNEX to stop offering Caller-ID services until a problem with
blocking has been rectified.

According to the article the problem exists with customers who've
requested their lines be permanently blocked. The *67 option is still
available and customers who currently have Caller-ID will be able to
retain the service. In a related blurb they state that the same problem
exists in NYNEX's New York offices.

Just another fine example of NYNEX doing what they do best.


Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR
Box 1908, Prov, RI 02912 Tel. [phone] Fax. [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone else wrote me to say Nynex has
now admitted the problem, (ID was being passed anyway, despite blocking)
and is working on getting it fixed. They have offered new non-pub phone
numbers at no charge (service/installation) to anyone affected who wants
it.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Chris Telesca)
Subject: Can Anyone Recommend ExcelL LD Phone Service?
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 14:49:33 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.


A friend of mine and her mother are Marketing Reps for Excel LD phone
service.  They say that they can save me a significant amount of money
over AT&T, my current LD carrier.  Their examples are the differences
in charges for one-minute phone calls.  EXCEL has lower flat rates,
while AT&T charges more for the first minute, but they virtually are
identical for longer calls (avg. time: 10 minutes).  EXCEL also charges
a $3.00 flat fee for their service.

Of course, since this is a MLM operation, my friend and her mother
will be collecting commissions on my phone bill.  So it seems that
what I'm really being asked to do is switch over to a service that is
no better (and hopefully no worse) than the one I'm using now, that
may or may not save me money, but will shift some of the money that
used to go to Southern Bell and AT&T over to my friend and her mother.
Not that I have anything against doing that, but does anyone without a
financial stake in EXCEL have any real-life experiences with this service?
Is their any real savings over AT&T?  How does their customer service
deal with billing problems, wrong numbers, unauthorized people using
your calling card number, etc?


Chris Telesca          Associate Photographer          [phone] x7489
SAS Institute Inc. / SAS Campus Dr. / Cary, NC  27513 / [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 10:28 EST
From: Lars Nohling <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller ID to TouchTones


I am looking for a device that will taking the incoming Caller-ID
number and enter it as touch tones to the answering modem before
connecting the incoming call. I want to use it for routing calls based
on the originating location.

Any ideas?

[e-mail]    Lars Nohling   Business Systems Solutions, inc.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Memorex PBX Help Needed
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 95 19:00:52 WST
Organization: ATS Technologies (Singapore)


Hi there!

Could you help me with small problem we having here?

We are using Memorex's Telex 1001VS PBX system at office (Phone is
2021L). It is 6 wires. So here are a few questions I'd like to ask:

1. Why is it having 6 wires (Not 4 wires as usual PBX)?

2. Is there any 3rd party suppliers who could supply compatible
   hardware and software to this PBX. (Voice mail, OS, PCB...)?

3. Is there network address for Memorex Telex company (www, ftp,...)?


Thank you in advance for any information.

Sergei Fishel

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Dolomond)
Subject: RS-422 - How Far at 1KHz?
Date: 3 Feb 1995 12:05:16 -0400
Organization: MII


Does anyone have any particular experience with RS-422?

I need to know how far I can transmit a 1KHz signal using an RS-422
link with 24 AWG shielded, twisted pair cable burried underground?
Any help would be appreciated !!!  e-mail if you can...


Thanks in advance,

Dave D. ([e-mail])

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

From: John Landwehr <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 95 09:45:09 -0800
Subject: ATT 500 Number Working in PacBell-land Today


Just FYI,

ATT activated my 500 number Jan 27.  On Jan 31, PacBell still had no
clue what 500 numbers were.  I called repair and they thought I was an
idiot and actually hung up on me.  I was going to call the PUC today,
but guess what -- my 500 numbers works.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: That's been my experience with Ameritech
recently where 500 numbers are concerned. They just assume I am a
crank caller and they humor me. AT&T says agreements were put in place
with all telcos on January 28 and that 500 service is working just fine
everywhere and that instead of bothering them further with it I should
contact the Commission. I call the Commission, they say they have no
record of any agreements being reached between AT&T and Ameritech to
unblock 500. Like yourself, thus far I have found no one at Ameritech
who knows anything about 500. Finally yesterday someone at AT&T told me
the 'specialist' would look into it, and I had to tell her digit by
digit exactly what number I was dialing and where I was calling from.
The 'specialist' has not called back. Neither has anyone from the Illinois
Commerce Commission. I told AT&T the easiest way was to simply disconnect
my 500 number and get back to me with it sometime in the future if/when
they got their act together.  I can't keep bothering with it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (timothy f. cooper)
Subject: OKI 1150 Cell Phone Help Wanted
Date: 4 Feb 1995 00:12:09 GMT
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


I have recently purchased an OKI 1150 cell phone from my neighbor
(moved away) and he gave me all the goodies like batteries, charger,
manual and such. He told me his number was disconnected and I would
need to get my own activation. What he didnt tell me is that he locked
the phone with several security codes! Will I be able to erase this
and start witha fresh phone? wWat are the ports for? (Programming i
know). Can I get the software and cable to do it myself? Who sells
this equipment? Will a dealer be able to reprogram the security codes?

Help!

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

From: [e-mail] (Yoji Hasegawa)
Subject: Very High Speed Wireless Communication
Organization: Computer Communications Div, MPT
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 10:39:45 GMT


Does anyone know an experiment of very high speed (155Mbps or more?)
communication by wireless measures anywhere in Germany?

Please send any info by e-mail.


Yoji    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Telstra (Australia) Information Wanted
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 1995 16:50:08 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


Looking for information on this company.  Stock Analysis.  Assets.
Prognosis.  History.  etc ...

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

From: [e-mail] (TJOconnell)
Subject: ACD/Call Router Information Wanted
Date: 3 Feb 1995 20:02:40 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (TJOconnell)


We are looking for a resource for general information on ACD/Call
Center technology.  This could include an Overview Book on different
systems, emerging technologies, or trends.  Do you have any
information or know of any sources that would help us "figure out"
today's Call Centers?

Please email: [e-mail]


Thanks,

Tom

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

Date: Thu, 2 Feb 1995 09:19:53 +0000
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Seeking Telecom Library
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Northern Telecom, GALWAY, Ireland


I'd be very grateful if anyone could forward me a phone number and
fax number (non 1-800 please) for Telecom Library, Inc in New York.

Please use the correct email address in the sig. Thanks for the
help.


Dermot Wall                 [e-mail]
Northern Telecom            Phone: [phone]
Mervue Industrial Estate    Fax  : [phone]
Galway                      ESN  :  570 3334
Ireland

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

Subject: Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 95 20:32:39 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (Alan Sterger) writes:

>> I am working for a small radio station that is now using two 8kHz
>> lines to feed four tansmitters (AM).  On one line we feed three
>> transmitters since they are for buildings next to each other; the other
>> line is for a building some 150 blocks from here.

> Are STLs out of the question?

They are in New York City.  Every allocated channel is occupied,
though in a very inefficient manner.  While it may be possible to free
up at least one wide-band channel by forcing at least one of the
larger FM stations to stop hogging more channels than they really
should ;), the cost to accomplish it, and of real estate for microwave
antennas, and for equipment expense, would make it difficult for even
the largest broadcasters in the country.  New York City is one
peculiar congested place where private (non-switched) circuits can be
cheaper than non-tariff'd alternative services.  It's also probably
the only place in the US that has a *vertical* mileage tariff for some
telco circuits.  <g>

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Daniel)
Subject: Re: 7/8ths Heliax Sources Needed
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 13:25:23 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan) writes:

> I need to find 350' of 7/8ths 50ohm heliax for an RF application I'm
> working on. Cheapest I've been able to find is $4.50/ft.  Anyone have
> other source suggestions?

Call Trilogy Cable at 1-800-874-5649. Ask for Larry Lindner and 1" low
loss 50 ohm cable. Best buy in the world on NEW high spec cable.

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

Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 06:20:08 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Mark Fletcher)
Subject: Re: 7/8ths Heliax Sources Needed


In V15 #73 [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan) writes:

> I need to find 350' of 7/8ths 50ohm heliax for an RF application I'm
> working on. Cheapest I've been able to find is $4.50/ft.  Anyone have
> other source suggestions?

I find the best cable is manufactured by:

Andrew
10500 W. 153rd Street
Orland Park, IL 60462
1-800-255-1479
1-800-349-5444 FAX

Another supplier is:

Times Microwave Systems
PO Bos 5039
Wallingford, CT  06492
800-TMS-COAX or
203-949-8400
203-949-8423 FAX

Either will provide you with a list of distributors in your area.
Also consider subcribing to Mobile Radio Technology (MRT). The
subscription is free for qualified individuals.

MRT
PO BOx 12937
Overland Park, KS 66282-2937


Mark Fletcher

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

From: [e-mail] (BUBEYE!)
Subject: Re: Who Are the Telephone Pioneers of America?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 1995 02:02:28 GMT


Jonathan Prince <[e-mail]> writes:

> [What is] the 'Telephone Pioneers of America'?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: ...  the Telephone Pioneers of America
> is an outstanding organization with chapters at telcos all over the USA ...

Another interesting fact is that Telephone Pioneers of America is the
largest philanthropic organization in the world.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not know they were the largest;
but their generosity is well known.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Skalko)
Subject: Re: Who Are the Telephone Pioneers of America?
Date: 4 Feb 1995 01:26:58 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY


The length of service restriction has been removed -- at least at
AT&T.  No matter what your service length, you can join in this
volunteer action organization.  And, thanks for your succinct and
lucid explanation of TPA.


JJS


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You and the other Pioneers are quite
welcome. I received some mail from a couple other Pioneers who said
the same thing as yourself regards service length, that there is no
longer a twenty year requirement. Apparently it was for a short time
reduced to seventeen years, now there is no restriction at all. Also I
was corrected on the year of their founding: it was 1911. In that
year, several of the employees of AT&T who had -- even then!  -- been
with the company for twenty years or more -- a few had worked with
Thomas Watson himself -- decided to form a service organization. Their
first projects as an organization were with deaf people, and to this
day hearing impaired people receive much of their time and resources.
Alex Bell was deaf, you know, and a teacher of deaf people.

Have a nice weekend everyone!  Very cold and snowy here, and the cold
will linger until Monday at least we are told.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #78
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa14048;
          6 Feb 95 4:33 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08439; Mon, 6 Feb 95 00:26:18 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08433; Mon, 6 Feb 95 00:26:16 CST
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 00:26:16 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #79

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 6 Feb 95 00:26:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 79

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Managing Internet Information Services" by Liu (Rob Slade)
    More on Universal International Freephone Numbers (Judith Oppenheimer)
    Final CFP: ISLIP'95 (Mehmet Orgun)
    Unit to "Speak" CLID (John and DonaLeigh Engstrom)
    Combinet ISDN Routers (Robert Seltzer)
    New Motorola Micro-tac Elite AMPS Cellphone (Andrew Knox)
    Phone Number Wanted For Genesys Labs (Paul Kendall)
    International Tariff Database Providers (Mitchell Weiss)
    Information Wanted on MagNet Communications ([e-mail])
    Re: How I Fooled Caller ID (Clifton T. Sharp)
    ADSI Terminals (was How I Fooled Caller ID) (Tony Harminc)
    Re: MCI Gave me a Deal (John Marquette)
    Re: MCI Gave me a Deal (Daniel J. McDonald)
    Re: MCI Gave me a Deal (John Gutman)
    Dick Tracy Tackles Hackers! (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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Feb 1995 14:45:11 EST
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Managing Internet Information Services" by Liu


BKMININS.RVW

"Managing Internet Information Services", Liu et al, 1994, 1-56592-062-7,
U$29.95
%A   Cricket Liu [e-mail]
%A   Jerry Peek [e-mail]
%A   Russ Jones
%A   Bryan Buus [e-mail] [e-mail] [e-mail]
%A   Adrian Nye [e-mail]
%C   103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA   95472
%D   1994
%G   1-56592-062-7
%I   O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
%O   U$29.95 800-998-9938 707-829-0515 fax: [phone] [e-mail]
%P   630
%S   Nutshell
%T   "Managing Internet Information Services"

For companies interested in gaining an Internet "presence", most of
the current crop of "business on the Internet" books recommend
becoming an information provider.  None of them are really good at
telling you how.  Here, then, is the first "all-in-one" compilation of
Internet server tools.

The book covers everything from simple finger responses, to mail
servers, to ftp, to WAIS, to Gopher and World Wide Web servers.
"Firewall" security, legal issues and intellectual property are
touched on.  While technical details predominate, there are practical
suggestions for design as well.

Unfortunately, this book is not really for managers.  The material is
demanding and requires a knowledge of UNIX.  The authors note this in
the preface, and it is fair to say that Internet server management is
a technical task.  At the same time, it would have been possible to
have started with simpler items and more basic explanations.  As it
stands, the book is more appropriate for either the technical staff in
a large company or those involved with setting up a UNIX Internet
access provider.  Perhaps a companion volume aimed at the more general
user would be a future project.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKMININS.RVW. Permission given for
distribution in TELECOM Digest and associated publications.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

From: Judith Oppenheimer <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 09:55:45 -0500
Subject: Universal International Freephone Numbers


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ms. Oppenheimer responds to email she
received on her recent articles.   PAT]

Mr. Brown,

I have the same publicly-available information that you have.

But I do have a few questions.  Rather than private email, I would
prefer to maintain the public forum of the TELECOM Digest so that this
thread remains available to all interested parties.

AT&T can no longer publicly maintain that their users don't care about
their 800 numbers.  In January 1993, the United States developed a
position that included grandfathering of existing U.S. 800 assignments.

This was further endorsed in October, 1994, by the U.S. Users
Statement, which also rejects the lottery.

And why shouldn't they?

U.S. carriers have aggressively encouraged U.S. companies to invest in
and brand their 800 numbers, leading the way themselves with such
visible and successful marketing campaigns as 800 PICK ATT and 800
COLLECT.

Indeed, 800 COLLECT is a trademarked brand.

The overt lack of carrier support for customers suggests that the
substantial investments of money and brand awareness in 800 PRODIGY,
800 JEEP EAGLE, 800 MERRILL, and others, are not important to their
users.  Or, that those users are not important to their telecom
vendors: the carriers.

Is 800 COLLECT also to be up for grabs?  (Where do I sign up? <g>)

When presented with this question, a participating MCI representative
retorted that 800 COLLECT was useless overseas because there are no
letters on the phone pads.  We all now know that a new international
telephone pad standard has been adopted.  That argument, like the
others, holds no water.

So why maintain the propoganda that it doesn't matter?  That your
customers are willing to lose the very competitive edge that you
yourself have helped them attain.

Given the opportunity, wouldn't the carriers rather gain entry into
European markets *and* protect and promote the interests of customers
at home?

U.S. users have spoken.  They care.  They stand to lose a great deal,
and gain nothing.

So how do *you* suggest that we move forward in a fair and practical
manner to address everyone's interests?


Judith Oppenheimer    [e-mail]

> Responding to msg by [e-mail] () on Wed, 1 Feb 11:50 PM

>> Judith,
>> My fax number is 908 949 6203.  I'd be happy to see
>> what you  have as 'current and unedited'.
>> Thanks,

>> John Carl Brown

   <continuing the same topic>

I'm adding another contact point to the list below that's more
business oriented, for those of you who'd like to coordinate with
like-minded business concerns.

Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) is the technical representative of
the airline industry, acting on behalf of the US airlines who have a
big investment in 800 numbers for their reservation systems.

This organization, via its ITU participation, has been working hard on
behalf of all U.S. 800 number users (for example, they gathered the
impressive ranks of such users as American Express, EDS and the Ford
Motor Company to draft and present the "Users' Statement of Principles
Regarding Universal International Freephone Service.)

Their stated mission in this matter is to protect and promote the
interests of all U.S. 800 number users.

The contact person at ARINC is Ben Levitan, 410 266-4111.  He is the
*only* participant at the international freephone meetings
representing the formal U.S. position, and the U.S. 800 number users.


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

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

Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 11:56:43 +1100
From: [e-mail] (Mehmet Orgun)
Subject: Final CFP: ISLIP'95


                       Final Call for Papers
                              ISLIP'95

The Eighth International Symposium on Languages for Intensional Programming
       May 3-5, 1995, Macquarie University, Sydney, 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 begun
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
   * visual languages
   * 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). Paper
submission deadline is 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 (negotiations with a publisher is under way).

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, 1995


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

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

From: [e-mail] (John and DonaLeigh Engstrom)
Subject: Unit to "Speak" CLID
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 02:05:13 CST


    Caller ID has just become available here in the Dallas area
and I was thinking to myself "self, it would be nice to not have to
get up and look at the caller ID box every time the phone rings".  I
then pull out my handy Hello Direct catalog and find the Voice 8000
unit which can tag up to nine numbers with individual audio stamps
that play every time that number calls.  Does anyone know of another
unit that does this?  I really need to voice stamp more than nine
numbers for this idea to become useful.  Thanks in advance for your
help.


John Engstrom   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Seltzer)
Subject: Combinet ISDN Routers
Date: 6 Feb 1995 03:06:34 GMT
Organization: Netcom


I am gathering opinions on ISDN products, particularly products from
Combinet.  Any information would be great.


Thanks,

Bob Seltzer   [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 06 Feb 1995 04:09:52 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Andrew Knox)
Subject: New Motorola Micro-tac Elite AMPS cellphone
Organization: University of Auckland


Motorola New Zealand is apparently about to launch a new AMPS
cellphone called the Microtac Elite.

I would be quite interested to know whether anyone has any details
about this phone or about pricing of it throughout the world.

Apparently the phone was to be launched approx six months ago but
problems with the lithium batteries have delayed the launch.


Regards,

Dr. Andrew Knox

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Kendall)
Subject: Phone Number Wanted For Genesys Labs
Date: 06 Feb 1995 01:53:06 GMT
Organization: J. Frank Consulting, Inc.


Anybody have a phone number for Genesys Labs? I'm interested in their
product line, especially the T-server.


Thanks,

Paul Kendall    J.Frank Consulting
Palo Alto, CA   [e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 13:51:35 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Mitchell Weiss)
Subject: International Tariff Database Providers


I am looking for a list of companies who provide tariff databases for
European, Far East, and other points of origin.  Any help would be
greatly appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail] (Franjieh)
Subject: Information Wanted on MagNet Communications
Date: 5 Feb 1995 04:50:06 GMT
Organization: University of San Francisco


I would like to know whether anyone here has heard of MagNet
Communications.  They are one of those new long-distance carriers that
offer flat-rate billing at six-second increments.  I am new to this
type of industry and would like to get some people's opinions (if they
have any) before and if I am to convert my LD service.  Any opinions
that you might have would be greatly appreciated.

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

From: [e-mail] (Clifton T. Sharp)
Subject: Re: How I Fooled Caller ID
Organization: as little as possible
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 07:48:01 GMT


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

> Standalone Caller ID boxes that display calling number, or calling
> number and name, "listen" all the time, and any time a valid incoming
> Caller ID comes in, they display it!  I checked several brands, and
> they all behaved this way.  Someone should alert the telcos and

Not the Radio Shack 43-951 (sold some years ago); it only supplies +5V
to its XR2206 chip between the first and second rings.  I don't believe
my AT&T model 85 will, either, but haven't been inside it.


Cliff Sharp   WA9PDM
[e-mail]

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

Date: Sun, 05 Feb 95 01:38:35 EST
From: Tony Harminc <[e-mail]>
Subject: ADSI Terminals (was How I Fooled Caller ID)


Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Level 3:  A telephone with a display screen.  (The "D" in ADSI.)

> The high end ADSI phones that I have tested even have things like
> pull-out QWERTY keyboards for data entry, PCMCIA Type I slots, "smart
> card" slots, and magnetic strip card readers!

> It is estimated that there will be between 5 and 15 million ADSI Level
> 3 screen phones in North America by 1998, and I suspect the higher
> number is more accurate.  Once you've tried one, you don't want to
> give it up!

Um -- how does this differ from inumerable similar failed projects
like the Northern Telecom DisplayPhone or Bell Canada's Alex terminals
now languishing in the remainder bins?  The experience with Minitel
in France is that sure -- everyone wants one *as long as they don't
have to pay for it*. Start charging market rates, and the units are
returned as fast as you can get a dial tone.  Massive state subsidies
is just not in the cards in North America, at least.


Tony Harminc

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

From: John Marquette <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI Gave me a Deal
Date: 5 Feb 1995 01:02:42 GMT
Organization: Earthlink Network, Inc.


[e-mail] (Glen Ecklund) wrote:

> MCI called yesterday, and made me an offer I didn't want to refuse.
> 50% off on all calls for six months.  After that, 50% off on calls to
> MCI customers (no list required) and 25% off (if I recall correctly)
> to everyone else.

I'm a Sprint customer.  I called MCI to verify the terms (YES!
Including international calls, UK 31c/min) and got on the phone to
talk with Sprint customer service.  I asked if they would match the
offer (I have several lines and am a good customer of long standing) ...
bottom line is they would not match, nor do they have a tariff that's
similar ... BUT they offered me a so-called "concession credit" on my
account of $50.00 for my loyalty.

May I recommend this to TELECOM Digest readers who are current Sprint
customers?  It's a dog-eat-dog world for customer retention out there
and we the customers should benefit from it whenever possible.


John Marquette

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

From: [e-mail] (Dan McDonald)
Subject: Re: MCI Gave me a Deal
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 21:10:46 PDT
Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access [phone]


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Glen Ecklund)
writes:

> MCI called yesterday, and made me an offer I didn't want to refuse.
> 50% off on all calls for six months.  After that, 50% off on calls to
> MCI customers (no list required) and 25% off (if I recall correctly)
> to everyone else.

No offense to MCI, but that sort of reminds me of an old Firestone ad:
"Firestone Tires stop 40% faster" Of course, they fail to mention what
they stop 40% faster than.  So, if they mean 50% of the AT&T price for
a similar call, that is one thing, but if it is just 50% off of their
imaginary rates, I would do a bit more homework ...


Daniel J. McDonald                 home: [e-mail]
Telecom Designer                   work: [e-mail]
Industrial Design Corporation      pots: 1.503.653.6919

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

From: John Gutman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI Gave me a Deal
Date: 4 Feb 1995 17:50:09 GMT


> MCI called yesterday, and made me an offer I didn't want to refuse.
> 50% off on all calls for six months.  After that, 50% off on calls to
> MCI customers (no list required) and 25% off (if I recall correctly)
> to everyone else.

    I received the same type of marketing call from MCI, and the
salesman said that MCI would match any plan that I already had, including
an AT&T Reach Out America calling plan with no calling card surcharge
on the weekends that is no longer offered to new customers.


John Gutman     UC Berkeley

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

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dick Tracy Tackles Hackers!
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 1995 23:50:00 CST


So after going outside early Sunday morning in very bitter (one degree
above zero) weather to steal my neighbor's copy of the {Chicago Sunday
Tribune} before he woke up and saw me out there, I immediatly turned to
the section of the paper I never miss.

No, not the front section news. Not Perspective, or the editorial pages
or the Sunday Magazine. I ripped the six pound, five hundred page paper
apart looking through all the innards, the Marshall Field advertising,
the grocery coupons and such looking for the Sunday color comics so I
could go sit in my kitchen in a stupor with a cup of coffee and see what
Mary Worth, Blondie and Dagwood, Beatle Bailey, Brenda Starr and the
others had going this week.

A new serial began with Dick Tracy this Sunday, and you will surely all
want to follow it.  It seems a hacker has broken into computers all over
town and is wreaking havoc. A cash machine spits out thousands of dollars
to a man who requested twenty dollars. Computers in companies display
pictures of Santa Claus in a 'wanted poster'. The telephone exchange is
okay so far, but the story line hints it will soon be disrupted. No
doubt over the next few weeks Dick Tracy, his partner Sam and that lady
detective will catch the miscreant hackerphreak responsible for all this
mischief and bring him to justice, comic page style.

Does someone want to summarize it here each day for the duration for the
benefit of people who don't get Dick Tracy in their paper?  I get the
{Chicago Tribune} most days -- by the way, 'Dick Tracy' belongs to the
{Tribune} you know, or did you know? -- but they send him out across the
nation daily via the syndicate. Anyway, I am sure it should be a very
amusing and interesting little story over the next month or so, three
picture frames daily and nine on Sunday with bubble messages in each. If
someone wants to save me the trouble, let me know.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #79
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa01377;
          7 Feb 95 0:38 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03465; Mon, 6 Feb 95 20:34:15 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03457; Mon, 6 Feb 95 20:34:13 CST
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 20:34:13 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #80

TELECOM Digest     Mon, 6 Feb 95 20:34:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 80

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Caller ID to TouchTones (Steve Friedlander)
    Re: Caller ID to TouchTones (Donald L. Moore)
    Re: Clock Slips Again ([e-mail])
    Re: Clock Slips Again (Steve Daggett)
    Re: When Will PBXs Go Away? (pp000413@.interramp.com)
    Re: When Will PBXs Go Away? (Jack Pestaner)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Ed Goldgehn)
    Re: AT&T 500 Number Problems (Stan Schwartz)
    NYNEX PIN Security - Extra Airtime? (Doug Reuben)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Eric Nelson)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Gary Novosielski)

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 friedlander)
Subject: Re: Caller ID to TouchTones
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 11:19:44 CST
Organization: MCSNet


In article <[e-mail]> Lars Nohling <LNohling_+a_BSSI_+
[e-mail]> writes:

> I am looking for a device that will taking the incoming Caller-ID
> number and enter it as touch tones to the answering modem before
> connecting the incoming call. I want to use it for routing calls based
> on the originating location.

> Any ideas?

Are you using 800 service?  Arch Telecom offers Real-Time ANI and DNIS
over POTS lines via DTMF tones, allowing you to route it where you
wish. You will need a Dialogic type card.


Steve Friedlander    e-mail:  [e-mail]
Providing efficiency and improved sales through Communications.
The leader in "Value Added" 800 service is Arch Telecom!
************************1.800.ARCH.TEL*************************

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

From: [e-mail] (Donald L Moore)
Subject: Re: Caller ID to TouchTones
Date: 5 Feb 1995 22:41:20 -0500
Organization: Interpath -- Public Access UNIX for North Carolina


In article <[e-mail]>, Lars Nohling <LNohling_+a_BSSI_+
[e-mail]> wrote:

> I am looking for a device that will taking the incoming Caller-ID
> number and enter it as touch tones to the answering modem before
> connecting the incoming call. I want to use it for routing calls based
> on the originating location.

Have you thought about using a modem that can read, the Caller ID data
stream. Just by looking for that data between RING 1 and RING 2 you
can have the data accessible for a program to do whatever you need.
It may mean that you need alter your program.


Don Moore

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Clock Slips Again
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 95 09:00:21 PDT


> An oscilloscope placed on an analog campus line should show clock
> slips as sudden phase shifts in the carrier.  Is this a valid test?
> If so, we could show the phase shifts through such a line and then
> demonstrate that no such problems occur on campus or between two
> Southwestern Bell lines.

Martin, to prove the clock slip problem once and for all you should
schedule an end to end test on the digital level. If you go through
your equipment the LEC will assume it is your equipment, which it very
well might be. I am assuming the trunk is a T-1, if so you can easily
check for clock slips by stepping out the testing through the network
using a Fireberd or similar test set. If you believe the clock slips
are in the LEC's internal network then attack it as a quality issue
that they must resolve. In case of the latter your most difficult task
is to quantify the problem and here's the biggie, demonstrate it.  If
it is a clock slip it should be fairly regular and predictable.


Damian McDonald, N2AEC
Time Inc. Transmission Group

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Daggett)
Subject: Re: Clock Slips Again
Organization: NETRIX Corporation
Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 22:58:19 GMT


> I am pretty sure that we have a chronic case of clock slippage
> somewhere in the interface between our campus' Ericsson MD110 and the
> Southwestern Bell trunks.  I would like to prove it once and for all.

I assume from your post that your trunks to SW Bell are analog.  If
your trunks are digital then your Ericsson will be maintaining a slip
count on your T1's.

> It occurred to me that a modem sending a steady carrier such as is
> used to establish a 300-baud connection would be a perfect signal
> generator.  It could be placed on a line off-campus and then called
> from on-campus.  An oscilloscope placed on an analog campus line
> should show clock slips as sudden phase shifts in the carrier.  Is
> this a valid test?  If so, we could show the phase shifts through such
> a line and then demonstrate that no such problems occur on campus or
> between two Southwestern Bell lines.

It seems to me that using the phase shifts of a modem carrier would be
rather indirect.  It could be difficult to tell the difference between
a clock slip and a modem retrain caused by some other factor.

It would be easier to just hook up a point to point BERT test.  You
should see frame slips as _periodic_ bursts of bit errors on the BERT
testers.  The time period between bursts of errors will depend on the
rate of change between the two different clock frequencies.

The off campus BERT tester isn't necessary if you use full-duplex
modems that support remote loopbacks.

        ON-CAMPUS                            OFF-CAMPUS
 ----------    ---------                ---------   ----------
 |  BERT  |____| Dial  |       \------- | Dial  |___|  BERT  |
 | Tester |    | Modem |--------\       | Modem |   | Tester |
 ----------    ---------                ---------   ----------


> Any suggestions are appreciated since the feeling is that
> there is really nothing wrong because the lines all sound clean and
> voice calls don't get dropped.

Your trunks are probably running on several different T-carriers on
their way to the CO.  There are definitely dozens of T-carriers in
your local area.  You're probably only having problems with one or two
segment out there in Telco-land.  Try to find a commonalty that can
help the local techs locate the bad segments.  Look for one group of
trunks that have the problem, or one area of town, or it's only when a
call goes outside the local calling area.  The more accurately you can
describe the problem the better chance you have of getting it fixed.


Steve Daggett       [e-mail]    Herndon, VA  USA

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

From: pp000413@.interramp.com
Subject: Re: When Will PBXs Go Away?
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 95 23:07:33 PDT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link


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

> What is the current thinking on when a PC (powerPC, whatever) replace
> the PBX? i.e. when can I run my T1 from the telco with my voice trunks
> on it into one card on a PC and have it route voice over the LAN to
> other desktop computers that double as phones? It will probably be a
> time curve: first available for small offices (ten users) on an ethernet,
> then a while later available for 200 lines on a faster LAN, etc. What
> says the net? My Mitel sx200 lite has a 68000 for a processor: it's a
> MacPlus! Surely the cpu horsepower is available to replace lots of
> dedicated TTL and switching hardware. I was just at a briefing from
> Apple and they're working with the PBX makers for a Geoport Mac to be
> a voice terminal behind a "big maker" PBX. But who are the startups
> that are out to kill the PBX makers?

I work in an office with five IBM mainframes tied together as one virtual
machine, 7,000 PS/2s connected via a flat token ring, 13,000 data terminals,
two central office switches that are used as PBXs, and 13,000 phones.
Every day that I come in, I have to personally reset the file server
on the LAN because I can logon only about 50 percent of the time. But,
I can always pick up the phone and make a call without having to do an
IPL on the switches.

I would never trust LANs to carry voice any time in the near future.
PCs and LANs are not engineered to the same standards for reliability
and backup as PBXs and other switches. If you ever get into a management
position, the first thing that will give you headaches is the number
of times that mainframe applications go down during the day, the numbers
of LAN servers that go on the fritz, and the number of folks complaining
about something wrong with their PCs. But, not the phone system which is
rock solid and reliable.

We have ISDN on our switches which makes them extremely reliable for
data communications, server access, connecting to the Internet, and
information databases outside the building. I wouldn't want our PBX to
go away because it is a powerful data switching machine that is always
up when I need it. I can not say the same for any of our LANs.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Pestaner)
Subject: Re: When Will PBXs Go Away?
Date: 5 Feb 1995 15:31:04 GMT
Organization: Oregon Grad. Inst. Computer Science and Eng., Beaverton


Certainly anyone who predicts that PC's can't do a task will eventually
be proven wrong, but I believe it will be quite a while before large
PBX's or high reliability PBX's will be replaced by PC's.

I have managed a 3000 line NEC PBX for five years now, and during that
period, it has never experienced a system failure.  On the other hand,
it is rare that our PC's run for more than a week w/o CTRL-ALT-DELETE
needing to be invoked.  In a large user environment, perferction is
the expectation, and Microsoft has never demonstrated that capability.

For instance, when you have direct integrated T1's, any little glitch
will dump any modem call on the system -- just one bit!

Our PBX is fully processor redundant, and switches daily between processors
without affecting phone traffic.  It also has an architecture that supports
expansion up to 20,000 stations.  I suppose a network of PC's could eventually
do this too, but you can imagine it is non-trivial.

It does appear that some PBX manufacturers are moving in the PC
direction.  NEC has announced the 2000IVS, which is an Intel processor
based PBX, and has ethernet capabilities.  Apparently, it is becoming
the darling of the CTI crowd.  Also, it is very low cost, about 1/2
per port of our NEC, and has all the same features plus more.

I feel much more comfortable seeing CTI from PBX vendors, rather than
PC/PC Software vendors.  Maybe the threat of competition and loss of
market share will spur on the PBX people.  Franky, the cost of many
PBX features is outrageous, and the CTI has been very slow to come.

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: 5 Feb 1995 19:04:17 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


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

>> BTW, the method of charges is entirely different for LD service in the
>> cellular industry.  With cellular, it is not unusual for local cellular
>> carriers (RBOC's or otherwise) to provide FREE or flat rate termination
>> charges to LD carriers.

> Why not, if they extend the T1s to your MTSO?  It's that many less
> erlangs going out on the other (paid) trunks.  I assume the B carriers
> probally must provide this for free or are limited to some max rate by
> Da Judge (that's Greene, not Ito :-))

Actually, it was a matter of marketing -- or necessity depending on
your point of view.  The cellular industry needed to attract long
distance carriers to make connections to their networks in order to
sell their services.  It didn't do much good to provide local
cellphone service without LD capability.  But, the LD carriers weren't
going to make those connections on the same basis that they make their
existing LD access (by the connection and by time).  So, since the
cellular industry needs the LD capability to sell its local calling
service, the fee structure was virtually eliminated.

I don't know which cellular carrier was first to do this (I would take
a guess that it was McCaw, but don't quote me on that).  But, from
what I've heard, this practice is now widespread.


Ed Goldgehn                        E-Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr. Vice President                 Voice:   [phone]
Open Communication Networks, Inc.  Fax:     [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stan Schwartz)
Subject: Re: AT&T 500 Number Problems
Date: 5 Feb 1995 22:58:06 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC


Matthew Spaethe ([e-mail]) wrote:

> My 500 number isn't scheduled to be ready until Feb 3, but I've been
> trying it pretty much everyday.  Well, AT&T completed the call today
> (the local switch has been accepting 1-500-367-XXXX for sometime) and
> the only billing option was calling card.  Well, I tried that, and
> someone other than me answered the phone.  I have no idea who it was,
> but I guess I'll have the number when I receive my calling card bill!

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you have gotten a lot further with
> it than I have here. My 500 number was supposed to be turned on yesterday,
> January 30. Still no go as of Tuesday evening, January 31. The AT&T rep
> suggested calling the Illinois Commerce Commission and asking them to
> ask Ameritech to unblock 500. A call to the ICC got me the response that
> 'so far as they knew' (the ICC), there was nothing yet tariffed for 500
> here. AT&T said try using it via 800-225-5288 (CALL-ATT), but guess what?
> That didn't work either. Since my long distance service is defaulted to
> AT&T I tried double zero, and ask the operator to get it for me. After
> asking someone what to do, she tried dialing it and it went nowhere. She
> said it was 'blocked' in her computer and would not 'leave'.

> I am sure the AT&T billing department is more effecient and that I will
> be billed for this month anyway, just as I was for last month. :(   PAT]

My 500 number was promised for February 5, and just after midnight, I
dialed 1-500-XXX-XXXX, got the AT&T chime, and my other line rang.
Way to go, NYNEX!

Now if NYNEX could just get some other things straight, I'd be verry happy!

(BTW: the line that I called 1-500 from is pre-subscribed to Sprint)

 -Stan

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I found out something curious over the
weekend about my service: It works from *some Chicago prefixes in 312*.
But it still does not work in any shape from 708. When dialing from
a 708 number both 1-500 and 0-500 are blocked.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Reuben)
Subject: NYNEX PIN Security - Extra Airtime?
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 01:16:12 EST


After hearing about NYNEX/NY's (Boston too?) "Free Weekend Airtime",
which allows toll and airtime free calling to anywhere in 212, 718,
917, most (all?) of 201, most (all?) of 908, (609 too?), and most
parts of lower 914, I broke down and had a friend of mine who was
going to cancel with Metro Mobile in CT sign up with NYNEX/NY rather
than Cellular One.

Due to NYNEX/NY's totally un-professional and erratic call-delivery
system, as well as its significantly poorer coverage in most parts of
NY (in NJ it is slightly better), and higher roaming rates, I normally
do not even suggest NYNEX when someone asks me about service in NYC.
(Although CO/NY does bill for incomplete calls over 40 seconds, so in
some rare cases I will suggest that a person use NYNEX instead of CO
if they make a lot of calls where the party they are calling takes
over 40 seconds to answer.)

However, free weekend airtime is something that's hard to argue with,
so I told the guy to go with NYNEX, and he is in general happy with
them for the free airtime (Until June?, enough so that he is willing
to put up with their inferior coverage (signals rarely penetrate
buildings, CO's signals seem substantially stronger inside buildings
on average).

However, they insisted that he have a fraud protection PIN code on his
phone, as has been discussed here in the Digest in previous issues.

This raises a question: Normally, for any call which is answered,
billing STARTS shortly after you press SEND, when the system
recognizes/validates your phone and processes your outward call.

Thus, if you dial a number, and it rings for four minutes, and on the
fifth minute it is answered, you will pay airtime (and perhaps -
incorrectly - toll charges) for the FULL 5 MINUTES.

Now how does the PIN code fraud feature affect this? I've timed how
long it takes to get the "prompt" to enter your PIN code, and then to
enter the code while driving, and it is about ten seconds. Now do these
tenseconds count?

Thus, if you place a call and are required to use the PIN, if the call
lasts 65 seconds total, from the time you first sent out the call, are
you required to pay for two minutes, or does the switch only start the
airtime counter from when it receives a correct PIN code?

Anyone test this? I'm interested in finding out because if I find that
NYNEX/NY is billing people from the time they *initially* hit SEND to
place the call rather than when a caller enters his/her complete PIN,
I will call NYNEX/NY and demand to have the PIN feature removed.

An information on this would be appreciated!


Thanks,

Doug Reuben  *  [e-mail]   *  (500) 442-4CID / (203) 499 - 5221
Interpage Network Services -- E-Mail/Telnet to Alpha or Numeric Pagers & Fax

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

From: [e-mail] (Eric Nelson)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 1995 20:23:47 MST
Organization: Primenet


Additionally, sometimes the fraudulent phones are used as long
distance centers.  People will call the fraudulent number and then use
three way calling to connect to a long distance or international
number.  The cellular companies have to pay for this long distance and
international charge.  Hence, real money out of their pockets.

Cellular companies have invested quite a bit of money in pre-call
validation procedures and equipment.  The AUTOPLEX system has software
patches that are designed to detect the rolling ESN type of fraudulent
phone.

GTE started a clearing-house about two years ago to do pre-call validation.

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: Small Business Administration
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 95 21:35:24 -0400
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?


Some contributors have made the point that in "stealing" someone's
goods or services, you steal their profits as well.  Others maintain
that only the replacement cost should be considered, if that.  This
question of real versus phony losses reminds me of the old joke:

It seems there was this well-to-do lady walking down the street, back
during the Depression.  When she gets to the corner she sees a
shabbily dressed fellow, obviously down on his luck, selling apples.
She figures she'll help the poor guy out.

"You there, my good man, I'll take an apple.  How much are they?"

"One million apiece," answers says the apple vendor.

"Are you mad?" says the lady.  "A million dollars?  Don't you know you
aren't going to sell very many apples at a million dollars each?  What
sort of fool are you?"

"Who's the fool?" says the vendor.  "I only need to sell one!"

<rim shot>

Sure, sure, bad joke; but stick with the premise for a moment:

Suppose instead, at the end of the story, that the lady hits the guy
over the head and steals his whole tray -- an even dozen apples.  How
much loss does he report to the police?  How much loss has he suffered?
If they catch the woman, what crime do they charge her with, grand
larceny or petty theft?  Does the fact that the vendor *priced* the
apples at a million bucks each make them *worth* a million each?

And what do the headlines read the next day?

        "Rich woman mugs beggar for twelve cents worth of fruit."
-or-
        "$12,000,000.00 apple heist called `Crime of the Century.'"


Gary Novosielski    GPN Consulting


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The product is worth whatever the seller
says it is worth, period. Its his product to be defined however he wishes.
Whether or not anyone else agrees with his assessment is another matter.
Generally we buy things we don't need based on our belief they are worth
more than the seller is asking, not worth less than he is asking. If he
says the apple is worth a million dollars, then that is what it is worth.
If the cellular carrier says a fraud call was woth $X, then that is what
is is worth.

Now: how seriously would such claims be taken?  In other words, what would
the headline be the next day?  Well, since he is an old dirty bum, his
word on the subject would mean nothing.  On the other hand, since the
telcos and the computer gurus all speak their own language that no one
else understands and since they dress properly and act as though they know
what they are talking about, their word means everything. Everyone 'knows'
that apples are not worth a million dollars, and the same people who 'know'
this also are the kind to take everything telco says at face value. (The
Telephone Company once said blah blah, fill in the blank).  Therefore what
telco says is true and old bums tell lies. Of course it also helps if
you have an attorney who is good at sucking up to the right people,
and a public relations department trained to bark on command. Don't
you understand anything?  Truth is whatever the right people say it is;
the people who are in the proper circles, who dress and act properly and
who say things the right way.

Did anyone keep up with Dick Tracy in the paper on Monday? Over the next
couple months he is going to catch someone who has stolen millions of
dollars in phone service and computer resources.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #80
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04580;
          7 Feb 95 6:52 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09081; Tue, 7 Feb 95 01:29:11 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA09074; Tue, 7 Feb 95 01:29:08 CST
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 95 01:29:08 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #82

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 7 Feb 95 01:29:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 82

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Michael D. Sullivan)
    Re: What is a T1 Line? (Al Varney)
    Re: Cheap Way to Get an 800 Number? (Paul Robinson)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Paul Robinson)
    New Archives Email Service Feature (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] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 14:47:44 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek & Newman Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> rta <75462.3552@compuserve.
com> writes:

> Several issues are being raised here so let me try to sort them out.
> For FGD, many tariffs if you break them down, have a 1/3 the cost in
> switching, paying for COs and access tandems, 1/3 in transport, the
> bandwidth, and 1/3 in Common Carrier Line on the originating or
> terminating end, what the carrier pays to support (subsidize) the line
> to your home or business. This breakdown is approximate and varies
> from LEC to LEC, but it gives you the overall picture.  Only about a
> third of the charge is for bandwidth as most of us would interpret the
> word. The other element is switching.

That happens to be the way Feature Group trunks are priced.  Of course
the whole trick to FG pricing is that it's intended to be "contributory"
(profitable).  This comes from the old separations game of "splifs",
for "subscriber plant factor" (SPF).  In that game, the average usage
of LOCAL lines is divided into interstate and intrastate baskets.  The
interstate portion is MULTIPLIED by SPF and then the total cost is
divided amongst the two jurisictions.  Given SPF of 3 (old ballpark; I
don't know what it is now), then if 15% of calls in a jurisdiction
were interstate, then the cost would be divided 85:45 to local/interstate.
The subsidy, folks, is in the splifs.

Interstate cost is currently divided into the part paid via tolls and
the part paid via CALC ($3-6/mo "access charges").  The toll-usage
part is divided into different components and adds up to 3-5c/minute/
side-of-call for most telcos.

> Switching and the lines to the customer premises are really what is
> expensive.  The lines are not heavily utilized, in the case of many
> small businesses and residences. Switches are expensive and are not
> set up to support multiple hour calls.  Regular business calls that
> get through are typically 4 to 6 minutes in length with residential
> calls longer since many are placed to friends and family. Switches
> were engineered on the assumption that most calls would be short. As
> data usage increases, the switches have to get bigger, an expensive
> proposition or the multiple hour data calls will have to shifted to
> another technology, such as packet or cell switching where switches
> and long distance circuits are not tied up during think time.

Strowger switch costs were heavily usage-oriented.  Modern switch
costs have a minor usage component, less than .1c/minute if you
compute it, for local calls.  Data usage could "pay its own way" at a
fraction of a cent/minute for local calls.  Don't let the phone
companies fool you otherwise.

> Most modern CO switches detect a phone that is off the hook and not
> transmitting and generate an obnoxious tone to get you to hang up.

Proof that somebody's trying to confuse the issue.  The howler tone
does not tie up major resources in a modern switch; the line card is
just connected to a tone generator channel.  On an old Strowger it
could hang a line finder.

> Jerry Harder   Senior Partner
> Renaissance Telecommunications Associates

Lemme guess.  A consulting firm specializing in helping telcos win rate
hikes?


Fred R. Goldstein   k1io    [e-mail]
Bolt Beranek & Newman Inc., Cambridge MA  USA   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael D. Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: 6 Feb 1995 03:50:31 -0500
Organization: Wilkinson, Barker, Knauer & Quinn (Washington, DC, USA)


[e-mail] (Bruce Albrecht) writes:

> My question is that if they are truly losing hundreds of millions of
> dollars a year to fraud, why aren't they switching to known technologies
> (e.g., GSM based) which have per call authentication using a random
> number query with an encrypted key response, when such systems have
> been available for several years in other parts of the world?  If they
> really are losing $300 million or more a year, it must be cheaper to
> replace every single cellular phone with a more secure system than to
> let these losses continue to escalate.

At least in part because the FCC *requires* all cellular carriers to
provide AMPS-standard, unencrypted, analog service.  They are free to
offer alternatives as well, such as CDMA and TDMA (GSM, too, if anyone
cared to do so), but they still have to provide service to unencrypted
analog customers.

Also, phones using the unencrypted AMPS standard are cheaper and
provide better voice quality than the alternatives; the companies'
customers have analog phones.  Cutting off the majority of your
customers to prevent fraud is a great way to go out of business.

The cellular manufacturers have been working on new standards for
nearly ten years.  They aren't about to come up with yet another
standard -- analog with encryption -- that will be incompatible with
every system out there, and the carriers aren't about to buy it when
they plan to transition to digital over time and do away with analog
when the FCC allows it and their customers accept it.  PCS, on the
other hand, has the advantage of reinventing the wheel, since there's
no embedded base of equipment.  Unfortunately, there are something
like seven different standards under consideration for PCS (including
at least one GSM variant).

> If most of this amount is funny money, "lost profits" that they never
> really expected to generate, and use of excess capacity, then are the
> phone companies crying wolf?  Are we currently in the position where
> the phone companies are like the suburban/rural household that never
> locks their doors "because crime never used to be a problem", and now
> screams for more police because they keep getting burglarized, but
> still never lock their doors?

The carriers have tried a lot of things, from "electronic signatures"
of phones that have to match a database entry to PIN numbers etc.  The
latest is the FCC's new rule, which the manufacturers hate, that
requires the ESN to be unchangeable, period.  This, unfortunately, is
kind of like making it illegal to build a house without locks to
prevent burglary.

> My main concern over cellular telephone fraud is that because it is
> partly due to decisions made by the phone companies, and that it's
> probably been exaggerated, that our government is either going to
> respond with excessive legislative and/or regulatory reaction to a
> technical problem, or with no action at all.  Either way, it sends the
> wrong message.

As discussed above, it's not just decisions made by the phone
companies; it's decisions made by the government, purchases made by
consumers, and the limits of technology.  Are we going to eliminate
credit card fraud by eliminating account numbers or mag stripes and
require voiceprints?  No.  Are we going to eliminate software piracy
by reqiring copy protection?  No.  Similarly, we can't eliminate
cellular fraud by requiring use of a standard that obsoletes all of
the existing phones and cellular systems.


Michael D. Sullivan | INTERNET E-MAIL TO:  [e-mail]
Bethesda, Md., USA  | also [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Varney)
Subject: Re: What is a T1 Line?
Organization: AT&T Network Systems
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 08:54:21 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Butch lcroan/.nameBalcroan
Lilli <[e-mail]> wrote:

> 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.

> ... 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*.

   Jeff certainly can fend for himself in this forum, so this is just
to add a little FACT to the fray.  Butch, you were right -- Jeff was
stretching the truth.  The actual drop in Signal-to-Distortion ratio
with 1/6 bit robbing between two switches is 1.8 dB, not 2.  Of
course, when there are 5 switches in the connection, the ratio drops
by up to 4.2 dB.  (5 out of 6 bits are affected on 10% of the calls,
4/6 on 40%, 3/6 on 40%, 2/6 on 10% and 1/6 less than 1%.)

   On a typical mid-length call (intraLATA toll or between adjacent
LATAs), 3 out of 6 bits will be robbed 57% of the time and the ratio
drops by about 3.2 dB.

> 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.

   I agree that S/D ratio is not a BIG issue with modems, but it does
place a small per-call variation into the connection -- and that could
be just enough (combined with echo/cross-talk) to force a modem to
back-off to a lower transmission rate.  It is probably at least as
much of a factor as the individual variation between two different
modem lines at a common location.

> There are also several new technologies such as fiber that have
> introduced timing impairments such as " Jitter " into the equation.

   Jitter exists on all synchronous transport mechanisms, even ISDN
lines.  Copper-based, fiber-based, microwave-based, soliton-based all
jitter.  Whether it is a significant problem usually depends at least
partly on the bit-rate, repeater design and bit-detection mechanisms.
You seem to have it in for optical-based media -- what do you have
against photons?


Al Varney

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

Date: Mon, 06 Feb 1995 10:11:14 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: Re: Cheap Way to Get an 800 Number?


> Some friends and I are starting a new small business. We would like to
> have an 800 number. How do I get one?

You call a long distance carrier's 800 number and tell them you want
one.  Within a couple of business days they will turn on the number.

> Other than ATT/MCI/Sprint, are there other people who can provide an
> 800 number cheaply?

Don't know how much you mean by 'cheaply'. My 800 number from AT&T
costs me $8 a month plus usage, which is typically around 20-25c a
minute depending on how far the person is from Maryland.  As I
typically have a low calling volume, the costs usually run only $12 a
month or so.

> How do I minimize my cost?

First you have to figure how many calls you expect to receive.  If you
are doing a substantial number of calls now, you might see some of
them move to the 800 number.  If you see you are getting large volumes
of calls, you can change your service to a different plan which
charges slightly more for the service and less per minute.

> How do I get 800-CALL-MY-BUSINESS? Do I have have to pay extra for a
> "good" 800 number.

I originally had Sprint for my 800 number.  The number I wanted --
since my company name is "Tansin A Darcos & Company" -- the number I
wanted to get was 1-800-TDARCOS.  I couldn't get it; it was apparently
reserved by someone else, even though calling it indicated that the
number said it wasn't in service.

The business line here is 301-587-6354.  So, I got *that* number from
Sprint, e.g. 1-800-587-6354 which is a nice idea.  I checked later
with AT&T when I saw their rate was fairly competitive with Sprint.
Guess what: AT&T *was* able to give me 1-800-832-7267 (800-TDARCOS).
So I moved to them.

There was one item that I was not told, which suggest you ask all
costs in advance.  Sprint enabled the number I asked for -- the one
that matched my telephone number -- for the fee of something like $10
a month, and included a listing with 800-555-1212 and even allowed
calls from Canada; they asked me if I wanted to allow that, I said ok.

When AT&T turned on the new number, there was an additional "installation"
charge of $45.

During a one month period, both 800 numbers from each carrier terminated
on the same 301-587-6354 number so, unless a carrier has some rules
against it, you can have multiple numbers terminating on the same line.

Also, there is no longer an instate/out of state restriction.  I can call
my 800 number from another phone in the same room, or I can call it from
Virginia (which is out of state but also a local call in this area).  You
no longer have to have separate instate/out of state numbers.  And my bill
shows the ANI of every call I've received, which occasionally includes calls
 from places like Texas or New York.

Another thing to consider is who had your 800 number before; if it was
in use by someone else recently.

I used to have a big problem with my old 800 number I had a couple of
years ago (this was before you could ask for a specific number); the
former owner was a freight broker, so I got calls from long hall
truckers across the country telling me about partially empty trucks
available from point a to point b.  I finally had to put an announcement
on the line that said "Tansin A. Darcos & Company, a computer software
development company."

This is a point that is probably going to be a problem for the local
telephone companies.  Bell Atlantic will sell an 800 number for
instate calls (it mentions this in the phone book); because of the
long distance restriction they cannot provide interstate delivery.  I
doubt they can be much cheaper than a national carrier; if I can get
an 800 number from Sprint for $10 a month that allows me to receive
calls from anywhere in the US or Canada, why would I want a number
that only works in my home state?

About the only reason I could see is if you wanted a restriction on
incoming calls from this state.  But that's a problem too: within a 50
mile radius of where I am includes in MD: Baltimore, BWI Airport, all
of Montgomery and Prince George's county, the state capital at Anapolis,
parts of Howard County, but it also includes interstate areas including
all of Washington, DC, Independent Cities of Alexandria, Falls Church,
and Fairfax, Va; towns of Vienna and Manassas, plus Fairfax and Arlington
Counties in VA, plus Washington National and Dulles Airports. If I
want to reach anyone I can get to in a two-hour radius, an in-state
only 800 number is worthless.  In fact, most companies operating
anywhere within twenty miles of Washington typically will operate in
DC plus the cities and counties in both states surrounding it.

For example, a large local plumber here lists one number to call in
the greater Washington area: 1-800-4-HOT-WATER.  I know they are
licensed in all three jurisdictions.  While they could probably take
calls from Baltimore, or Arlington, VA, calls to them from, say,
Dallas/Ft Worth or Los Angeles or Chicago would be worthless.  Yet
since they don't advertise there, paying more per month to block calls
outside the local area probably isn't worth the extra cost, e.g if you
get $3 worth of wrong numbers a month, paying an extra $20 to restrict
area codes you don't want to service is not cost effective.

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

Date: Mon, 06 Feb 1995 10:54:58 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem


Victor Hu <[e-mail]>, writes:

> I just purchased a 28.8 K modem with the brand "Supra".  I paid extra
> to get the 28.8 K instead of the 14.4 K.

Probably about twice as much. 14K modems are down to $50 or so. 28Ks
are probably in the $100 range.  I purchased a 14.4 two years ago and
it cost me $215.  Consider yourself fortunate.  Mine still works quite
well -- I am using it to enter this message -- and like most modems,
will be obsolete long before it wears out.  If my Internet provider
decides to upgrade to 28.8K, I will probably get one.  Otherwise,
since I can't use one yet, I'm not going to bother.

> 1.  Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or
> 14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression?

The raw data rate for a modem will be from 110 to 28,800 baud (or
14,400 baud) depending on what the other side agrees on.  The rate
will be the lowest of whatever the two modems agree on. If you call up
a service that has only 14.4 modems, or 9600 baud modems, or even
2400, you will only get 14.4 or 9600 or 2400 even though your modem
can do more.  If both modems are 28.8 and both have their highest
speed enabled, you should see 28,800 baud before any compression
occurs.

The data is not sent at 28,800 bits per second, however.  Typically
the modem will divide up the telephone line into six or more channels,
and run each channel at 2400 to 4800 bits per second.  By multiplexing
six channels at 2400 baud, you get 14,400 baud, etc.

> 2.  What kinds of host supports 28.8K?  I only connect up to my
> university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max.

Your university may have so much load they can't run faster than 9600,
or the terminal controller might not be able to handle it.  Many
mainframes can't do I/O faster than some otherwise slow speed by
comparison.  When a IBM Sierra mainframe came out, a 9600 baud modem
probably cost as much as an ISDN BRI interface does now; hundreds or
thousands of dollars, so the port controller was probably set up with
that as the maximum.  The school might not have money in the budget to
upgrade modems, or the hardware might not be able to support those
kind of speeds, or it could be the administration was waiting until
the 28,800 speed was standardized by ITU, as some modems used
proprietary methods to communicate about 14.4 and thus you might need
the same brand at both ends.  You might ask them if they plan to
upgrade to 28.8 now that the ITU has standardized the method of
delivering 28,800 baud.

> 3.  What is the speed of fax machines?

There are two speeds for transmissions.  First, when the connection is
being set up, each side will send an identifier sequence.  I call it
the "answerback" after the similar sequence sent by a telex machine.
This identifier sequence is called a TTI or CSI.  One of these will
typically appear in the log that the fax machine prints after 20-40
transmissions indicating the identifying machine.  The other is the
telephone number or other identifier that appears in the display
window.  The two items may be different.  This information is
transmitted by each machine at 300 baud, which is okay since it is
typically no more than 60 characters for each side.  The sending
machine then increases its speed and the transmission takes place in
the equivalent of "half duplex" mode, except that the recipient
machine typically acknowledges the end of each page and end of
transmission.

The ITU standard for fax machine transmissions supports 4800, 9600,
12000, and 14400 baud, but typically a fax machine that does printing
will do 9600 tops, and can be downgraded to 4800 if line conditions
are bad. 12000 and 14400 are typically for fax modems in computers.

> 1.  The Supra has a nice display (external version for the PC) that
> shows the mode of transmission.

> 2.  However, I found that it required a different initialization string
> than that suggested as default for modems that are Hayes compatible.

The strings for each modem are because they all do different things,
and thus, to enable those features you have to set certain values.
For example, you can do a feature called "port locking".  Currently,
my terminal program sends and receives data to and from my modem at a
"locked" speed of 19200 baud.  The modem will transfer data to and
from the computer at 19200 baud, whether the connection at the other
end is 110 all the way to 14400.

The typical rule is to indicate every connection is at 19200.  I can
set a switch register and the modem will also report the actual
connection speed.  I can set a switch and have it enable or disable
data compression, and I can enable or disable error correction.  And I
can set switches so that it tells me whether the other side allows or
does not allow compression or error correction, or force error
correction or compression.

For example, when playing DOOM over a modem, the modem will run at
9600 baud (later revisions of the driver support 14,400). The modems
must not use data compression or error correction (because the extra
time to do this can lose synchronization between the two computers),
and the setup string for my modem will specifically disable these
features.  At the end of the game, the driver will issue an AT Z HO to
disconnect the line and reset the modem to the default settings.

If I have caller ID service on a line, I can enable the modem to send
the data after the "RING" message.  I can enable the data in hexadecimal
display digits, or I can enable it as ASCII text.  I can also tell the
modem to resend the last Caller-ID string it got, and I can tell it to
resend it in hex or ASCII, even if I had already received it using the
other mode.  I can also turn off reception of Caller ID data.

If I want the modem to send or receive facsimile data, the program
must use the AT&F prefix with certain commands to tell the modem to
either place a fax call or receive a fax.  Every feature in a modem
requires controls on it in order to enable or disable them as needed
in a particular instance or application.

Oh, yes, one more thing.  The alleged claims of data compression
giving throughput rates of 50+K and 110K on 14.4 and 28.8 modems is
sheer fantasy.  If you were sending a 100,000 byte file consisting of
all spaces, or all the same character, you might see those kind of
rates.

On my 14.4K modem, on ASCII text files, if I use a locked port at
38,800 baud, and enable compression I can see transfer rates of as
much as 3000 cps in rare cases, and typically around 1800 cps if the
data compresses well.  For binary and compressed ZIP archive files, I
have generally seen average transfer rates in the 1600-1620 cps.

For a 28.8K modem, you can expect to probably see rates around
3200-3400 cps, depending on the content of the material, if the other
side uses a 28.8K and can stuff it fast enough to keep the line
loaded.

MCI Mail supports 14,400 baud on their dialins, but I typically see
rates in the 700-1000 cps rate, probably because their VAX machines
are heavily loaded.  Occasionally I'll see rates as high as 1200 cps.

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

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Archives Email Feature
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 1995 01:00:00 CST


Monday evening I installed a new feature in the Telecom Archives Email
Information Service software called AREACODE. This allows the user to
enter one or more areacodes and get back email telling where the code
is located.

This is just an additional command installed in the software, used in
the same way as the other commands. You can insert as many areacodes
as desired and get back responses on each one.

If you are not already familiar with the Telecom Archives Email Information
Service, you can request a help file explaining how to use the service.
Send email to [e-mail]. The subject does not matter.
In the text of your message, at the left margin, enter these commands
on your first use of the program:

REPLY yourname@site
HELP
INFO
END

The REPLY command *must* be first, and END *must* be last. What you put
in the middle depends on what you are seeking. The help file you will
get in return explains the other commands.

To use the new AREACODE command, it would look like this:

REPLY yourname@site
AREACODE 208 701 302 509   (or whatever areacodes you want to check).
END

Watch for a response in email, typically a minute or two later.  Other
interactive commands you can use are:

SEARCH <string>   to search the back issues of the Digest for subject
                  and author names since 1989 forward.

GLOSSARY <string> to search the several glossaries on line in the Archives
                  checking for abbreviations and telecom terms you want
                  to learn about.

The help file will explain it all when you order it and INFO. Carl Moore
keeps the area codes files up to date, so blame him, not me if you don't
find all the newer codes there.


Patrick Townson

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #82
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04771;
          7 Feb 95 7:00 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08409; Tue, 7 Feb 95 00:53:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08402; Tue, 7 Feb 95 00:53:03 CST
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 95 00:53:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #81

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 7 Feb 95 00:53:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 81

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Book Review: "Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway" (Rob Slade)
    GTE PCS/Global Roam (Bernard Cerier)
    Caller ID and Call Waiting (Evan Champion)
    Re: Old Phone Number Format Question (Charles Shukis)
    Re: Old Phone Number Format Question (Al Varney)
    Re: MCI Strikes Again (Christopher Harwood Snider)
    Re: How I Fooled Caller ID (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Re: How I Fooled Caller ID (John Lundgren)
    Basic LAN/WAN Internetworking Cliff Notes Needed (guest machine)
    Professional Voice Prompts For IVR etc. (Evan Berle)
    Another A&T 500 Service Mixup (Matthew Spaethe)
    Re: MCI Gave me a Deal (Michael P. Deignan)
    Re: MCI Gave me a Deal (Christopher Harwood Snider)
    Re: MCI Bureaucratic Blunder (Richard Masoner)
    Re: Fraudulent Call Forwarding (Robert S. Helfman)

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, 06 Feb 1995 14:25:05 EST
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: "Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway"


BKSTINSH.RVW   941226

"Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway", Goldsborough, 1994, 1-
56761-513-9, U$19.99/C$26.99
%A   Reid Goldborough
%C   8219 Northwest Blvd., Indianapolis, IN  46278
%D   1994
%G   1-56761-513-9
%I   Alpha Books/MacMillan Publishing, USA
%O   U$19.99/C$26.99 800-858-7674
%P   340
%T   "Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway"

Yes, by all means, let us have some straight talk about the
information superhighway.  The author waffles around with terms like
"vehicle for the delivery ... of ... multimedia," but the reality is
that the phrase was and is a speech-writer's icon.  The slogan is very
environmentally friendly: it has been reused in ever-broader situations,
recycled in more promotions and speeches, and, in the process, reduced
almost to meaninglessness.  Goldsborough, in common with many who have
only a tenuous grasp on the concepts, attempts to marry the widespread,
anarchic, and still experimental Internet with the tightly-controlled
"providers" of electronic media.  (He also attempts to expand the
collection of information supercliches with "infopike".  Since he uses
this to draw an analogy to the toll-road turnpikes of the northeastern
United States, it is easy to see where his sympathies lie.)

The book is a collection of enthusiastic essays about life in the telecom-
rich future, with a piece concluding each chapter by some politician,
"industry leader", Famous Person, or other "expert".  Sometimes, it's
hard to determine whether the "viewpoint" is an addendum to the chapter,
the chapter is an introduction to the viewpoint, or whether both are related
solely by proximity.

The author must be sensitive, in advance, to possible charges that
this material is all very "blue sky".  After the opening story, he
argues that this is not a fantasy, but that future technology will be
very much like it.  Of course, the technologies presented -- email,
multimedia extensions, teleconferencing, voice recognition and
macros -- are all available *now*, but it is obvious that Goldsborough
is not really experienced in the most effective ways to use them.

This is an extended series of the usual mass-media magazine articles,
high on "gee whiz!" and low on content.

copyright Robert M. Slade, 1994   BKSTINSH.RVW   941226.  Distribution
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 15:26:29 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: GTE PCS/Global Roam


Pat,

Information you may find of interest.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Forwarded By Mac SprintMail >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

February 2, 1995

GTE PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES AND DEUTSCHE TELEKOM MOBILFUNK GMBH
(DETEMOBIL) ANNOUNCE GLOBALROAM(SM), AN INTERNATIONAL CELLULAR ROAMING
SERVICE; GTE OFFERS FLAT RATE AIRTIME CHARGE IN EUROPE AND OTHER CONTINENTS

GTE Personal Communications Services and DeTeMobil today announced an
agreement to offer international cellular roaming service.  With the
service, called GlobalRoam(SM), a traveler's cellular roaming capability
will ultimately be expanded to most countries in the world.

"American business travelers will have the same communications mobility from
country to country as they already have domestically from city to city," said
Jerry Waylan, executive vice president-product management and business
development, GTE PCS.  "Our research clearly indicates a need and desire for
this service."

In 1993, 3.7 million business people traveled between the U.S. and
Europe," said Roland Mahler, executive director of product management
mobile telephony services, DeTeMobil.  "As the marketplace becomes
increasingly global, we are making sure that business communications
are keeping pace."

Through this agreement, each company will have its own gateway to
provide interoperability between their two different cellular
transmission standards.  GTE, along with all other carriers in North
and South America, uses analog cellular radio technology known as the
AMPS standard, which stands for Advanced Mobile Phone Service.  Most
other countries in the world have adopted a digital cellular system
known as the GSM standard, which stands for Global System for Mobile
communications.  Deutsche Telekom, the parent company of DeTeMobil,
played a leading role in the development of GSM.

Initially, DeTeMobil subscribers will have access to North American
cellular services.  Through international roaming agreements between
DeTeMobil and other GSM network operators, North American subscribers,
through their local carriers, will be able to use worldwide GSM
networks.  In the summer of 1995, GlobalRoam will be available in more
than 30 countries, and will eventually be expanded to include
countries with other cellular standards.

GTE PCS will market the service initially to large U.S. corporate
customers and then to North American cellular carriers including GTE
Mobilnet and Contel Cellular, who will offer the service to their
customers under the GlobalRoam service name.  DeTeMobil will offer
GlobalRoam to GSM cellular carriers.

Subscribers to the GlobalRoam service will receive a "smart card,"
programmed with an identification number and other customer information.
For travel outside the U.S. and Canada, they will purchase or rent a
GSM mobile phone that accepts the card.  The phones will be available
for overnight shipment.  When subscribers use the phone in a foreign
network, calls to their home cellular phone number will automatically
be directed to their GSM phone, which will operate in any country
where DeTeMobil has a roaming agreement with the respective network
operator.  "Ultimately, we expect manufacturers to develop dual mode,
AMPS/GSM cellular phones, which can be used at home as well as in
other countries," Waylan said.

All charges will appear on the customers "home" cellular phone bill as
international roaming charges.  The GlobalRoam service will be made
available to cellular carriers at a flat wholesale rate, per-minute
airtime charge, plus toll, and a one-time activation fee with recurring
monthly charges per subscriber.  Cellular carriers can then retail
this service to their subscribers.  Additionally, as an option, the
carrier can provide to North American travelers a debit "smart card."
A $100 debit card, for example, would cover the cost of $100 in
airtime and toll charges.  The debit card will initially be available
for use in Germany.

GTE Telecommunication Services Inc. (GTE TSI) will facilitate this
service by providing the AMPS/GSM gateway in North America.  In
addition, GTE TSI -- which provides advanced software services to the
wireless industry -- will provide billing record translation and
clearing services so that charges for the international roaming
service will be included on customers standard cellular telephone
bills.  For additional information on this service, call 1-800-798-ROAM.

Deutsche Telekom Mobilfunk GmbH (DeTeMobil), headquartered in Bonn, is
a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Deutsche Telekom AG, dealing with
mobile communication services.  The company is Germanys largest
provider of these services and one of the largest in Europe with more
than 2.2 million customers at the end of 1994.  DeTeMobil is the
operator of the digital network D1 and played a leading role in the
development of the successful international GSM standard Global System
for Mobile Communications.

       GlobalRoam to be available in summer 1995 in these countries:

                        Australia       Latvia
                        Austria         Luxembourg
                        Belgium         Netherlands
                        Canada          Norway
                        Denmark         Philippines
                        Estonia         Portugal
                        Finland         Singapore
                        France          South Africa
                        Germany         Spain
                        Greece          Sweden
                        Hong Kong       Switzerland
                        Hungary         Turkey
                        Iceland         United Arab Emirates
                        Indonesia       United Kingdom
                        Ireland         United States
                        Italy

                                   # # #

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

Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 20:10:40 +0000
From: evan champion <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller ID and Call Waiting
Organization: Bell Northern Research


This is a problem that I'm sure is shared by many people who have
caller ID and call waiting.

If you have caller ID, you have probably grown very attached to that
"reassuring" feeling of knowing that the person at the other end is
not a telemarketer, or similarly disfunctional individual, but rather
you best friend Bob.

Now, the problem is that if you are on the phone and someone calls in,
you get the call waiting beep but no indication of who the second
caller is.  Caller ID is not applied to the call waiting service.

Is there a reason why caller ID cannot be used with call waiting?  I
would pay dearly to be able to get call display and name display
working with call waiting.

(I am a Bell Canada subscriber, but I suspect this problem affects more
than just us Canucks).


Evan


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There is a two-part answer here. The
first part is why it cannot work, and the scond part is about how it
will soon be changed so it does work.  The present arrangement is
that the data has to be sent when the phone is on hook. If you are
willing to disconnect your call in progress and hang up completely
(rather than just flashing the hook and putting the first party on
hold) then you *will* get the CID for the new call. The data gets
sent to your box between the first and second *actual ring at your
end*. This means it could 'ring' five times in the caller's ear and
you would get a couple of call waiting tones. You finally tell your
caller you want to see about the other call and will call him back
later. You disconnect and the call waiting starts ringing at your
end. Watch your ID box; the calling number will show up there immed-
iatly. The ID comes between the first and second ring *you hear* from
the actual bell on your phone. Now if it is someone you do not want
to talk to, well, you are sort of stuck at that point. I guess you
let it ring through to your answering machine or voicemail. That is
another curious point: Even though you have voicemail you might have
noticed that the call waiting won't transfer there after three/four
rings like other calls. Well, it will, but again, its after three/four
rings *that you hear* -- not the artificial 'rings' the caller gets
in his ear. A sophisticated caller who knows that he always gets your
voicemail after three/four rings calls and it rings ten times in his
ear *then* he gets your voicemail realizes you were there, and on a
call, and chose not to take his call once you saw who was on the ID
box.

That is going to change however. We had a report here not long ago about
'Caller-ID on Call Waiting' (I believe that is what it is called) and how
it will be implemented later this year in many places.  My understanding is
you'll need to have a special kind of phone to make it work. It will work
sort of like call waiting does now, where the central office gets on your
pair, and for a split second breaks the path to the person you are talking
to in order to send the spurts of tone. Its going to do that same kind of
thing with Caller ID on Call Waiting in the future. Existing display boxes
and phones will not be compatible however. Would whoever sent in that
report send it again as there have been others asking.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Charles Shukis)
Subject: Re: Old Phone Number Format Question
Date: 6 Feb 1995 00:22:26 GMT
Organization: Netcom


>>> The following question appeared recently in the Old Time Radio
>>> Digest mailing list, and seems tailor-made for an answer from this
>>> forum.

>>> From: "Richard M. Weil" <[e-mail]>

>>> The number for the store in Rockford was curiously 8-22-47.  I'm
>>> too young to know anything about 5 digit phone numbers.  Is that
>>> how it was back then in small cities?

Gee, all this talk of 5-digit numbers makes me feel old!  I grew up in a
small town in western Pennsylvania, and in the late 1940's, our phone
number was 849M.  No idea why the "M" instead of a fourth number, but
the line was a four-party line (private lines were extremely rare -- most
everybody I knew had a party line).  The phone would ring when any one
of the party-line subscribers were called ... each had his own distinctive
ringing pattern.  Ours was two longs and two shorts, or some such thing.

The only way to tell if the line was in use was to pick up the receiver
and listen.  One of the other subscribers on our line had a daughter
quite a few years older than I, and I must admit that I didn't always
hang up when I heard her on the phone. Never listened long, though,
because I found "girl talk" boring ... "mushy" was the word used in those
days, I believe.  "Crossed connections" were not uncommon in the days of
mechanical CO's (anybody remember the cats' eyes?), either, so we
frequently got to listen to conversations between other subscribers, as
well.  No taps, no bugs, no scanners: the telephone was a source of
entertainment as well as a means of communications.

I don't know what the laws were then, but I probably committed my
first felony, or at least misdemeanor, before I was five years old!
As we got older, we found another way to use the phone for entertainment:
"prank" calls.  Call the local drugstore ... "Do you have Prince Albert
in a can?" ... 'Yes, we do.' ... "Well, you'd better let him out before
he suffocates!"  Such shenanigans are a thing of the past, killed by
ANI, CID, auto call-back, auto call-trace, and the like ... perhaps it's
just as well.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For those unaware, 'Prince Albert' was a
type of smoking tobacco used in a pipe. I guess they still make it. The
other variation on this was to call someone late at night and claim to
be the Electric Company, asking 'is your refrigerator running?' Some fools
would actually put the phone down and go into the kitchen to see, then
come back and say it was. "Then you better stop it before it runs away
and you never see it again ...".  To five and six year old children,
those jokes are very funny, especially when played on an 'old person'
late at night, after the 'old person' was already in bed asleep and the
child should have been but wasn't.  The 'M' (like J, W, and R) were just
keys to tell the operator which party on the line was to be rung. The
switchboards had four buttons marked M,J,W,R and the operator would press
down on one of these buttons while pulling the ringing key. Whichever
one she pressed sent the current one way or another down the party line
to ring the one bell, and only the one bell similarly wired. Other places
had the 'short/long' ringing system as you mentioned, where all bells were
wired in common, and the subscriber was relied upon to know which to
answer and which to ignore.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Varney)
Subject: Re: Old Phone Number Format Question
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 07:40:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Michael Dillon <michael@junction.
net> wrote:

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

>>> From: "Richard M. Weil" <[e-mail]>

>>> The number for the store in Rockford was curiously 8-22-47.  I'm
>>> too young to know anything about 5 digit phone numbers.  Is that
>>> how it was back then in small cities?

> Too young, eh?

> In the early 1970's I lived near Moonstone, Ontario in Canada. At the
> time we got phone service from the Moonstone Telephone Company which
> was bought by Bell in 1972 I believe. Before Bell came in, our number
> was 33-W-21. The way it was explained to me was that 33 was our line

   I grew up on a farm outside a small Kansas town, with manual phone
lines run by Southwestern Bell.  I still have a yardstick from the
local lumber yard with "Phone 37" on it.  Around 1959 they put in a
small SXS CDO and dial phones.  And everybody got a four-digit phone
number in the block of 32xx to 35xx.

   Since business (and businessmen's homes) had all the two-digit
numbers, they were converted to the 32xx block by prefixing "32".  So
the lumber yard got 3237 and his house got 3236.  His widow still has
that number.  Southwestern Bell replaced the SXS in 1993 with a
digital switch, and forced everyone to seven-digit local dialing.
Virtually every business still has a NXX-32xx number.  (The fire
department has 3210.)

   For my home town, the current phone book (6" by 9" format) has just
over three pages.  My dad has the distinction (since his mother died in
1980) of being the only "V" entry.


Al Varney

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

From: Christopher Harwood Snider <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI Strikes Again
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 15:43:32 GMT


[e-mail]  writes:

> 3) MCI missed the boat.  When I called, they seemed to think nothing
>    of the fact that the long-distance service was not in my name.

> 4) Telecom*USA, when informed of the whole proceedings, declared that I
>    had a "$5 minimum usage" charge on my acount.  When in reality, I didn't.

> 5) Southwestern Bell AND MCI don't compare notes when user's start
>    complaining about mis-billing.  Only when state agencies get in the
>    act, do they begin to resolve the problem.

> Is it over?  I don't believe it will end until the PSC gets involved again.

> This is a time that makes me wish there were two local companies.  That way
> the competition would force them to be as caring of their users as they are
> about their money.

> On the other hand, I believe that Murphy was an optimist.

Michael,

     If I'm not mistaken, Telecom*USA is a subsidiary of MCI.  I've
looked at their rates, and they are not pretty. The MCI F&F program
beats them and there are even better rates out there.  It really is
worth it to look around.


Regards,

Christopher H. Snider   Telecommunications Consulting
American Access         [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Re: How I Fooled Caller ID
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 18:58:14 GMT


Could you send the data while your phone is ringing?  I've heard that
you can put resistors across your line and talk to someone while your
phone is ringing, and the phone company doesn't know it's picked up.
This implies that you can send data yourself between rings.  Is this
true?


Shawn Gordhamer   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, you can put a resistor across the
line then attach a listening device behind that and listen all you want
without being detected. That's how phones are tapped. And, I suppose
you could send data, since as far as everyone else is concerned, your
phone is still on hook.  But how would the person who is attempting to
spoof *your* display box know that you had such resistance on your line
unless he came to your house and put it there himself?  Seems like a lot
of trouble to me.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: How I Fooled Caller ID
Date: 6 Feb 1995 19:48:29 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


Clifton T. Sharp ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> Standalone Caller ID boxes that display calling number, or calling
>> number and name, "listen" all the time, and any time a valid incoming
>> Caller ID comes in, they display it!  I checked several brands, and
>> they all behaved this way.  Someone should alert the telcos and

> Not the Radio Shack 43-951 (sold some years ago); it only supplies +5V
> to its XR2206 chip between the first and second rings.  I don't believe
> my AT&T model 85 will, either, but haven't been inside it.

The XR2206 chip requires a _minimum_ of 10 volts to operate.  The
above statement sounds bogus to me.


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: guest machine <[e-mail]>
Subject: Basic LAN/WAN Internetworking Cliff Notes Needed
Date: 7 Feb 1995 00:59:00 GMT
Organization: Loyola University of Chicago


Can you assist with a brief discussion on the basics behind LAN/WAN
technology and internetworking?

I'm interviewing for a job and am not all that familiar with this
area.  I don't need the techy version, but just need to be able to
talk intelligently about LANS/WANS, hubs and routers. I would like
information on the major players in these areas. i.e cisco Systems,
Synoptics, etc.

Thanks; I really appreciate any assistance here.

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

From: [e-mail] (Evan Berle)
Subject: Professional Voice Prompts for IVR etc.
Date: 7 Feb 1995 02:52:09 GMT
Organization: Vox Box


Are you involved in setting up:

Automated Attendants
Voice Mail
Interactive Voice Response Systems
Fax-Back Systems
Automated Call Directors
 ... or any other system that prompts the user with voice?

Are you looking for professional voice prompts? Check out the VOX BOX
home page at HTTP://www.pubnix.net/~evan using Netscape or any other
graphical browser.  VOX BOX provides voice prompts and on-hold
advertising to telephone companies and end-users.


Evan Berle   Montreal, CANADA.
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew Spaethe)
Subject: AT&T 500 Service
Date: 6 Feb 1995 19:30:37 GMT
Organization: UMR Missouri's Technological University


On September 4, 1994, I reserved 1-500-FOR-MATT (which is a
non-guaranteed reservation).  I was told that that number was not
being used, and they would do whatever would be possible to get me
that number.  For the next months, I called and called to check up on
the status of the 500 assignments.  Well, on Jan 3,1995, I ordered my
500 number which was scheduled to go into service on Feb 3,1995.  Then
my 700 number was supposed to be cancelled at the same time.  Well in
late January, my number was working, but someone else was answering
the call.  I called AT&T, and they told me to just wait until Feb 3,
and it should work then.

Yesterday was Feb 3, and I called them.  They were going to assign my
700 master pin to my 500 number that evening.  I called back later to
ask a question, and now they had NO RECORD EVER of me ever wanting a
500 number.  I was informed that the 500 number belonged to someone
else!  NO RECORD OF ANY CONVERSATION! NONE!! NADA!!!  They told me
they were sorry, but there was nothing they could do.  Believe me, I
was very upset.  Not just losing my number, but not having any record
of talking to them.  I kept asking them about all the literature I
have that I requested!  It's got my name, my address, etc.

They set me up a new 500 number in 55 minutes.  It went from a month
to 55 minutes!  My voice mail still doesn't let me in, and they keep
trying to fix it.  United Telephone doesn't know how to bill the 500
call, so I must use a calling card.  MANY MANY little things ...  I
know that "my" 500 number terminates in NY, and that I believe that
person also had 0-700-MATTHEW.  It wouldn't suprise me if he worked
for AT&T (since their headquarters is located at 195 Broadway).  It's
just very very very weird for all information about my 500 number to
be GONE! VANISHED!.

Four of my five lines are now on MCI, enjoying my 0.06/min night rate ...


Matt :(

* Internet: [e-mail]
* PGP Public Key: finger [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you might check again. Very possibly
the computer was 'down' when you called and they could not 'find a record'
of any previous calls. Sometimes when they are without computer they try
to bluff as they go along ("I don't have all of your records available to
me right now ..."). What you are saying could be true, but I have never
seen them quite that bad, that they lost everything.

In other news, *my* 500 number started working perfectly today. About 3 PM
Monday I tried dialing 0-500 and 1-500 and as before, got nowhere. But I
had already found out both versions work fine from Chicago. I called
repair service on a lark and ask them 'when is 500 going to be unblocked?'
I got a call back within ten minutes from a woman very eager to hear all
about it. She insisted all was working fine. "Not in the Skokie CO," I
told her. She seemed astounded to hear that but said she would look into
it right away.  Another five or ten minutes goes past and she calls me
again to advise "I fixed it. The translations were not loaded is all ...
you can use it now."

Of course I tried it immediatly after disconnecting with her, and sure
enough, it worked fine, twenty minutes or less after calling repair service.
Amazing ... absolutely amazing. An interesting side to this is when I use
my own phone to dial 1-500-677-1616 (my number) it rings once and I am
told it will try my alternate numbers (because it found my home number to
be busy).  When I do 0-500-677-1616 and tell it to bill the call to the
phone I am using, it vanishes for a couple seconds and I get call-waiting,
then after four rings (call waiting or not) it interupts and a voice
message says it will try my alternate numbers. I did not bother with AT&T
voicemail; I have voicemail up the kazooey from a few other places I rarely
use. Anyway, feel free to call me at any reasonable hour: 500-677-1616.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael P. Deignan)
Subject: Re: MCI Gave me a Deal
Date: 6 Feb 1995 11:56:58 GMT
Organization: Population Studies & Training Center


> MCI called yesterday, and made me an offer I didn't want to refuse.
> 50% off on all calls for six months.  After that, 50% off on calls to
> MCI customers (no list required) and 25% off (if I recall correctly)
> to everyone else.

I saw a commercial for this last night. I thought it stooped to a new
sleazy low in marketing. At the very end, MCI claims you "always save
over AT&T True USA" and then in little letters that I needed to squint
to see, next to "True USA" were the words "ex promo".

Wow, what a deal. What next? "Save 99% on all calls" and then in a four
point font "compared to AT&T's rates 30 years ago!"

I think the public is rapidly becoming burnt out on these percentage
"savings" compared to some obscure number nobody ever mentions. I don't
know a single person who doesn't flip the station when a long distance
advertisement comes on.

In my opinion, Sprint is the real winner now, with their penny-per-minute
promo. At least you know what you're paying and when the rate is applicable.
With the other two, its a percentage crap-shoot over some elusive "basic"
rate.


MD

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

From: Christopher Harwood Snider <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI Gave me a Deal
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 15:39:18 GMT


[e-mail]  writes:

> MCI called yesterday, and made me an offer I didn't want to refuse.
> 50% off on all calls for six months.  After that, 50% off on calls to
> MCI customers (no list required) and 25% off (if I recall correctly)
> to everyone else.

50% off is all well and good, but what is it off of? If that is their
savings on $1/minute rates then you are getting taken to the cleaners.
Percentages do not matter as much as the bottom line which is the
rate you are paying. Find out what those are and then you can make a
viable comparison. I have flat rates around 14 cents/minute on my home
line with a carrier. I have seen better rates from resellers, but I just
can not trust them with my phone service. Anyone in the US can get these
rates and businesses will often times get better, if not much better,
rates. Also, do not get a calling card if it has a surcharge or any
hidden fees such as higher first minute billing. Ask for nothing less
than straight six second billing. You should only be paying for what you
use, right? I hope this helps. :-)


Regards,

Christopher H. Snider   Telecommunications Consulting
American Access         [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 6 Feb 95 11:24:25 CST
From: [e-mail] (Richard Masoner)
Subject: Re: MCI Bureaucratic Blunder
Organization: Central Data Corp., Champaign, IL


> was made!  October was the last month we received a billing from MCI
> on the U.S. West bill, and it was only for part of the month.  So,
> suspicions are that an error made by U.S. West in finally correcting
> their bill to us created the problem with MCI, and started the

This is interesting.  I too am an MCI subscriber, and last October the
MCI portion of my bill no longer appeared on my GTE-North phone bill.
I did get the MCI bill separately, directly from MCI.  A phone call
inquiring about why this was quickly rectified the situation.


Richard


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Rectify it for us please. Why are they
now billing you separately.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert S. Helfman)
Subject: Re: Fraudulent Call Forwarding
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 08:17:08 -0800
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation


In article <[e-mail]> Patrick Townsend wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This same report appeared in alt.dcom.telecom
> today submitted to that newsgroup by Jack Decker who concluded by saying
  ........deleted...........

> What goes around comes around:  Does anyone remember the old anecdote about
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^....Hah!
> the original development of automatic switching involving Alvin Stroger?
> Mr. Stroger was an undertaker a hundred years ago; he believed that the
> operators on the manual exchange serving his community had been bribed to
> divert calls from the public seeking funeral/burial services to his compe-
> tition. So the story goes, he developed the switch which came to bear his
> name as a way to be certain that manual operators at telephone exchanges
> could not wilfully give away his business to his competitors.   PAT]

PAT, tell us that you actually intended that hysterical pun! (Then
again, many readers are too young to get it ...)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yeah, I had the same thing in mind. I do
stand corrected though on the inventor's name: It is spelled 'Strowger'
with a /w/ in the middle.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #81
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21485;
          8 Feb 95 5:21 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08730; Wed, 8 Feb 95 00:28:03 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08724; Wed, 8 Feb 95 00:28:01 CST
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 00:28:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #83

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Feb 95 00:28:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 83

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    FCC Allocates Data-PCS Spectrum (Bennett Z. Kobb)
    911 Access in Jeopardy (Jim Conran)
    Speculations Regarding AT&T True Connections (John Shelton)
    Where are the CTI Environments? (Scott Sanbeg)
    The Philosophy of CallerID (Malcolm Slaney)
    Special Alert! Unreasonable Network Policing Proposed (Carlos Amezaga)
    Who Belongs to 10732 Five-Digit Access Code? (Thomas Grant Edwards)
    Survey of IT-Consumption in USA (Morgan Widung)
    Custom IVR (Jack Pestaner)
    Motorola Flip Phone and Low Battery (Erik P. Larson)
    Human Intrusion (Dale Neiburg)

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] (Bennett Z. Kobb)
Subject: FCC Allocates Data-PCS Spectrum
Organization: New Signals Press
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 22:31:31 GMT


Here is the news release issued by the FCC today on the 2.4 GHz
allocation. (The full text of the decision has not yet been released.)

Congratulations to all concerned for a job very well done.


Bennett Kobb   [e-mail]
Editor and publisher  Spectrum Guide

Federal Communications Commission NEWS  February 7, 1995

Action in Docket Case (ET Docket No. 94-32)

The FCC has allocated 50 Megahertz of spectrum, at 2390-2400 MHz,
2402-2417 MHz, and 4660-4685 MHz, that was transferred from Federal
Government to private sector use. The allocations adopted by the
Commission today will benefit the public by providing for the
introduction of new services, such as wireless local area networks,
and the enhancement of existing services.

Among other things, these services will allow companies to operate
more efficiently by communicating through wireless networks that are
flexible enough to operate almost anywhere. They also will allow low
cost access to Internet services and other information networks for
schools, libraries, telecommuters and home offices. In addition, these
services will allow for better health care through wireless health
care monitoring devices and allow the instantaneous updating of health
care records and databases.

The Commission stated that this 50 MHz is the first of at least 200
MHz of spectrum required to be reallocated from Federal Government to
private sector use in accordance with the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1993. The Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993
required the Commission to adopt allocations for and propose
regulations to assign this first 50 MHz of spectrum by February 10,
1995.

The Commission allocated the 2390-2400 MHz bad for use by unlicensed
Personal Communications Services (PCS), provided for continued use of
the 2402-2417 MHz band by unlicensed devices operating in accordance
with Part 15 of the Rules, maintained the availability of both of
these bands for use by the Amateur service, and allocated the band
4660-4685 for Fixed and Mobile services.

The Commission stated that unlicensed PCS devices, which include
wireless networking and data transfer devices, operating in the
2390-2400 MHz band will be governed by the same rules that apply to
PCS devices operating in the 1910-1920 MHz band. Power levels,
emission limits, and spectrum etiquette for unlicensed PCS devices
operating at 2390-2400 MHz are identical with requirements for
asynchronous (data) devices operating at 1910-1920 MHz.

The Commission believes that allocating the band for unlicensed
data-PCS, and providing for use of 2402-2417 MHz by Part 15 devices,
will provide for the continued development and implementation of a new
generation of advanced communications devices and services, such as
wireless local area networks, digital cordless telephones, electronic
article surveillance equipment, utility metering devices, fire and
security alarm devices, and wireless bar code readers.

In addition to offering the potential for providing greater safety and
security to citizens and allowing business to operate more efficiently,
this new family of devices offers the potential to directly benefit a
large percentage of the public by providing a new "on-ramp" to the
information superhighway.

Corresponding to the Fixed and Mobile allocation for the 4660-4685 MHz
band, the Commission proposed technical, assignment and service rules.

Action by the Commission February 7, 1995, by First Report and Order
and Second Notice of Proposed Rule Making (FCC 95-//).

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Conran)
Subject: 911 Access in Jeopardy
Date: 7 Feb 1995 21:08:23 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470


Cellular phone users throughout the country could have their 911 emergency
access in jeopardy if action is not taken immediately.  The FCC issued
a proposed rulemaking on October 19, 1994 that to look into the matter
of revising FCC rules and regulations to ensure compatibility to 911
enhanced services.

Comments to the FCC from concerned citizens will be accepted until
February 8, 1995.  Your action is greatly needed on this matter if 911
services are to be accessible by all cellular users. Please do not
wait until a natural or other disaster strikes before you realize how
valuable full accessibility to 911 emergency services is for all
citizens.

To learn how to take immediate action on this issue:

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 2346   Orinda, CA 94563
510/253-1937    510/253-1359 (Fax)

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

From: John Shelton <[e-mail]>
Subject: Speculations Regarding AT&T True Connections
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 95 13:39:55 PDT


Here are some speculations re: AT&T True Connections service:

*  Use of SS7 to better judge whether a phone is answered or busy or
   whatever.

   - Note:  AT&T says if you have a sequence of numbers, and
   one is busy, they will skip to the next one.

   - Note:  AT&T says sequencing option is not available to
   some customers, *yet*.

*  AT&T sees this as a way to keep customers loyal.

  - $1/mo isn't very much revenue for the basic service.  But you need
   to have AT&T service on that line.

  - Those of us with multiple phone lines can of course keep AT&T service
   on one line (for TrueConnections billing) and use MCI or whatever for
   the other lines.

*  Some PBX systems will continue to block calls to NPA 500
   for quite a while.  They won't see the utility, and may
   even be suspicious that it's "like 900".

*  Other carriers will not charge the same rates for calls to
   NPA 500.  The 500 number space will become a big mess for
   a while, until things settle down and some consortium
   addresses the issue.

   (Who does set the rate for such a call; the caller's LD
   company, or the destination's LD company??)


John


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T sets the rates (or whatever company
offers the 500 service, such as Ameritech also proposes to do) for calls
since you are connecting to them. It is much like calling an 800 number
in that the billing is done by the company whose prefix you dial into.
All your local telco will be doing is handing the call off to AT&T (or
other 500 carrier.) I think from now on the *only* phone number I am going
to give out (on forms I complete, etc) is my 500 number.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott Sanbeg)
Subject: Where Are the CTI Environments?
Date: 8 Feb 1995 00:05:19 GMT
Organization: NW NEXUS, Inc. -- Internet Made Easy [phone]


A lot has been happening with CTI ... it was happening last year when
I attended the conference in Dallas and much is hyped over in the
industry rags.  However, my company has looked into many environments
over the past year and have, so far, found only one that seems it will
be suitable (when it's completed).

A full featured application out of Florida is called Dimi/TAS.  Agent
stations are MS-Windows (or ...) clients connecting to a central server
or more.

I've reviewed AmTelco's Infinity system where telephony and data are
on seperate networks altogether, using MS-Windows DDE capabilities to
automatically hot-key between the two nets.

We're familiar with Eve, Startel, TASCOM, others.

But, our call center environment is too large for entry-level network
topologies.  We look like this:

         _______
|-------| Fiber |
|     __|  MUX  |
|    |  |_______|                      T1's, ISDN,       # Call Center
|    |                                 Other WAN           Server 1
|    |             (FDDI RING #1)      Connections
|    * Router                           |||                  # Call Center
|      (Firewall)  # Communications     |||                    Server 2
|                    Server             |||
|                                       |||    (FDDI RING #2)   # Call Center
|    |----|                             |||                       Server 3
|    |    |Modem Pool                   |||
|____|    |(192 ports)________ ** Bigger Router       @@@@@@...
     |____|                       (Firewall)          65 Agent Stations

Beyond that, we have used the telco approach with -48 volt power
supplies, everything is redundant, we generate our our AC and have a
large natural gas generator for when and if city utilities go out, a
wall of batteries dual-homed/dual-attached/dual counter-rotating ring
FDDI switches connecting the servers and dedicated 10Mbps Ethernet
going to each Agent Station.  One Call Center Server is a fault-tolerant
Tandem. We have many T1 spans and have been in business for 58 years.

We just don't need an entry-level topology, as you may see.

What we do need is a client-server based product that will run well on
65 Windows-for-Workgroups clients, and understand Tandem's CAM (for
telephony integration, screen pops, etc.).  The product we need incorp-
orates functions of an answering service and a call center (message
taking and order taking), with the ability to send data out via fax,
remote printer, PC pickup, etc.

Who knows such a critter?


Scott
Computer Systems Engineer, Seattle, WA   [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 19:35:53 +0000
From: [e-mail] (Malcolm Slaney)
Subject: The Philosophy of CallerID


The article listed below (with abstract) does an incredibly good job
of discussing the issues in CallerID and Anonymous call-rejection.
The article's primary purpose is to define four types of privacy and
how they relate to CallerID:

        Anonyminity - public place but no ID
        Solitude - Don't be disturbed
        Reserve -  Mental distance
        Intimacy - Screening

To make the issue more interesting, who wins and loses depends on who has
access to the technology.

This article should be required reading for anybody who wants to enter
into the debate.  I think the definitions and framework are a valuable
starting point.


Malcolm

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

Caller ID and the Meaning of Privacy

Laurie Thomas Lee (Univ of Nebraska-Lincoln) Robert LaRose (Michigan
State)

The Information Society, Volume 1, pp 247-265, 1994.

Caller ID service continues to be controversial issue in the U.S.
because of its privacy implications.  State and federal regulators,
legislaters, scholars, and the courts have examined and responded to
the privacy issue from a policy perspective, but perhaps without a
complete understanding of the meaning of privacy in the context of the
debate.  What types of privacy are involved, how signifiant are these
interests, and how might privacy needs compare and be balanced?  This
article explores privacy in the context of the Caller ID debate from a
social science perspective.  It examines motives for seeking and
preserving privacy and explores the dynamic relationship between the
caller and the called party positions.  It then provides an analysis
of current and proposed Caller ID features and policies with a view
towards understanding how these proposals balance competing privacy
needs.  This article establishes an analytic framework and a
foundation for further study of caller and called party privacy that
should lead to a better understanding of the privacy debate and the
privacy implications of Caller ID.

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

Organization: Megalith Mail/News Server - Miami, FL USA
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail] (Carlos Amezaga)
Subject: Special Alert!  Unreasonable Network Policing Proposed
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 1995 20:57:00 EST


                       -> EMA ALERT <-
            News For and About the Members of the
               ELECTRONIC MESSAGING ASSOCIATION
============================================================
                February 3, 1995 -- Number 18
<---------------------------------------------------------->
                  ***** SPECIAL ALERT *****
 - Congress to consider making all system operators liable
   for messaging content.  Bill would force employers to
   monitor message content.              ACTION NEEDED NOW!
<---------------------------------------------------------->

UNREASONABLE NETWORK POLICING PROPOSED

   Yesterday, Senator Jim Exon (D-NE) introduced S.314, the
Communications Decency Act of 1995, in the United States Senate.  In
an effort to stamp out digital pornography, it makes all
telecommunications providers doing business in the United States (from
the telephone companies all the way down to offices that use LANs)
liable for the content of anything sent over their networks.  To avoid
the possibility of tens of thousands of dollars in fines and up to two
years in jail, business owners would be forced to police their
networks and monitor in advance all messages sent over them.

WITHOUT ACTION - COULD BE LAW IN MONTHS

   This bill is substantially the same as the one he put forward last
year.  He will offer it as an amendment to the pending telecommunications
deregulation legislation in the U.S. Senate, which is expected to be
enacted by July.  Last year, his amendment was adopted even though
many thought it hastily drafted and poorly thought out.  Fortunately,
the telecommunications deregulation legislation died.  This year, a
more conservative U.S. Congress may be even more reluctant to challenge
a "morality" amendment; and its legislative vehicle, the telecommunications
deregulation legislation, stands a much better chance of passage this
year.

ACTION NEEDED NOW

   Action by the business community is needed now.  Please notify your
corporate government affairs office and/or your legal counsel.  This
measure could be adopted as an amendment to the telecommunications
bill IN A MATTER OF WEEKS (or potentially added to any legislation
pending on the U.S. Senate floor), if business does not mobilize
against it.  S.314 will not stop digital pornography, but it could
devastate the messaging business.  If you are interested in further
information or are able to participate in lobbying efforts over the
next few weeks, contact Sarah Reardon at EMA (see below).

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

EMA ALERT is published and copyrighted (1995) by the Electronic
Messaging Association.  Permission to reproduce and/or redistribute
with attribution is hereby given to all EMA members.  For more
information about anything in EMA ALERT, contact EMA via e-mail - use
either X.400 (S=info; O=ema; A=mci; C=us) or Internet ([e-mail])
address, facsimile (1-703-524-5558), or telephone [phone]).
Any EMA staff member can be addressed directly via e-mail by using,
for X.400, G=<firstname>; S=<lastname>; O=ema; A=mci; C=us, and, for
Internet, <firstinitial><lastname>@ema.org.  EMA's postal address is
1655 N. Fort Myer Dr. #850, Arlington, VA 22209 USA.  --



% __A500 % UUCP: [e-mail] % I Tried MS-DOS Once
% % __/// 030 % DATA/FAX: [phone] % But Didn't Inhale.  % %
\\//Amiga % System Administrator - PGP on Request % --D.Atkin-- %

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

From: [e-mail] (Thomas Grant Edwards)
Subject: Who Belongs to 10732 Five-Digit Access Code?
Date: 7 Feb 1995 14:44:15 -0500
Organization: Project Glue, University of Maryland, College Park


Recently an "urban rumor" has been going around:

If you want to know whether your phone has been tapped in the last six
months, dial in the following:

107 321 404 988 966 4

What you will get back is a digital recording consisting of (a) your phone's
area code;  (b) your 7-digit phone-number;  (c) the digit 8;  (d) a pause of
a few seconds;  (e) 9 zeroes in three groups of three -- 000 000 000;  and
(f) a digit.  If the digit (f) is a 2, your phone is clear.  Otherwise, if it
is any other digit (usually it's a 1 in that case), your phone has been
tapped in the last six months.

OK - obviously this number is 10732-1-404-988-9664.  Which provider is
the 5-d code 10732?  Anyone know mroe details on the 1-404-988-9664?


Thomas


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Gosh, what a mystery!  If you will be so
kind as to dial 10732-1-700-555-4141 the recording which answers will tell
you that you have reached 'a private network', and that if you want to get
more information you can dial your account representative. For anyone
wishing to make a call, we are told to dial (here comes the clue!) 10288
and the number. 10732 is used by AT&T's largest customers. I don't know
everything about it that makes it different than 10288, but it does have
a few things different. In case you had not noticed, 404-988-9664 cannot
be dialed via any other carrier. You can try it; all you will get is a
busy signal. This tells us that AT&T is grabbing incoming calls to that
number via 10732, intercepting them and delivering them somewhere (probably
to themselves at their office in Atlanta) on a T-1, and that the actual
phone [phone] is just left off the hook all the time. After the recitation
of your phone number -- or more precisely, your ANI -- then your account
number is read back. It is all zeros because you don't have an account with
AT&T, at least not where this particular network is concerned. I don't
know what the final digit is, but that bull about 'your phone has been or
is being tapped' is just exactly that: Bull!  How would AT&T know if
some customer of Sprint (for example) had his phone tapped by his local
telco, at (for example) the request of law enforcement.  Whoever spreads
these stories (you perhaps? 'urban legend', indeed!) should stop it now.
I don't know what the AT&T private network uses that number for, but I
can almost assuredly advise you it has nothing to do with phone taps.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Morgan Widung)
Subject: Survey of IT-Consumption in USA
Date: 7 Feb 1995 15:05:34 GMT
Organization: Lund Institute of Technology, Sweden


Is there anyone out there who knows what companies /organizations/
universities that make investigations about the IT-consumption in the
US market (everything from multimedia to mobile phone consumption)?

Also, where are those investigations made?


Sara Fortea                           work [phone]
Ericsson Mobile Communications AB     memo: ECS.ECSSAFO
Ideon Alpha
232 70 LUND
SWEDEN

PS. As I have no internetaccess from Ericsson, kindly respond via
    [e-mail] (Morgan Widung)

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

From: [e-mail] (Jack Pestaner)
Subject: Custom IVR
Date: 7 Feb 1995 16:04:31 GMT
Organization: OGI Telecomm; Beaverton, Oregon


I am evaluating several solutions to an IVR application, and it occurs
to me that developing our own using visual voice software may be a
cost effective solution.

We want to integrate with our NEC2400 PBX, which has an RS232 connection
they call Infolink which provides realtime status information from the
ACD processor to external IVR equipment.  Apparently,it is an open
application and NEC will provide documentation.

Our initial application is pretty simple--we want to provide queue
status information to the caller, and allow the caller after a
predetermined time to exit the queue to voice mail, or be returned to
the queue.

Commercial IVR companies offer systems but want about 40K to do this.
I would like to contract with an experienced developer to do this for
us if we benefit from it.

Please let me know if you or any associates are interested.

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

From: [e-mail] (Erik P. Larson)
Subject: Motorola Flip Phone and Low Battery
Date: 7 Feb 1995 17:02:27 GMT
Organization: Michigan State University


I have a Motorola Omega Series flip phone.  I've been satisfied with
it for the most part, but does anyone know how to disable the low
battery warning beep?  It's really annoying and it's very easy to
check the status of the battery.


Thanks,

Erik Larson

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

Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 11:19:28 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Human Intrusion


In TELECOM Digest V15 #70, David McCord wrote:

> Passed along FYI (For Your Insomnia?) .....

> From: "Mark D. Baushke" <[e-mail]>
> From: [e-mail] (Fred Baker)
> Subject: Human Intrusion

> At a symposium at MIT earlier this year, a representative of the
> Communications Workers of America (CWA) began a presentation bemoaning
> the loss of union craft jobs among telcos by drawing on the chalkboard
> a sketch representing the telco C.O. of the future:

[Graphics snipped]

> In this picture, there is a single man, a dog and a computer.  The
> man's job is to feed the dog and the dog's job is to bite the man if
> he touches the computer.

Years ago, when I first moved to Baltimore, Maryland, I was living in
a pretty rough, run-down neighborhood.  The only building of any size
was a C&P (now Bell Atlantic) CO that towered over the area.  To
protect vans and other company vehicles, they were parked overnight in
an adjoining enclosure, surrounded by a chain-link fence topped with
barbed wire.  As an additional safeguard, there were two very
unfriendly guard dogs released in the enclosure overnight.

That continued for about a year after I moved in.  The practice ended when,
one night, someone stole the dogs ...


Dale Neiburg, STC   National Public Radio  Phone:  [phone]
635 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.   Washington, D.C.  20001
Internet: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Dogs make excellent security assistants.
The City of Chicago has an auto pound over at 30th and California Avenue
right behind Cook County Jail. Anyone whose auto is towed out of a place
it should not be parked, along with autos which were stolen, stripped and
then abandoned on a street somewhere wind up there in the city auto pound.
It is a dreadful place. Along with high barbed wire fences, signs warn
against trespassing and caution that vicious dogs roam the premises all
night. So walking down the sidewalk past there at night, or a Sunday
afternoon or other time when the place is deserted, you see these mountains
of stripped, rusted out cars, piles of tires and motor parts everywhere,
and three or four really vicious, nasty German Shepherds who constantly
jump at the fence, growl, bark and bare their teeth at you as you walk past.
You can see the hatred in their eyes. Occassionally, I am told, some fools
still climb the fence at night, go in and try to strip an auto left there
by the police towing or just outright steal it.

On the other hand, it is *good* seeing the dogs with the security people
on the subway and elevated trains at night. The rate of crime on public
transportation at night -- violent or non-violent -- has gone down quite
a bit as a result. Those dogs are kept on a strong leash/strap, with wire
muzzles around their nose and mouth so they cannot just go up and take a
bite out of someone. But let one of them stand next to you on the train at
night looking at you; you *know* the dog would love to take a bite out of
your leg if he could. Consequently, people are behaving themselves quite
nicely on the subway these days, or rather, these nights and early mornings.

Coming home from downtown Chicago on a Saturday night, I went in the subway
at Jackson Street about 1:00 AM. Nothing surprises me there; that
station is like a zoo at night all the time. A very tall man who
appears to be intoxicated and high on something has finished drinking
beer. He smashes the bottle on the concrete floor and holding the
bottle by its neck is menacing anyone and everyone there with the
broken peice of glass. Someone has told the fare collection agent
upstairs about this and she has started frantically ringing the
security bell; very loud bells with big gongs wired in parallel in all
the downtown stations. She presses a doorbell button in her cage with
a certain cadence to produce a ringing signal on all the bells to say
which station needs assistance. Meanwhile downstairs this fellow is on
a rampage, screaming and cursing and threatening anyone who comes near
him with that broken bottle he is waving and the overhead bells are
ringing loudly, two short, one long ... two short, one long.

A woman who is one of the Chicago Transit Authority security representatives
comes up about that time with Bruno, her dog. She has no gun, but she does
have a club I would hate to be on the wrong end of. She stands about ten
or fifteen feet away from this guy and looks him right in the face and
yells at him: "You scum! Put down that bottle now! Toss it out on the
track! He looks at her and stands there. "I told you to put down that bottle!
Sit it down there on the floor or toss it out on the track!" Instead of
doing either, he starts toward her waving it.  In about two seconds she
had bent down and pulled the muzzle off Bruno. All the dogs are trained
to respond *only* to a word said by their owners. The word is obviously
not 'kill', because all sorts of practical jokers on the trains look at
the dogs and say that to them; the dog just keeps watching them, but does
not respond. In Bruno's case, the secret word was 'love'.  "Go love,
Bruno!  Love!" To the dog, this meant great fun was at hand. He lunges
at the dude, knocked him over and was snarling and fighting with him as
the woman kicked the beer bottle out of the way and handcuffed the guy.
About this time, Chicago Police tactical officers arrive to back her up;
they hussle the guy off into the catacombs, some of the odd, desolate
little rooms in the bowels of the subway which connect with the remains
of the old tunnel system from a century ago. They take prisoners there
to 'interview' them sometimes, and no doubt to administer discipline on
the spot, knowing quite well that in our overcrowded court system, the
only punishment to be meted out to miscreants on public transportation --
the purse snatchers, pick pockets and others -- will be the punishment
afforded them by the police officers who arrested the 'asshole', as in
"The asshole was threatening other passengers with a broken bottle. My
dog had to take him down ..."  It doesn't quite go in the official report
in those exact words, you understand. <g> .... PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #83
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29124;
          8 Feb 95 14:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA15752; Wed, 8 Feb 95 09:34:03 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA15745; Wed, 8 Feb 95 09:34:00 CST
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 09:34:00 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #84

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Feb 95 09:34:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 84

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    700 Problems = 500 Problems (Doug Reuben)
    Re: NYNEX PIN Security - Extra Airtime? (Ken Weaverling)
    MVIP Interface? (K.S. Lee)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Robert Lindh)
    QUALCOMM Gone Wrong? (Simon J. Wallace)
    Re: Telstra (Australia) Information Wanted (Sam Spens Clason)
    Motorola Fones (Antonio Veloso)
    Re: Phone Number Wanted For Genesys Labs (Joe Sulmar)
    Dial-N-Save (Jeff Hersh)
    Re: Cheap Way to Get an 800 Number? ([e-mail])
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Marc A. Randolph)

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: 700 Problems = 500 problems
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 05:24:28 EST


Hoping that AT&T learned from its mistakes with the 700 service, I
anxiously awaited the availability of their 500 service. Although
there are a few impressive features on the system, overall, many
people can NOT reach me on it and/or find it awkward. Here are some
observations:

1. WHY does it have to say "AT&T" when someone calls 1-500-442-4CID? I
   don't need people calling me to hear free advertisements for AT&T.
   I realize that people may wonder why there are AT&T 500 charges on
   their bills when they may use MCI or Sprint, but having the service
   say "AT&T" for every call is annoying. Put the info on the bill if
   needed.

2. Configuration is the same as the 700, ie, I dial 0-500-442-4CID, and
   enter my PIN. The menu is exactly the same for the "middle" tier service,
   and is slightly more complicated for the higher-end ("Navigator"?)
   service.

   BUT - dialing 0-500 is also the problem. From a cellphone, you need
   pay for this. I don't want to have to pay each time I want to re-forward
   my calls to my cellphone, or from one phone to the other. There is really
   no technical reason why AT&T has to return supervision on 0+500 calls
   (or 0+ calls in general)...I mean, so if it doesn't work on the last
   remaining Step-By-Step exchange in Vermont or whatever, fine, but
   I think there are good deal more people using carphones than served
   by SXS exchanges where 0+ tone dialing requires a supervision return. The
   service is useless to me if I need to re-forward it and have to PAY each
   time I do it. I have no problem paying for use, but to pay airtime to
   my cellco just to reforward calls is too much.

   I know you can schedule it to try a few numbers, but I'm not always
   at the same carphone, and I suspect there are a number of poorly connected
   cellphone companies where AT&T's system will not be able to tell if the
   line is busy or no one is there via any other method than a timeout.

   We intend to use 500-442-4CID for business purposes, (or we'd like to),
   but if it is too flaky and/or costly to use we just won't bother.

3. Caller ID isn't shown (no surprise there).

4. It doesn't work from Rochester, NY, and all these other telcos which
   couldn't bill the 700 number directly, either. It doesn't work from most
   people's PBXs, and it doesn't work from any sort of system which is
   not directly connected to the local telco, like an outdial from a
   voicemail box, etc.

5. Most cellular companies do not allow 1+500 billing (even those which AT&T
   owns), so you need to dial 0-500, resulting in an airtime charge to the
   caller even if no one answers or the line is busy. This was one of the
   biggest problems with ER700 -- no one wanted to call me from their
   carphones after about a month of using the service and seeing all these
   calls at 80 cents per minute to my 700 when I never even answered.


There are other significant problems, but I'll save those for another
post. What I do like about the service (and this is more of a result of
how 500 numbers work than anything AT&T has done) is:

1. I can tell everyone to just dial 1-500-442-4CID. If it works from
   your home phone/business phone, great. If you are at a payphone,
   you can STILL dial 1-500-442-4CID, and it automatically dumps you
   into the 0+500 menu. This way, people don't have to know 0-500 or 1-500,
   they just always dial 1-500. (It would be nice if payphones would let
   you pay for 1-500 with coins, at least for AT&T 1-500 calls.) There is
   no need for any access codes, alternate instructions, 10xxx codes, or
   anything. 1-500 does the trick! (Assuming it works at all, which, from
   many phones and businesses, it does not).

   The usual problems with having to use the silly 800 number to access the
   500 number still apply to many cellular services, most businesses, etc.
   Most of my friends can't call me from work, so I wonder about how
   worthwhile the service is for personal use, let alone for business use.

2. I can forward my calls to my 500 number, which although not something
   which I would often do, is still a feature which the 700 lacked and
   which would have come in handy from time to time.

3. You can give your callers PINs if you want to pay for the call. This
   is also a welcome feature carried over from EasyReach 700. Unfortunately,
   it's also necessary - without giving out PINs to some of my callers, they
   would NEVER be able to reach me. They call from locations where they need
   to use the 800 access method and calling card, and do not have AT&T or
   local Bell calling cards. So because the 500 service is STILL
   difficult for many people to reach, *I* am forced to pay to allow them to
   reach me.

   I had hoped the 500 service would alleviate all this - apparently, it
   does not.

Although a number of these features are an improvement, AT&T needs to do a
LOT of work before their 500 service becomes useful enough for me to
justify the $7 monthly "Navigator" charge, or even the $4 "middle service"
monthly charge.  Right now, it is a partially fixed 700 service, but does
not go far enough to remedy the major deficiencies of ER700.

If there are any other carriers out there who offer a similar service but
without all the problems of AT&T's, I'd love to hear from you!

BTW - Can International callers access the 500 service by dialing +1-500 etc?
I'd be interested in hearing about this as well. (I don't mean via AT&T's
thoroughly overpriced USADirect service, rather, I mean as a direct dialed
call to the US.)


Doug Reuben  *  [e-mail]   *  (500) 442-4CID / (203) 499 - 5221
Interpage Network Services -- E-Mail/Telnet to Alpha or Numeric Pagers & Fax


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What an interesting article to find in
the mail when I woke up today!  Here is why: I was awakened twice during
the night (Wednesday early morning) on calls from Europe where people
were trying to reach my 500 number -- the only number I give out now.
About 5:50 AM Chicago time the phone rang. Someone in London was calling
to say someone *they* were dealing with was trying unsuccessfully to reach
me and could I advise how to get through.  I was too groggy to speak with
them for more than a few seconds.  Then about 8:00 AM the phone rang again,
this time with *someone from AT&T* on the line. He was in New York, and
said he was working 'with a customer calling internationally trying to
reach me'. So what, I asked ... and this guy (an AT&T employee!) asks me,
"What is a 500 number?".  Sort of astounded, I asked if he was indeed an
AT&T employee and he said he was, but that he had never heard of 500
numbers ... and he worked for the company!

I told him it was called 'Personal Number Service'. He wanted to know how
callers from international points 'were supposed to get through' and I
told him damned if I knew anything about it, I am just an ignorant cust-
omer. I suggested maybe they could try USA Direct and see if that worked.
That should keep a few people at AT&T occupied and busy today. Then I
realized one way to force everyone to call you via AT&T whether they want
to use that company or not is by giving 500 as the only possible number
to reach you on. Let them argue about it with their telcos, etc. This
should prove to be a great help toward maintaining the privacy of your
phone number when it is requested on credit applications, etc. No fraud
is intended of course .. you *can* be reached via 500. All you have done
is just made it a bit harder for folks calling from PBX's and via lame
telcos, etc. Plus, its so new, it will still be a novelty for quite
awhile ... so let's all give 1-500 as our number; our only number. Either
use it or don't get through. Forget the 0-500 unless the person thinks
of it on his own as a way to call using a credit card. I certainly do
not intend to give out any of those PINS for collect calls to me with
the exception of my very immediate friends, etc.  I am having lots of
fun with this already!   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ken Weaverling)
Subject: Re: NYNEX PIN Security - Extra Airtime?
Date: 8 Feb 1995 03:15:06 -0500
Organization: Delaware Technical & Community College


In article <[e-mail]>, Doug Reuben <dreuben@interpage.
net> wrote:

> This raises a question: Normally, for any call which is answered,
> billing STARTS shortly after you press SEND, when the system
> recognizes/validates your phone and processes your outward call.

[...]

> Now how does the PIN code fraud feature affect this? I've timed how
> long it takes to get the "prompt" to enter your PIN code, and then to
> enter the code while driving, and it is about ten seconds. Now do these
> tenseconds count?

I've wondered this myself.  I'm with Bell Atlantic Mobile, which has
the same system. One thing I've found out though, you don't have to
wait for the tones before you press in your PIN, just make sure the
tone sounds before you press SND.

Regardless, I hate the entire PIN thing. I don't know why I assigned
one to my number. In addition to the above concern, it messes up your
last number redial. When I RCL my last number, it's the blasted PIN.
It's also a hassle to punch it in whilst driving.


Ken Weaverling          Computer Services, Delaware Tech College
[e-mail]   (My opinions are mine alone, I don't speak for the college)

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

From: [e-mail] (KS Lee)
Subject: MVIP Interface?
Date: 8 Feb 1995 08:33:35 GMT
Organization: Technet, Singapore


Hello,

Can someone point me to ISDN card that have a proper implementation of
MVIP interface?  Please email you suggestion to me.


Thanks,

Lee, Kok Seng     FAX: [phone]
Tel: [phone] ext 505
Internet: [e-mail]  CS :70313,2555

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Lindh)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Date: 8 Feb 1995 11:43:17 GMT
Organization: Ellemtel Telecom Systems Labs, Stockholm, Sweden


I think Norway switched to seven-digit telephone numbers for all
calls, including "local" calls, approximately one year ago.

The reason given was something like "to prepare for new functions in
the future".

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

From: Simon J Wallace <[e-mail]>
Subject: QUALCOMM Gone Wrong?
Organization: Edinburgh University
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 11:58:17 GMT


Hello there.

I wonder if anybody can help me with the following questions.

1)  What's the difference between Qualcomm's IS-95 and PN-3384 the new PCS
    derivative?

2)  Where are GO communications based?  I read this morning that they plan to
    bring GSM to North America.

3)  GO claim to be introducing GSM as CDMA looks unlikely to roll out in the
    near future.  What do other people think?


Thanks for any comments.


Simon Wallace   Masters Student    University of Edinburgh
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Sam Spens Clason)
Subject: Re: Telstra (Australia) Information Wanted
Date: 8 Feb 1995 12:24:42 GMT


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

> Looking for information on this company.  Stock Analysis.  Assets.
> Prognosis.  History.  etc ...

The official story is available on http://www.tansu.com.au.

BTW, I have collected some telecom related URLs.  If someone has
something to add to my list I'd be very glad for (mail) replies.


Sam
<A HREF="http://www.nada.kth.se/~d92-sam/">Sam Spens Clason</A>

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

From: [e-mail] (Antonio Veloso)
Subject: Motorola Fones
Date: 8 Feb 1995 12:28:45 GMT
Organization: PTT Telecom B.V.


I am looking for MOTOROLA CELLULAR fones and accesories; who can give
me some info?  I want them for outside the USA.


A.Veloso   Holland

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

From: [e-mail] (Joe Sulmar)
Subject: Re: Phone Number Wanted For Genesys Labs
Date: 8 Feb 1995 13:41:03 GMT
Organization: North Shore Access


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Paul Kendall) says:

> Anybody have a phone number for Genesys Labs? I'm interested in their
> product line, especially the T-server.

Paul:

Here's the contact info:
    Genesys Inc.
    1111 Bayhill Drive
    Suite 180
    San Bruno, CA 94066
    voice: 415-588-5149
    fax:   [phone]

I'd like to hear about your application, and your thoughts on the
suitability of T-server.  I am also presently considering working with
this product.

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

From: Hersh Jeff <[e-mail]>
Subject: Dial-N-Save
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 95 09:38:00 PST


Some time ago, someone asked if anyone has had any experience with the
long distance carrier called Dial-N-Save.  At the time, I had also
received the promotional flier advertising rates 10% lower than AT&T.
These rates were available by dialing the appropriate access code.  I
have used the code for several calls between NJ and Texas, making
calls at times-of-day similar to calls I had placed with AT&T (my
"normal" long distance carrier).  I received my bill yesterday, and,
true to its word, the Dial-N-Save reduced my long distance charges by
a little more than 10%.  The average call rate went from about $0.17
per minute to about $0.153 per minute.  Rates for nite/weekend were a
little lower.  Other than waiting a couple of seconds longer for
ringback, there was no discernible difference in quality.


Jeff Hersh   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (SM Communications And Marketing)
Subject: Re: Cheap Way to Get an 800 Number?
Date: 7 Feb 1995 19:34:03 -0500
Organization: InfiNet


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

>> Some friends and I are starting a new small business. We would like to
>> have an 800 number. How do I get one?

> You call a long distance carrier's 800 number and tell them you want
> one.  Within a couple of business days they will turn on the number.

>> Other than ATT/MCI/Sprint, are there other people who can provide an
>> 800 number cheaply?

> Don't know how much you mean by 'cheaply'. My 800 number from AT&T
> costs me $8 a month plus usage, which is typically around 20-25c a
> minute depending on how far the person is from Maryland.  As I
> typically have a low calling volume, the costs usually run only $12 a
> month or so.

Cheaply probably means lower rates than the usual big three rates.

For example, Hospitality Services Group has a personal 800 program
whereby a person can get a free (and true) 800 number with no montly
fees, no setup fees, no minimums, billed in six second increments and
only 18 cents per minute, all the time.

There are also other 800 services one can get at much lower rates if
they volume warrants it.(usually over $50 per month.) And the rate can
be as low as 13.5 cents per minute flat rate, billed in six second
increments.

And if you have a vanity number you can transfer and keep the same
number and pay lower fees.


Metin  [e-mail]     http://www.infinet.com/~sm

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc A Randolph)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: 8 Feb 1995 02:09:29 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Texas  A&M University


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

>> 1.  Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or
>> 14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression?

> The data is not sent at 28,800 bits per second, however.  Typically
> the modem will divide up the telephone line into six or more channels,
> and run each channel at 2400 to 4800 bits per second.  By multiplexing
> six channels at 2400 baud, you get 14,400 baud, etc.

   Sorry, this is not correct.  The data IS sent at 28,800 bits per
second.  The line is not divided into channels either; a phone line
can only handle something in the range of 2900 baud (+/- 500 baud or
so).  Baud means symbols per second, not necessarily characters per
second.

Here is part of a message from U.S. Robotics that explains it ...

[if someone could send me the whole article I would appreciate it, I
 deleted everything except this extraction - [e-mail]]

 From: [e-mail] (Robert Chechi)
 Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
 Subject: V.34 in a Nutshell
 Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 12:23:34
 Organization: U.S. Robotics, Inc.

V.34: The next-generation modem
by Dale Walsh, U.S. Robotics vice president, advanced development

[... lots of background deleted...]

A V.22 bis, or 2,400 bit/sec, modem sends four bits per symbol and 600
symbols per second to achieve its speed of 2,400 bit/sec. The V32
modem sends four bits per symbol and 2,400 symbols per second to reach
its speed of 9,600 bit/sec. V.32 bis sends six bits per symbol and
2,400 symbols per second to achieve 14.4K bit/sec. But V.34 will send
up to nine bits per symbol, and 3,200 symbols per second, to achieve
28,800 bit/sec, twice as fast as V.32 bis.


[... lots of detailed v.34 info deleted... ]

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

Marc Randolph          [e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]
PGP keyID: 4C95994D         ...!{uunet,gatech}!tamu.edu!mrand

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #84
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa06512;
          9 Feb 95 1:13 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01929; Wed, 8 Feb 95 20:58:17 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01923; Wed, 8 Feb 95 20:58:14 CST
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 20:58:14 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #85

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Feb 95 20:58:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 85

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Communications Decency Act of 1995 (Ben Heckscher)
    Recommended Least-Cost Network Design Programs? (Jon L. Gauthier)
    Caller ID on Call Waiting/ADSI (John Combs)
    Information Wanted on Galaxy Worldwide Communications (Richard Baillie)
    UCLA Short Course on Advanced Communication Systems Using DSP (W. Goodin)
    Teletel Micro: How to Win 402.36 FF Pro Connection Hour? (Jean B. Condat)
    Numbers Numbers Numbers ... (Jim Derdzinski)

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, 8 Feb 95 17:19 EST
From: Ben Heckscher <[e-mail]>
Subject: Communications Decency Act of 1995


This is a little difficult to follow unless you have a copy of the
Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 223) is amended, but it gives
you some idea what Senator Exon has in mind.

Can you say "big brother"?

Source: US Congress Thomas WWW site - 8 Feb 95

Communications Decency Act of 1995 (Introduced in the Senate)

   S 314 IS

   104th CONGRESS

   1st Session

   S . 314

   To protect the public from the misuse of the telecommunications
   network and telecommunications devices and facilities.

   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

  FEBRUARY 1 (LEGISLATIVE DAY, JANUARY 30), 1995


   Mr. Exon (for himself and Mr. Gorton) introduced the following bill;
   which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce,
   Science, and Transportation

  _________________________________________________________________

   A BILL

   To protect the public from the misuse of the telecommunications
   network and telecommunications devices and facilities.

   Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
       States of America in Congress assembled,



  SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.



   This Act may be cited as the `Communications Decency Act of 1995'.



  SEC. 2. OBSCENE OR HARASSING USE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES UNDER THE
  COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934.



   (a) Offenses: Section 223 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S
       .C. 223) is amended--



        (1) in subsection (a)(1)--



             (A) by striking out `telephone' in the matter above
                 subparagraph (A) and inserting `telecommunications
                 device';

             (B) by striking out `makes any comment, request, suggestion,
                 or proposal' in subparagraph (A) and inserting `makes,
                 transmits, or otherwise makes available any comment,
                 request, suggestion, proposal, image, or other
                 communication';

             (C) by striking out subparagraph (B) and inserting the
                 following:

             `(B) makes a telephone call or utilizes a telecommunications
                 device, whether or not conversation or communications
                 ensues, without disclosing his identity and with intent
                 to annoy, abuse, threaten, or harass any person at the
                 called number or who receives the communication;' and

             (D) by striking out subparagraph (D) and inserting the
                 following:

             `(D) makes repeated telephone calls or repeatedly initiates
                 communication with a telecommunications device, during
                 which conversation or communication ensues, solely to
                 harass any person at the called number or who receives
                 the communication; or';

        (2) in subsection (a)(2), by striking `telephone facility' and
            inserting `telecommunications facility';

        (3) in subsection (b)(1)--

             (A) in subparagraph (A)--

                  (i) by striking `telephone' and inserting
                      `telecommunications device'; and

                  (ii) inserting `or initiated the communication' and
                      `placed the call', and

             (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking `telephone facility'
                 and inserting `telecommunications facility'; and

        (4) in subsection (b)(2)--

             (A) in subparagraph (A)--

                  (i) by striking `by means of telephone, makes' and
                      inserting `by means of telephone or
                      telecommunications device, makes, knowingly
                      transmits, or knowingly makes available'; and

                  (ii) by inserting `or initiated the communication'
                      after `placed the call'; and

             (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking `telephone facility'
                 and inserting in lieu thereof `telecommunications
                 facility'.

   (b) Penalties: Section 223 of such Act (47 U.S .C. 223) is amended--

        (1) by striking out `$50,000' each place it appears and inserting
            `$100,000'; and

        (2) by striking `six months' each place it appears and inserting
            `2 years'.

   (c) Prohibition on Provision of Access: Subsection (c)(1) of such
       section (47 U.S .C. 223(c)) is amended by striking `telephone' and
       inserting `telecommunications device.'

   (d) Conforming Amendment: The section heading for such section is
       amended to read as follows:

   `obscene or harassing utilization of telecommunications devices and
   facilities in the district of columbia or in interstate or foreign
   communications'.

  SEC. 3. OBSCENE PROGRAMMING ON CABLE TELEVISION.

   Section 639 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S .C. 559) is
       amended by striking `$10,000' and inserting `$100,000'.

  SEC. 4. BROADCASTING OBSCENE LANGUAGE ON RADIO.

   Section 1464 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking
       out `$10,000' and inserting `$100,000'.


  SEC. 5. INTERCEPTION AND DISCLOSURE OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS.

   Section 2511 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

        (1) in paragraph (1)--

             (A) by striking `wire, oral, or electronic communication'
                 each place it appears and inserting `wire, oral,
                 electronic, or digital communication', and

             (B) in the matter designated as `(b)', by striking `oral
                 communication' in the matter above clause (i) and
                 inserting `communication'; and

        (2) in paragraph (2)(a), by striking `wire or electronic
            communication service' each place it appears (other than in
            the second sentence) and inserting `wire, electronic, or
            digital communication service'.

  SEC. 6. ADDITIONAL PROHIBITION ON BILLING FOR TOLL-FREE TELEPHONE CALLS.

   Section 228(c)(6) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S .C.
       228(c)(6)) is amended--

        (1) by striking `or' at the end of subparagraph (C);

        (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (D) and
            inserting a semicolon and `or'; and

        (3) by adding at the end thereof the following:


             `(E) the calling party being assessed, by virtue of being
                 asked to connect or otherwise transfer to a pay-per-call
                 service, a charge for the call.'.


  SEC. 7. SCRAMBLING OF CABLE CHANNELS FOR NONSUBSCRIBERS.

   Part IV of title VI of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S .C. 551
       et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:


  `SEC. 640. SCRAMBLING OF CABLE CHANNELS FOR NONSUBSCRIBERS.

   `(a) Requirement: In providing video programming unsuitable for
       children to any subscriber through a cable system, a cable
       operator shall fully scramble or otherwise fully block the video
       and audio portion of each channel carrying such programming so
       that one not a subscriber does not receive it.


   `(b) Definition: As used in this section, the term `scramble' means to
       rearrange the content of the signal of the programming so that the
       programming cannot be received by persons unauthorized to receive
       the programming.'.

  SEC. 8. CABLE OPERATOR REFUSAL TO CARRY CERTAIN PROGRAMS.

   (a) Public, Educational, and Governmental Channels: Section 611(e) of
       the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S .C. 531(e)) is amended by
       inserting before the period the following: `, except a cable
       operator may refuse to transmit any public access program or
       portion of a public access program which contains obscenity,
       indecency, or nudity'.

   (b) Cable Channels for Commercial Use: Section 612(c)(2) of the
       Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S .C. 532(c)(2)) is amended by
       striking `an operator' and inserting `a cable operator may refuse
       to transmit any leased access program or portion of a leased
       access program which contains obscenity, indecency, or nudity.

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon L. Gauthier)
Subject: Recommended Least-Cost Network Design Programs?
Date: 8 Feb 1995 17:10:48 GMT
Organization: EUS/NI/N (Ericsson, Inc.)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jon L. Gauthier)


I'm looking for a program to design a multiplexed data network using
the add algorithm (see 'Designing Data Networks', Robert L. Ellis,
1986, Prentice- Hall, ISBN 0-13-201864-0).

Years ago I wrote one to design multi-drop networks (i.e. SNA) using
the Esau-Williams algorithm, but never got around to implementing the
add algorithm.

Are there any public domain, or share-ware programs available that
will take user-supplied tariff data?  Or point me to some good
commercial ones (like ComNet, BoNes, or whatever ...).

Please email responses to me at the address below.


Thanks in advance.

Jon L. Gauthier                        Ericsson, Inc.
EUS/NI/N Sr. Systems Programmer       P.O. Box 833875
[phone]             Richardson, TX 75083-3875
e-mail:  [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Tue, 7 Feb 95 23:33 EST
From: Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]>
Subject: Caller ID on Call Waiting/ADSI


In Issue 81 of the TELECOM Digest, the Editor asked for information on
Caller ID on Call Waiting to be uploaded again, which might have been
referring to my recent submission entitled "How I beat Caller ID."  I
have been deluged with email requests about ADSI, so here is more
detail on how ADSI actually works, as well as all the applicable
Bellcore standards.

The future of Caller ID lies with ADSI.  The acronym stands for Analog
Display Services Interface, and it is really a series of Bellcore
documents that lay out the new standard.  I have received several requests
for the names of these standards, which are all covered in Bellcore
FR-NWT-000012.  They include:

     TR-NWT-001273  TR-NWT-000030  SR-INS-002461  SR-TSV-002476
     SR-TSV-002697  SR-NWT-002495  SR-TSV-002578

In short, ADSI is provided in three different "levels" of service:

     Level 1:  Calling name and number after the first ring.
     Level 2:  Calling name and number with call waiting.
     Level 3:  A telephone with a display screen.  (The "D" in ADSI.)

Remember, originally Caller ID was just the phone number of who was
calling, displayed after the first ring.  Then, the service was
improved to show both the number AND the name of the incoming caller.
ADSI Level 1 is just that service, and it displays the incoming number
and name after the first incoming ring.

ADSI Level 2 delivers the calling number and name during call waiting
by sending a short, low level sound called CAS tone, which the person
on the receiving end WILL hear for a tiny fraction of a second, but
it's not obnoxious.  The CAS tone alerts the ADSI Level 2 phone to
open the receive path to the user's earpiece, then the phone accepts a
short burst of Bell 202-type modem info.  The reason that this
"obsolete" modem type was used is simple -- it requires none of the
tedious "training time" that modern Trellis-encoded modems must have
to handshake.  The entire interruption in the listening path is only
about a third of a second, then the incoming call number and name are
displayed.  If the receiving party has Caller ID with call waiting
enabled on their phone line, but the phone they currently are talking
on is NOT an ADSI phone, they will hear the CAS tone, but when the CO
doesn't get the proper response back from the phone, it will NOT send
the burst of modem tone with information.  The proper response is a
DTMF digit, that is how ADSI phones talk back to the CO or an ADSI
server not owned by the telco.

By the way, if two users are off-hook on the line, and only one is
ADSI Level 2 compliant, when a CAS tone comes in, there will be no
Caller ID on call waiting, as an ADSI Level 2 device must momentarily
hang up, and check the line voltage to see if another phone is
off-hook before going back off-hook and acknowledging the CAS tone.
This is to prevent annoying bursts of modem tone in POTS phone users'
ears.  (I'm not sure what happens if BOTH phones are ADSI Level 2 --
if the timing requirements are tight enough for when they briefly hang
up and check, they wouldn't see each other, and BOTH would go back
off-hook and acknowledge the CAS tone.  I don't have time to research
it right now.  Perhaps someone from Bellcore could comment, if they
know ...)

ADSI Level 3 came about because Bellcore did a study to determine how
to sell more features on a telephone line, such as call waiting, or
call forwarding.  (The RBOCs like to sell these extra features as they
are revenue above the standard line charge, and quite profitable.)
The study concluded that many people didn't buy extra features because
they didn't want to fool with code sequences to enable/disable
features, such as *69.  Bellcore's solution was ADSI Level 3.  These
phones have a screen that must be 20 characters across by 6 rows, and
can be 40 characters across by more rows.  There are from four to six
"softkeys."  Menu trees of softkeys can be downloaded to an ADSI
phone, and stored in memory as a "script."  The user gets plain
English displays (or the language of your choice), and can press
softkeys to activate telco features, or even order new ones directly
from the phone without talking to a customer representative!  Some of
the RBOCs have also expressed interest in using the ADSI Level 3
phones for electronic white and yellow pages, Bell Atlantic comes to
mind.

Please note that an ADSI Level 3 session is also initiated from a a
privately-owned ADSI server by a brief CAS tone.  (Things work
differently between the ADSI phone and the CO itself to change calling
features.)  The actual modem communication is always ONE-WAY, from the
CO or privately-owned ADSI server TO the ADSI phone.  This is because
most information will be sent TO the phone in real life, the phone
merely needs to respond with brief sequences of DTMF tones to indicate
what softkeys the user has pressed.  The user won't hear any of this,
the receive and transmit paths are opened during ADSI Level 3
communication.  Also remember that the far-end of the call will NEVER
be a human listener, it will either be the CO, or a private ADSI
server owned by a business.

If there is an "achilles heel" to ADSI, this is it ... it can take up
to two minutes to download a maximum-length, complicated script to an
ADSI phone.  An ADSI-compliant phone must have enough memory to hold
at least four different scripts, so if one calls the same ADSI servers
on a regular basis, this might not be a problem.  Also, a smart
programmer will probably only download short pieces of script to a
phone, and then, while the user is reading the new options, they can
download a bit more.

The REAL attraction of ADSI is that ANYONE can have their own ADSI
server!  After all, it's designed to work on analog lines.  In a
couple of years, a screen phone will be used to call the local video
store, scroll through the new releases, and even reserve one for later
pickup.  Or, perhaps one could call Domino's, order a pizza and
toppings.  Just imagine calling a business, and instead of getting the
tedious voice mail prompts telling you to press *1 to do something,
you get a text screen that lets you scroll though a directory of
employees and select who you want!  The high end ADSI phones that I
have tested even have things like pull-out QWERTY keyboards for data
entry, PCMCIA Type I slots, "smart card" slots, and magnetic strip
card readers!

Bellcore deserves praise for this well thought out service, laid out
in several Bellcore standards.  Another smart move on their part is
that they didn't bother submitting the standard to an international
standards body to try to get it adopted.  (We all know how long that
takes.)  Instead, they have been visiting the PTTs of dozens of
countries, and trying to convince them to sign on to the ADSI standard
as defined by Bellcore.  Several European nations have expressed
interest already, as have Pacific Rim nations, including China.

ADSI is being field-trialed by a few RBOCS right now, including
Ameritech in Chicago.  Ameritech is selling high-end Philips P-100
ADSI screen phones at cost for only $200 each, and primarily marketing
it for enhanced banking features from your home, along with the
ability to easily order/change custom calling features.

It is estimated that there will be between 5 and 15 million ADSI Level
3 screen phones in North America by 1998, and I suspect the higher
number is more accurate.  Once you've tried one, you don't want to
give it up!  It is my opinion that ADSI, along with V.34 modems giving
true 115 kbps data throughput (via V.42bis compression), could be an
ISDN BRI "killer" one-two punch.  ISDN is STILL not ubiquitous, the
local telcos don't understand it and don't sell or market it
effectively, and it will NEVER be offered in the boondocks where I
live. (Mayo, Kentucky)

In closing, perhaps the Editor will permit a small plug for my
employer.  TestMark Labs is currently the ONLY alternative to Bellcore
itself, if you want your ADSI product tested for compliance to the
full Bellcore requirements.


John Combs, Project Engineer, TestMark Laboratories, [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Thanks for resubmitting this. Even though
it appeared here not that long ago, it seems many readers missed it the
first time around, and I think this is an exciting development where
Caller-ID is concerned; exciting enough to be certain all interested
readers are informed.   PAT]

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

From: Richard Baillie <[e-mail]>
Subject: Information Wanted on Galaxy Worldwide Communications
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 95 20:17:00 EST


Looking for information on this company. Said to have been incorporated
in July, 1994 after having launched as a division of a publicly traded
(?) U.S. company the prior year.

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

From: [e-mail] (William R. Goodin)
Subject: UCLA Short Course on Advanced Communication Systems Using DSP
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 1995 10:18:52
Organization: UCLA Extension


On April 3-7, 1995, UCLA Extension will present the short course,
"Advanced Communication Systems Using Digital Signal Processing", on
the UCLA campus in Los Angeles.

The instructors are Bernard Sklar, PhD, Communications Engineering
Services, and frederick harris, MS, Professor, Electrical and Computer
Engineering, San Diego State University.

This course provides comprehensive coverage of advanced digital commun-
ications.  It differs from other communications courses in its emphasis
on applying modern digital signal processing techniques to the implementa-
tion of communication systems.  This makes the course essential for
practitioners in the rapidly changing field.  Error-correction coding,
spread spectrum techniques, and bandwidth-efficient signaling are all
discussed in detail.  Basic digital signaling methods and the newest
modulation-with-memory techniques are presented, along with trellis-coded
modulation.

Topics that are covered include: signal processing overview and baseband
transmission; bandpass modulation and demodulation; digital signal processing
tools and technology; non-recursive filters; channel coding: error
detection and correction; defining, designing, and evaluating systems;
signal conditioning; adaptive algorithms for communication systems;
modulation and coding trade-offs and bandwidth-efficient signaling;
and spread spectrum and multiple access techniques.

Each participant receives a copy of the text, "Digital Communications-
Fundamentals and Applications", by Bernard Sklar.

For additional information and a complete course description, please
contact Marcus Hennessy at:


[phone]     [phone]  fax
[e-mail]

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

Date: 07 Feb 1995 07:23:35 GMT
From: [e-mail] (JeanBernard Condat)
Organization: FranceNet
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: Teletel Micro: How to Win 402.36 FF Pro Connection Hour?


Bonjour,

A new product is born today on the France Telecom catalogue: the
"Teletel Micro." It's a transparent access for micro-computers
connection between 300 and 14,400 baud on a single phone line (V22,
V22bis, V32, V32bis with MNP4 and V42, and perhaps V34 [=28,800
baud]).

All the hosts will be connected to Transpac and available all over France.
Five numbers are already available for first time tests and evaluations:

  - 36011414: 0.59 FF/min (0 FF for the host);
  - 36011616: 1.27 FF/min (33.37 FF/hour for the host);
  - 36011717: 2.19 FF/min (75.28 FF/hour for the host);
  - 36012828: 5.48 FF/min (226.31 FF/hour for the host);
  - 36012929: 9.29 FF/min (402.36 FF/hour for the host).

The forwarding of a service on another service will be only possible
on same level billing services.

France Telecom look at some companies able to give new ideas and/or
realisations on this Teletel Micro. The contact person is Mr. Gerard
Monin (phone: [phone], fax: [phone]).


Jean-Bernard CONDAT                       [phone], desk 47874949
IPA Groupe SVP                            fax [phone]
[e-mail]     telex 233999 S V P F
B.P. 155, 93404 Saint-Ouen Cedex, France  Pager Kobby: 06 49 09 52

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

Date: 07 Feb 95 00:25:30 EST
From: Jim Derdzinski <[e-mail]>
Subject: Numbers Numbers Numbers ...


I have been following the news accounts and the threads here regarding
the suggestion that Chicago area telephone users dial 11 digits on all
calls.

First of all, I think this idea is absolutely nuts.  It seemed
perfectly logical to me that Ameritech was introducing 630 as an
overlay code for cellular, pagers and other wireless services.  That
way, one could tell by the number who/what they were calling.  It
would also be quite simple as follows:

630 to 630 - dial seven digits,

312 to 312 - dial seven digits,

708 to 708 - dial seven digits,

anything else, do the 1-plus NPA thing.

Then we get all this crap from these other companies complaining about
the impact it will supposedly have on their customers, and how Ameritech
will take up all the "good" numbers, etc., etc.

First of all, my decision to buy a cellular telephone or pager or
whatever service would be based on a NEED for, the PRICE of and the
QUALITY of the actual device/service -- not the NUMBER that it will be
assigned.

Who started this concept of "good" numbers anyway?  I order whatever
telephone service, the clerk gives me the number, and I'm on my way.
Am I the only one who doesn't care about the number assignment?

I am basically a regular POTS customer who doesn't yet have a need for
these companies' services.  However, after reading about the dial-11-digit
idea, I can't help the feeling of being manipulated by a bunch of
startup companies (most of whom probably won't even exist five to ten
years from now) by having to dial 11 digits to call my upstairs neighbor.

If these issues are such a problem, I think it's time for Bellcore to
devise a new nationwide numbering plan that will address all of these
problems.  We did it 35-40 years ago and got over it, I think we can
do it again.

Any thoughts?

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #85
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08787;
          9 Feb 95 3:22 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA05000; Wed, 8 Feb 95 23:06:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA04993; Wed, 8 Feb 95 23:06:02 CST
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 23:06:02 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #86

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 8 Feb 95 23:06:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 86

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Access to "500" Numbers (Richard Cox)
    500 Service Comments (Jeff Buckingham)
    Voice Delay Standards Information Wanted (Alex Zacharov)
    Voice Teleconferencing (TNTPKT)
    A Problem With 205/334 DA (Scott D. Fybush)
    GO Communications (Steve Samler)
    Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society WWW Page (Andrew Funk)
    ICA Annual Conference/Supercomm '95 - Mar 19-23 - Anaheim, CA (Bob Harper)
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (John Combs)
    Re: LD Termination Fees Charges (Jerry Harder)
    Re: Information Wanted on MagNet Communications (Christopher H. Snider)
    Re: Can Anyone Recommend Excell LD Phone Service? (Christopher H. Snider)
    Re: Plumber Arrested: Fraudulent Call Forwarding (Jim Ancona)
    Re: Memorex PBX Help Needed (John Combs)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (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: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 11:04:47 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Access to "500" Numbers


PAT said:

>>  Anyway, feel free to call me at any reasonable hour: 500-677-1616

But not, it seems, from outside the mainland US!  Callers from the UK
are told that the number "has not been recognised" and when I asked
British Telecom why this is so, they insisted that the numbers do not
even exist.

Pressed on this point, BT contacted AT&T who (initially) said the same
thing but later had to admit that the numbers do exist, and that they
STILL had not "officially" told BT about them -- and as a result BT
had not put the necessary data about these numbers into the international
access switches in London.  It seems BT will be discussing this with
AT&T, MCI and Sprint later today, and we just might be able to call
you later this week.  But until then, UK customers simply can't call
US 500 numbers.

And when we DO get access, we'll all remember the time difference
before we make that call, right?


Richard D G Cox

Mandarin Technology, PO Box 111, Penarth, South Glamorgan CF64 3YG
Voice: 0956 700111;    Fax: [phone];    VoiceMail: 0941 151515
e-mail address: [e-mail]; PGP2.6 public key on request


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh -- so that was you Wednesday morning
at 6 AM Chicago time was it?  And then about 90 minutes later, more or
less 7:30 AM I get a call from a fellow at AT&T in New York, in what
he called 'International'. *He* wanted to know what is a 500 number.
It seems lots of folks who work for AT&T have not even heard of this
new service. Is that wild or not?  So ... you badgered BT and AT&T from
your end; I humiliated that poor fellow from AT&T on my end; maybe some
good will come from it all later this week as you point out. I'd like
to think you and I were responsible for getting access started from the
UK to the USA on 500 numbers; but that may be delusions of grandeur on
my part. In a related message on this topic, presented next in this
issue, Jeff Buckingham wonders what all the fuss is about with 500 numbers
and discusses a product from his company which is almost identical.  PAT]

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

Subject: 500 Service Comments
From: [e-mail] (BUCKINGHAM, JEFF)
Date: 08 Feb 95 11:59:55 EST


I continue to be amazed at people's fascination with 500 numbers. Why
is everyone putting up with so many problems just to receive a phone
call?

The irony to me is that the type of number does not have anything to
do with the service that it's pointed to. I have a virtual number
service (MyLine) with a local DID number and an 800 number. The 800
number works from anywhere in the US and Canada, from all hotels,
payphones, PBX's, etc. The local number works locally and from
international locations. I have a locator service that works today,
without any problems.

I know that AT&T sets things up in very strange ways (PIN numbers and
AT&T recordings) but there are several virtual number providers out
there today providing service that works on 800 and DID. I may point a
500 number (I have the 545 prefix reserved) to my virtual number if
they ever work all the problems out but at least people will be able
to reach me for the immediate future.

All I am suggesting is that we stop the insanity and use the numbers
we want to point to the services that we want.


Jeff Buckingham  [e-mail]
805-545-5100     fax [phone]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: 'My Line' is a very good service. I have
mentioned it before here, but newer readers may not know about it. In the
past, one complaint about 800 numbers was that they could not easily be
forwarded from one location to another throughout a busy day. None of the
big three thought it was worth doing. Then Cable & Wireless came along
with forwardable 800 service, but you had to pay an extra fee each month
if you wanted the ability to automatically switch destinations.

Enter 'My Line':  Your own personal 800 number, not one of the gimmicks
like MCI where you dial a number in common to everyone and enter a PIN.
Persons calling your 800 number here a recording in your voice saying
something like 'Hi, this is Pat ... please stand by while your call is
transferred to me.'  The switch then outdials the call to wherever you
have told it you will be. Callers can enter a two digit 'override code'
(if you told them about it and what code to enter) and this will force
the call to be transferred to your 'priority' number instead of your
'normal' call forwarding number.

You can toggle between 'call forwarding' and 'number referral'. In the
latter case, instead of actually outdialing the call to you, the switch
announces that 'calls are being taken at XXX-XXX-XXXX.'  Priority calls
still get outdialed directly to you of course, provided the caller entered
the customer-defineable priority code. Voicemail is part of the package
when you fail to answer; the switch withdraws the outdialed call and puts
it in voicemail instead.

'My Line' also offers callback service for international calls, along
with 'Wake Up Service'. You tell it when to call and wake you each morning.
You use these additional features by entering your PIN during the initial
recorded announcement. When it starts talking ("Hi, this is Pat, please
hold, etc") you punch in your passcode right over the announcement; it
switches to maintainence mode with the prompt, "My Line is ready". You
change your call forwarding, listen to voicemail, etc.

Best of all is the pricing. 'My Line' costs about the same as the plain
vanilla 800 service you get from the Big Three, but they don't offer all
the bells and whistles. Really, I don't understand why anyone these days
would subscribe to 800 service from the Big Three when you can get so many
extras from smaller carriers like My Line. This is the same company which
offers 'Call America' 800 service, also discussed here in the past. I think
John Levine and a few of you subscribe to that one; I do also. (Yes, I
have two 800 numbers, two 700 numbers, my new 500 number, and three 708
numbers. That's not counting my pager; also a 708 number.)

Anyway, please send off email to Jeff Buckingham, or call or fax. He'll
send you complete details on 'My Line'. I've used this service for about
a year now and am very pleased with it. You'll like it also. Here is
his .signature again:

   [e-mail]   805-545-5100  fax [phone]

Whenever I run messages about My Line -- and I am quite impressed with
the service -- I always get a message within a day or two from Arch Telecom
telling about their version of the same thing. I imagine they will write
again, and if so, I'll tell you about that one also.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alex Zacharov)
Subject: Voice Delay Standards Information Wanted
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 16:49:12 GMT
Organization: Telrad Ltd.


    Voice packetzation and compression introduce some delay. I am looking
for information on the following:

    1) Standard recommendations for end-to-end delay with echo cancellation.

    2) Standard recommendations for end-to-end delay without echo
       cancellation.

    3) Standard recommendations for CPE delay (i.e. maximum delay that
       is allowed to be introduced by CPE which performs voice compression/
       packetization). I am especially interested in this one.

I am interested in European and American standards.

Any information will be appreciated.

Regards,

Alex   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Voice Teleconferencing
Date: 8 Feb 1995 17:50:37 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Hi!

Can anyone provide me with the name/number of a firm capable of doing
voice teleconferencing?  The "Big 3" have the service, but want a good
deal for it.  We are a small chemcial R&D shop in need of having five
to seven parties thru out the US joined in a voice teleconference on a
regular basis.

Thanks in advance for your assistance!


Tim

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

From: [e-mail] (Scott D Fybush)
Subject: A Problem With 205/334 DA
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 04:46:40 GMT


Has anyone ever gotten this message from 205-555-1212 or 334-555-1212?:

"Due to a high volume of calls, your call cannot be completed.  Please
try again later." (paraphrased, but you get the point)

That's how my calls to both numbers were answered Monday afternoon
around 1pm Eastern.  I tried through several carriers, and even used
one of my company's tie lines that dials out from 908 instead of 617.
Calls to other points in Alabama (well, at least to 334-479) completed
properly.

Later in the day, calls were again being completed properly to Alabama
DA.  So ... anyone know what happened?

By the way, my company's internal phone system does not yet recognize
334, or for that matter 360 or 630.  The "real" NYNEX phone lines at
work and at home are functioning correctly now.


Scott Fybush - [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Does anyone know what happened? Yes, I
know what happened:  ahem! Due to a high volume of calls, telco was
unable to complete your call. The recording was rather self-explanatory
wasn't it?  It is another way of saying 'all circuits are busy now;
please try your call again later.' At the time you called, DA was probably
swamped with calls coming out their ears and other orifices. It happens,
especially if their computer was down and they were doing manual lookups
on microfilm or from books. They probably had every operator, clerk,
typist, supervisor and secretary at their disposal taking calls and they
were still getting buried alive. Calls to other points completed properly
because other points were not swamped with calls waiting in a queue for
an answer. You get caught up in that rush here in 312/708 occassionally
also; but unless it is really severe they don't tell you to call back
another time; they just hold you in a queue with an endlessly repeating
message that, ' ... all positions are busy; please wait, an operator will
be with you shortly ...'. They have really cut back on help answering
calls to Repair; here in Chicago it is totally automated now. When you
dial 611 you do *not* get connected at all to a live person unless you
specifically bail out at one of the prompts. You punch the buttons to
tell them the number you are calling from, and you punch the buttons to
answer multiple choice questions about what is wrong with your service.
I'd say you just hit them on a bad day in Alabama, or at a bad time.  PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 14:57:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: GO Communications


GO and Northern Tel had a press release last week (1/30) about GO
committing to purchase 346 million dolllars of equipment for their PCS
system.  The release had the following contacts and phones:

    Steven Zecola Pres and CEO GO
    David Lowry Chf. Tech Officer GO
Norhtern Tel contacts
    Mark Buford 214 684 8512
    Frank McNally 703 712 8374
Phillips and Associates (PR firm?)
    Scott Phillips 312 943 8858

There was no location given for GO nor were there phone numbers.

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

From: [e-mail] (Andrew Funk)
Subject: Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society WWW Page
Date: 8 Feb 1995 15:15:05 -0500


The Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society is now on the Web:

    http://www.webcom.com/~arfunk/rats.html

 From here are links to various RATS projects, including the ROSE X.25
Packet Switch, etc.


Andrew Funk, KB7UV
Tech Producer/Editor          Internet: [e-mail]
WCBS-TV Channel 2 News   http://www.webcom.com/~arfunk/
New York, NY USA

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Harper)
Subject: ICA Annual Conference/Supercomm '95 - Mar 19-23 - Anaheim, CA
Date: 8 Feb 1995 20:27:15 GMT
Organization: ICA
Reply-To: [e-mail]


International Communications Association 1995 Annual Conference

15 tracks with over 80 dcom sessions
23 in-depth tutorials (Full and Half) day.

Web Address   URL = http://www.onramp.net/ica/


ICA E - Mail      [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 00:30 EST
From: Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs


For what it's worth, when I was still a GTE employee (Jan. '92), I
viewed a videoconference by Kent Foster (a senior executive of GTE)
sent via scrambled satellite broadcast to all employees.  The topic of
this discussion was why GTE was laying off yet more employees even
though it had shown record profits the previous year.  For the last
few years, GTE had been consolidating on providing local phone
service, and selling off other branches that weren't directly related,
such as GTE Sylvania, and, thank goodness, GTE TestMark Laboratories.
However, Kent actually admitted that for each $1.00 of local service
that GTE sold, it cost them $1.28!  The only reason GTE was profitable
was the subscriber line charge for long distance access, plus the
lucrative intra-LATA long distance market!  Since these two sources of
revenue are definitely doomed, GTE had to continue laying off employees
so they could become cost-competitive in the local service area, their
chosen area of competition.

He actually went on to discuss scenarios where local competition was
allowed, e.g., cable companies providing local phone service, along
with "cream-skimmers" putting fiber rings to steal away large
businesses in the main cities where GTE did business.  If 40% of GTE's
business was lost in those prime areas, the company might actually
collapse due to insufficient revenues to service the huge long-term
debt all telcos incur because of CO and outside plant purchases!

It is a fact of life that for the last century, the various state PUCs
and the FCC have treated local service as a RIGHT of citizens, and
they kept local service rates artificially low so widows and orphans
could afford phone service.  According to Kent Foster, GTE would
almost have to double local service basic rates to make a decent
profit margin on the service, but the PUCs would never allow it.  So,
we have Catch-22.  The FCC doesn't want the cost of local service to
rise, but they are allowing intra-LATA long distance competition now,
and the long distance providers are pressuring GTE and the RBOCs to
lower or eliminate the long distance access charge.  (Don't forget,
AT&T recently bought a huge cellular company, which is definitely one
way to bypass long distance access charges!  And, MCI announced a 20
billion dollar plan to put in their own local service options in their
twenty-largest markets, another "cream-skimming" operation!)  If the
FCC doesn't acknowledge reality, we might end up with the cost of
local phone service suddenly jumping to impossible prices in the rural
areas, while dropping slightly in the large cities.

This scenario is made more believable by the fact that GTE stock has
basically been a non-performer for the last few years, in spite of new
record profits each and every year!  The investors obviously think
they know what the future holds for GTE and the RBOCs!


John Combs, Project Engineer, TestMark Laboratories, [e-mail]

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

Date: 08 Feb 95 20:49:08 EST
From: rta <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs


Fred R. Goldstein writes in Volume 15, Issue 82

> That happens to be the way Feature Group trunks are priced.  Of course
> the whole trick to FG pricing is that it's intended to be "contributory"
> (profitable).  This comes from the old separations game of "splifs",
> for "subscriber plant factor" (SPF).  In that game, the average usage
> of LOCAL lines is divided into interstate and intrastate baskets.  The
> interstate portion is MULTIPLIED by SPF and then the total cost is
> divided amongst the two jurisictions.  Given SPF of 3 (old ballpark; I
> don't know what it is now), then if 15% of calls in a jurisdiction
> were interstate, then the cost would be divided 85:45 to local/interstate.
> The subsidy, folks, is in the splifs.

> Interstate cost is currently divided into the part paid via tolls and
> the part paid via CALC ($3-6/mo "access charges").  The toll-usage
> part is divided into different components and adds up to 3-5c/minute/
> side-of-call for most telcos.

In practice, only residential and small business customers pay these
rates. My clients primarily, Fortune 500 and governments, typically
utilize DS1, leased fiber from the LEC, or CAPs to avoid these
charges.

Another way costs have been increased this that the SPF is based on
the *cost* of providing switches.  Since most of these were installed
under *rate based* regulation, the LEC had every reason to oversize
the switch and to *gold plate* the switch as well as the local trans-
mission facilities.

It is correct that much of the cost for long distance is due to SPF.
But this begs the question as to why the SPF ratios were set the way
they were. Large and medium size business provide the majority of LD
revenues in the US. Residential and small businesses account for the
bulk of the lines and voters. From a political and regulatory perspective
it made and still makes sense to have business customers, particularly
large business customers, subsidize small business and residential
customers. The key question in the long run is whether residential and
small business customers will accept higher rates or will they turn to
the political process to reverse the current trend to increased
competition for LD access and ultimately for local service.


Jerry Harder    Senior Partner
Renaissance Telecommunciations Associates
615-231-6126    [e-mail]

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

From: Christopher Harwood Snider <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Information Wanted on MagNet Communications
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 15:26:23 GMT


[e-mail]  writes:

> I would like to know whether anyone here has heard of MagNet
> Communications.  They are one of those new long-distance carriers that
> offer flat-rate billing at six-second increments.  I am new to this
> type of industry and would like to get some people's opinions (if they
> have any) before and if I am to convert my LD service.  Any opinions
> that you might have would be greatly appreciated.

Magnet is a multilevel marketing reseller. I do not know anything
about their rates or marketing plan other than that. Personally, I
would avoid resellers for business lines.


Regards,

Christopher H. Snider   Telecommunications Consulting
American Access         [e-mail]

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

From: Christopher Harwood Snider <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Can Anyone Recommend ExcelL LD Phone Service?
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 15:30:08 GMT


[e-mail]  writes:

> A friend of mine and her mother are Marketing Reps for Excel LD phone
> service.  They say that they can save me a significant amount of money
> over AT&T, my current LD carrier.  Their examples are the differences
> in charges for one-minute phone calls.  EXCEL has lower flat rates,
> while AT&T charges more for the first minute, but they virtually are
> identical for longer calls (avg. time: 10 minutes).  EXCEL also charges
> a $3.00 flat fee for their service.

Excel is a multilevel marketing reseller. Like I said in another
followup, I would not trust a business line to a reseller. The rates
that I have seen from resellers are generally better than those of the
Big Three, but there is a risk involved.


Regards,

Christopher H. Snider   Telecommunications Consulting
American Access         [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Plumber Arrested: Fraudulent Call Forwarding
From: [e-mail] (Jim Ancona)
Organization: D & B Software
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 95 09:55:01 EST


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

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This same report appeared in
> alt.dcom.telecom today submitted to that newsgroup by Jack Decker who
> concluded by saying this was a good reason telcos should password
> accounts, presumably to prevent fraudulent Call Forwarding among other
> things. The thing he neglected to mention -- nor was it mentioned by
> Dave Levenson here -- was that Call Forwarding Ultra (or Enhanced Call
> Forwarding or Remote Call Forwarding as it is known in other telcos)
> *does* require a password.

I believe what Jack was saying was that BILLING ACCOUNTS should have a
PIN, to prevent unauthorized individuals from changing service.
Apparently what happened in this case is the bad guy called the telco
claiming to be one of his competitors. He ordered the remote call
forwarding service on their lines, then used it to forward their lines
to his number. Note that since HE (the bad guy) ordered the service,
HE got to supply the PIN.

Another simple way for telco to prevent this sort of thing would be to
call back the customer requesting the change, and ask him to verify
it.


Jim Ancona   [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 10:50 EST
From: Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Memorex PBX Help Needed


Sergei Fishel wrote in TD#78 that he was looking for proprietary
phones for a Memorex PBX, and he wondered why they used six wires.
The first generation of "hybrid" digital phones, which appeared in the
early 1980s on digital PBXs were almost all six wires, with the
outermost pair being DC power to the phone, the next pair being
digital control for signalling, and the innermost pair being analog
voice, which sometimes also carried DTMF tones generated by the phone.
Four wire digital phones came a little later in the eighties, and they
typically "simplexed" the DC power onto the data and analog voice
pairs.  "Modern" digital phones are truly digital, and they send
digital packets on the single pair, which also feeds DC power to the
phone.

One unforeseen side effect of this final digital PBX phone design is
that it is a modem "killer."  People working in offices with digital
PBX phones are often unaware that these phones aren't POTS, so they
will unplug their proprietary digital phone and plug in their modem
(or fax machine).  Many brands of digital PBXs supply 300 mA or more
to their digital phones, and this will burn up the front end of a POTS
modem or fax machine.  (Sometimes it even sets the device on fire!)

Since Sergei's Memorex phones are six-wire, this suggests they are
fairly old, and probably not manufactured anymore.  I recommend that
he keep reading TELECOM Digest for a week or two, there are a few
resellers of old phone equipment who put ads in every so often.


John Combs, Project Engineer, TestMark Laboratories, [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 12:11:11 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing


Wes Leatherock writes:

> In the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, you must dial 10
> (not 11 digits) if you are dialing a call to a local number in the
> other area code.  (Dallas is in the 214 NPA, Fort Worth in the 817
> NPA.)

Will the local telcos ever fix this?  By "fix", I don't mean eliminate
the ability to dial an inter-NPA local call with only 10 digits; I
mean eliminate the prohibition against dialing them with the full 11
digits.  Likewise for local calls in the same NPA, of course.

> Note that almost all telephone service in the Dallas-Fort
> Worth area is flat rate.  A local call generates no billing whatever
> (except for the very few message rate customers).  This is true, I
> believe, almost everywhere in the United States except in the
> Northeast and in the Chicago area.

I think your blanket indictment of the entire Northeast is too strong.
Aside from New York City, what other parts of the region mandate
Measured Local Service for all residential customers?

Meanwhile, Tad Cook writes:

> Chicago is a unique case though.  Chicago will have an overlay area
> code, and since someone using a phone within Chicago could possibly
> have no idea what area code it is in, this means that all local calls
> must dial the area code and number, since phones right next to each
> other could be in different NPAs.

Chicago is hardly a unique case.  The first overlay NPA (917) went
into effect several years ago in New York City, where it overlays 212
and 718.  True, 917 was originally reserved just for wireless and (I
think) fax and data lines, but I doubt that convention will survive
another fill-up of 212.  With a bunch of new overlay NPAs coming soon
(Houston, Miami, Los Angeles and possibly Atlanta), it will be interesting
to see what kinds of dialing plans emerge.

> In the rest of North America, we are having to dial the area code for
> all long distance calls within the area code, so that the system can
> handle the new area codes that look like prefixes.

This is not true either.  Actually, it's true for *most* of the rest
of the NANP, but there are a handful of states (NY and IL among them)
which instead went with a 7D dialing plan for intra-NPA long distance.


Bob Goudreau        Data General Corporation
[e-mail]    62 Alexander Drive
[phone]        Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #86
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa09573;
          9 Feb 95 4:55 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06693; Thu, 9 Feb 95 00:20:17 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA06687; Thu, 9 Feb 95 00:20:15 CST
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 00:20:15 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #87

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Feb 95 00:20:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 87

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    North Pacific Cable Cut? (Stephen Palm)
    SVNet Meeting February 15: Cellular Digital Packet Data (Paul Fronberg)
    Rolm 6200/b CBX Information Wanted (Christopher L. Browne)
    Re: MCI Gave me a Deal (Tony Pelliccio)
    Re: MCI Gave me a Deal (Lindsay L. Meeks)
    Re: How I Fooled Caller ID (Anthony Chor)
    Re: How I Fooled Caller ID (Shawn Gordhamer)
    Campus Wiring/Connectivity Innovation ([e-mail])
    Re: Clock Slips Again (Harold Hechinger)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Jill Arnson)
    Re: International Tariff d (Allyson Anthonisz)
    Re: New Motorola Micro-tac Elite AMPS Cellphone (Michael Berlant)
    Re: New Motorola Micro-tac Elite AMPS Cellphone (Steven King)
    Re: Caller ID and Call Waiting ([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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Palm)
Subject: North Pacific Cable Cut?
Organization: Rockwell International Japan, JEDC
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 02:19:13 GMT


We have 56kbps digital leased line between Tokyo and California that
used the North Pacific Cable (NPC).  Apparently NPC was cut on 2 Feb
1:00 AM JST (1 Feb 8:00 AM PST) and we are now on satellite backup.

Does anybody have any more information?  Does anyone know when they
are planning to fix NPC?


Thanks,

Stephen [kiwin] Palm                        TEL (Voice mail): [phone]
Rockwell - Digital Communications Division                   COMNET: 930-1564
Japan Engineering Design Center      (JST=PST+17hours)   FAX: [phone]
  [e-mail]   [e-mail]   [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Paul Fronberg [CONTRACTOR])
Subject: SVNet Meeting February 15: Cellular Digital Packet Data
Date: 9 Feb 1995 04:38:48 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA


SVNet Meeting: Wednesday, Feb 15, 1995, 7:30pm  Mtn View

        (FREE, Open to Public)

SVNet is a SF Bay area UNIX and Open Systems user's group which
sponsors technical presentations at its monthly meetings.  The
meetings are free and open to the public.  The next presentation will
be:

WHAT:    Coming Soon to a Beach Near You???
       Cellular Digital Packet Data  (CDPD)

Will we really be able to telecommute and surf the Net from our
"branch" office on the beach in Tahiti?  While Cellular Digital Packet
Data may offer the next level of freedom from those pesky wires
representing data and network connections, delays in equipment
availability and geographic coverage are still a challenge to would-be
service providers.  On top of that, service providers are still
deciding how to price the services.

Tonight's speaker will give us the latest news about a variety of
technical and standards/specifications issues on CDPD, including what
functionality is currently being anticipated by the recently published
Release 1.1 of the CDPD spec.  TCP/IP services, the inclusion of a
Hayes AT command set, etc. are among the items to be covered.

WHO:   Chuck Berman, McCaw Cellular

WHEN:  Wednesday, February 15, 1995 at 7:30 p.m.

WHERE: Sun Microsystems Bldg 6, 2750 Coast Avenue, Mountain View
       Coast Ave appears to be just a driveway next to Bldg 5 on Garcia Ave
       between Amphitheatre Pkwy and San Antonio, so don't get confused.

For more information, please call either Paul Fronberg at [phone]
or Ralph Barker at [phone].

SVNet is a UNIX and open systems user group supported by member dues
and donations.

             SVNet Meetings are FREE and OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.
         UNIX is a registered trademark licensed solely by X/Open

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

From: [e-mail] (Christopher L. Browne)
Subject: Rolm 6200/b CBX?
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 95 11:51:34 PST
Organization: USRobotics, Inc.


I am looking for technical references or manuals for the Rolm 6200/b
pbx.  Are such documents available any where on the net?


Christopher L. Browne                [e-mail]
USRobotics, Inc.             [e-mail]
Applications Engineering   [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Tony Pelliccio)
Subject: Re: MCI Gave me a Deal
Date: 8 Feb 1995 20:16:12 GMT
Organization: Brown University -- Providence, Rhode Island  USA


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Michael P. Deignan) wrote:

> In my opinion, Sprint is the real winner now, with their penny-per-minute
> promo. At least you know what you're paying and when the rate is applicable.
> With the other two, its a percentage crap-shoot over some elusive "basic"
> rate.

I have to agree. I spend at LEAST $25.00 a month and with Sprint Sense get
 .10 a minute from 7PM-7AM weekdays and from 7PM Friday to 7AM Monday
morning. So at that rate it comes to 250 minutes of talk time. If I'd
spent that with AT&T's TrueUSA it came out to only 192 minutes.

The best part was when the sleaze from MCI called me last night asking
if I'd switch to their new Friend & Family II. Ha! My reply? "Send me
a check for $75.00 and I'll think about it."

I'm waiting to see how many people do this with my data line which makes
NO long distance calls -- I should make a fortune off that one.


Tony Pelliccio, KD1NR
Box 1908, Prov, RI 02912 Tel. [phone] Fax. [phone]
------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (LLMeeks)
Subject: Re: MCI Gave me a Deal
Date: 8 Feb 1995 18:12:44 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (LLMeeks)


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Glen
Ecklund) writes:

> MCI called yesterday, and made me an offer I didn't want to refuse.
> 50% off on all calls for six months.  After that, 50% off on calls to
> MCI customers (no list required) and 25% off (if I recall correctly)
> to everyone else.

     Yes, MCI is offering 50% off all calls fro six months to NEW
customers.  After that it is 25% off all calls if the monthly bill is
over $10, 30% if over $50.  The 50% discount will only be to other MCI
customers in your Friends & Family list.

     This is off the standard rates (generally just slightly less than
AT&T's).  It makes more sense than any other plan they have except for
intralata calls in Texas.  Other plans might make sense for that but
are being grandfathered by the company.

     In comparing New F&F to True USA, the rate will always be less
than AT&T, even without the 50% MCI to MCI discount.


Lindsay Meeks

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

From: Anthony Chor <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed,  8 Feb 95 16:40:30 PST
Subject: Re: How I Fooled Caller ID


In TELECOM Digest #78, [e-mail] (John Combs) writes
(about ADSI):

> Bellcore deserves praise for this well thought out service, laid out
> in several Bellcore standards.  Another smart move on their part is
> that they didn't bother submitting the standard to an international
> standards body to try to get it adopted.  (We all know how long that
> takes.)  Instead, they have been visiting the PTTs of dozens of
> countries, and trying to convince them to sign on to the ADSI standard
> as defined by Bellcore.  Several European nations have expressed
> interest already, as have Pacific Rim nations, including China.
> ...It is my opinion that ADSI, along with V.34 modems giving
> true 115 kbps data throughput (via compression), could be an ISDN BRI
> "killer" one-two punch...By the way, even though ADSI works on POTS lines, it
> qualifies as PANS.  (Pretty Amazing New Stuff.)

ADSI is state-of-the-art technology -- for 1975. However, it is 1995,
and Bellcore's low speed, asymmetrical protocol doesn't meet today's
expectations for a multimedia information terminal.

A little background: ADSI provides 1200 baud signalling to the CPE and
a DTMF backchannel. So, ADSI is really slow sending info to the user,
and the user can only signal back in DTMF. This is inherently limiting,
as you might imagine. ADSI also defines presentation capabilities
which allow the server to write text and options on the CPE screen.
However, this capability is text-only.

So, here we are on the brink of the Infobahn with cable companies and
on-line services promising users a rich multimedia world replete with
full motion video and CD quality sound and here's Bellcore offering
1200 baud text only services. OK, maybe the Infobahn stuff is a little
way out, but ADSI adoption hasn't exactly been earth-shattering.

By the time there is any appreciable penetration of ADSI phones (if
ever), people will have truly state-of-the-art capabilities in their
TVs and PCs. Meanwhile, the phones, phone companies, and telecom folks
(us) will look dumb showing off ADSI stuff. Furthermore, we would then
have a backward compatibility issue with these installed devices as we
tried to move into some new technology.

Therefore, we in the telecom industry should be pushing for a more
modern voice/data solution than ADSI, one which will carry us into the
next century. For instance, the Radish VoiceView protocol is a fully
symmetrical switched voice/data solution which allows data (anything,
not just text) to be carried at much higher speeds; the protocol also
allows negotiation for fax (unlike ADSI). We should see VoiceView
modems appearing later this year. Plus, digital simultaneous voice/data
(DSVD) standards are coming soon (i.e. next year) which will allow high
speed data connections plus voice on the same analog line.

Finally, I'm not sure how v.34 and ADSI finish off ISDN. If I'm
running v.34, I can't talk on the line. ADSI makes no provision for
interrupting a data call with voice or a voice call with v.34 data, so
these two things are unrelated. (Besides, I'd like to meet the person
who gets 115kbps reliably over real phone lines using v.34.)

(Other random thoughts: when the head of any RBOC talks about the
Information Superhighway, none of them has ever mentioned ADSI as a
key technology in making our future happen. If they don't believe in
it, why should we? Something else to keep in mind: who will be the
torch bearer for ADSI? Last I checked, Bellcore was for sale. Given
the uncertainty of their future, I wouldn't count on them to propagate
any standards.)

Thus, ADSI is hardly new (technology wise) and not very amazing. Just
say 'no' to ADSI.


Tony Chor  Program Manager
Telecom Product Unit   Microsoft Corporation

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

From: [e-mail] (Shawn Gordhamer)
Subject: Re: How I Fooled Caller ID
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 19:31:34 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Yes, you can put a resistor across the
> line then attach a listening device behind that and listen all you want
> without being detected. That's how phones are tapped. And, I suppose
> you could send data, since as far as everyone else is concerned, your
> phone is still on hook.  But how would the person who is attempting to
> spoof *your* display box know that you had such resistance on your line
> unless he came to your house and put it there himself?  Seems like a lot
> of trouble to me.    PAT]

No, you would put a resister on your phone.  Then, when you detected
the first ring, you would send "fake" caller-ID data which would fool
the callers box.  Is this possible?


Shawn Gordhamer   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: No it would not work since anything you do
on your phone only applies as far as the central office. If it were possible
for me to do something to *my* phone which influenced the behavior of *your*
phone then lots of folks would add resistors or whatnot to their own lines
to fool the exchange into thinking *you* had not answered, thus there
should be no charge for the call, etc.  Remember the book and movie a few
years ago called 'Tandem Rush'?  The sick phreak sits at home and dumps all
this very high current on the phone line causing the phone on the *other end*
to catch fire and/or electrocute the recipient ... yet it goes unnoticed in
the central office ... balogna!  Whatever hardwiring you do on your phone
only influences the behavior of your phone(s) and line(s). Once the results
of your handiwork reach the CO maze, that, as they say, is that. Notice I
said nothing about audio tones, just hardwiring. Anyway, if you put this
resistor in your phone, then the CO would think you were the one *not* off
hook and would never extend dial tone to you.  Or were you planning to
switch it in and out of the circuit as appropriate? As soon as you switch
it in (if off hook) the CO will think you disconnected.  Won't work!   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Campus Wiring/Connectivity Innovation
Date: 8 Feb 1995 05:22:28 GMT
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.


                     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 7 miles (11 km).
Change existing utp to E-1 or T-1 for lan to lan connections up to 7
miles (11 km).  Allow ethernet to be extended on existing 2 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/routers

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

Date: Tue, 7 Feb 95 17:19:02 CST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Clock Slips Again


When using DS1 circuits, a switch needs to be timed with the rest of
the network.  On the switches I have worked on, I designate which DS1s
the switch should use for timing.  Check where your PBX is receiving
timing.

Assuming your switch is clocking off of the DS1 like it should be, a
second problem can come from having the clocking DS1 on SONET
facilities.  We have found that SONET DS1s have significant jitter,
and can not be used for timing.  We have gone so far as to require
special facilities from the LEC to avoid SONET routing.  With the T1
on SONET, your PBX may be unable to clock properly.  Ask your telephone
company how the T-1 is routed to the central office.  You will need to
convince the LEC to keep at least one DS1 off of SONET facilities, and
program your PBX to use that DS1 for timing.

I hope this will give you a few more ideas.  Please give me a call or
EMAIL if I can help you more.


Harold Hechinger   WILTEL   918-588-3404

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

From: [e-mail] (Jill Arnson)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Date: 8 Feb 1995 23:59:19 GMT
Organization: Colorado SuperNet, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, Terrence McArdle <mcardle@
paccm.pitt.edu> wrote:

> Just for clarification's sake, I assume the phrase "local numbers that
> are in a different phone number" means dialing a destination existing
> in separate exchange, but the same area code, as the originator?
> Calls that cross a LATA boundary currently require eleven digit
> dialing, do they not?

    One other reason for the 10 (11) digit dialing is that the NPA
and NXX in an area may be the same now that '0' and '1' are no longer
required to be the middle digit of the NPA.  So far it has been
avoided mostly, but in the future it will not.  If only seven digit
dialing were used in this case, there is the possiblility that the
switch will construe it as a misdialed number if only seven digits are
dialed if it thinks the first three digits are an NPA.  Granted the
software can be designed to get around this, but well ...


Jill C. Arnson   Omnipoint Corporation
Colorado Springs, Co  (but Denver's where I hang my hat)
[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Its not that the software can be designed
around this -- it HAS been designed. Ever hear of timeouts? If you dial
something which can be interpreted in a couple different ways depending on
what digits follow, if any, the central office will sit there a few seconds
following your last key press waiting for more. Lacking any further entry
on your end, translation is started based on the context of what you did
enter. For instance, you dial just zero for the operator. It is going to
sit there a few more seconds waiting to see if you plan to continue dialing
with 011, or 01, or 00, or 0+area code and number, all of which are valid
combinations.  To avoid timeouts and waiting, try dialing 0#. That 'pound
sign' on the end functions as a carriage return. It means the dialing
string is finished. Ditto with credit card calls to the number associated
with the card; you only need to enter the four digits of the PIN. But the
computer does not know what you are dialing, so it will sit there and wait
to see if more digits are following. Terminate the PIN with # and watch
how fast your call is processed. Anytime the number of digits to be entered
is variable depending on context, use the # on the end to speed up the
process in the same way you were told to do with international calls.
Note that when you dial a seven or eleven digit number, adding # at the
end does absolutely nothing to speed up the connection.     PAT]

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

Date: 8 Feb 1995 15:50:55 +1000
From: Allyson Anthonisz <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: International tariff database providers


I used to subscribe to T-Guide produced by Eurodata Foundation, which
contains tariffs for mainly European countries with the exception of
the USA, Canada, Japan and Hong Kong. I think they have a PC version
of it called T-Calc 2 which I have not used.

I also recently received a brochure on the LYNX Global Telecom Guide
which contains tariff data for a wider range of countries and is
available as a database.

Contact details:
Eurodata Foundation, Empire House, 175 Picadilly, London W1V 9DB
Tel: [phone]    Fax: [phone]

Lynx Technologies Inc., 710 Route 46, Fairfield, N.J. 07004
Tel: [phone]   Fax: [phone]


Allyson Anthonisz                 Tel: [phone]
Information Services Manager      Fax: [phone]
AUSTEL Library                    E-mail: [e-mail]
5 Queens Road              Melbourne, 3004  Australia

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Berlant)
Subject: Re: New Motorola Micro-tac Elite AMPS Cellphone
Date: 9 Feb 1995 02:29:44 GMT
Organization: EDS Japan


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Andrew Knox) says:

> Motorola New Zealand is apparently about to launch a new AMPS
> cellphone called the Microtac Elite.

The Elite was introduced in the USA about three months ago.  It is
smaller and lighter than the MicroTAC Ultra Lite, which was Motorola's
previous lightweight champ.  Aside from the electronic feature
improvements, physical presentation is the big news for this model.
Until now every last one of Motorola's "Flip Phones" was designed so
that its accessories (batteries, cig adapters, car adapters, modem
adapters, etc.) would interchange with any other Flip phone.  As I
understand it, the new Elite cannot share accessories with any other
model of Motorola phone.  This may present you with "new product
accessory availability" problems which were not present, for example,
when Motorola introduced the MicroTAC Ultra Lite a year and a half
ago.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven King)
Subject: Re: New Motorola Micro-tac Elite AMPS Cellphone
Date: 8 Feb 1995 16:04:00 GMT
Organization: Cellular Infrastructure Group, Motorola


[e-mail] (Andrew Knox) publicly declared:

> Motorola New Zealand is apparently about to launch a new AMPS cellphone
> called the Microtac Elite.

> I would be quite interested to know whether anyone has any details
> about this phone or about pricing of it throughout the world.

The phone has more features than you can shake a stick at and is
extremely light.  I'd have purchased one instead of the MicroTAC
Ultra-Lite I bought two days ago, if it weren't for the fact that
street price in the U.S. is a little over US $1000.  The street price
on the Ultra-Lite is less than half that.  (Of course, actual price
depends on what kind of deal you can get with your service plan.  With
the plan I got, I received $150 off any phone in the store.)

Please note that I work in the Infrastructure group at Moto, not the
Subscriber group.  I get all my information about these phones through
the same retail channels as anyone else.  Sorry, no inside dope for
you.  :-(


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Integral 1)
Subject: Re: Caller ID and Call Waiting
Date: 8 Feb 1995 18:05:21 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Integral 1)


Ameritech now offers what they call "Access 24" in many areas of
Detroit and suburbia, a service which offers Caller ID combined with
Call Waiting.  You must purchase a whole new phone to use this
feature; Ameritech offers this phone for, I believe, a cost of around
$250.  The phone, produced by none other than Northern Telecom,
features "soft keys" that can be pressed to instantly access other
custom calling features; the screen will display Caller ID information
of normal incoming calls and of calls that are waiting.  This particular
phone is supposed to also be compatible with future home banking and
other electronic services.


Scott Barnett   Detroit, MI   [e-mail]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #87
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa18954;
          9 Feb 95 17:21 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16855; Thu, 9 Feb 95 10:56:28 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA16849; Thu, 9 Feb 95 10:56:25 CST
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 10:56:25 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #88

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Feb 95 10:56:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 88

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    AT&T 500 Service and the Hospitality Industry (Darryl Kipps)
    Re: AT&T 500 Service (Marc A. Randolph)
    Re: Motorola Flip Phone and Low Battery (Patrick Wolfe)
    Re: Atlanta Toll-Free Calling Zone Growing? (Ed Goldgehn)
    Re: Directory Assistance Vendor Wanted (Ed Goldgehn)
    Re: The Philosophy of CallerID (Benjamin P. Carter)
    Re: North Pacific Cable Cut? (Floyd Davidson)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Finn Stafsnes)
    Re: When Will PBXs Go Away? ([e-mail])
    Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs (Michael D. Sullivan)
    Re: CCITT Class A (Lars Poulsen)
    Cash For Telecom Experts Who Want to be Published (David Bezar)
    Information Sought on RF Data-Comm Chips (1/4 Mile Range) (Rob Mitchell)

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: 09 Feb 95 03:25:57 EST
From: Darryl Kipps <[e-mail]>
Subject: AT&T 500 Service and the Hospitality Industry


     As MIS director for a small chain of hotels, I am concerned about
the increasing number of comments I'm seeing here regarding the
inability to access 500 numbers from most PBX's.  I take great pride
in offering our guests the luxury of trouble-free communications away
from home.  I don't want to block these calls, but I'd like to make
sure I have all the facts straight regarding who pays for the calls.
If I understand correctly, I assume that if I were to call our
Esteemed Moderator's 1-500-number at 4am I'd be greeted with a grumble
and a click. :) From there I assume that a charge would appear on my
telco bill by AT&T for a one minute call from VA to Chicago.  At what
rate am I being charged?  (i.e. Basic Rate, Calling Card, Flat, etc. ?)
Do I lose the benefit of any calling plans I subscribe to?

     Having been burned to some extent by each new calling scheme
that's come down the pike in the last ten years, I'm a bit cautious,
as I'm sure you understand, but I deplore the thought of a business
traveller calling my (clueless) desk staff complaining that their 500
number can't be completed and the clerk responding with such infinite
wisdom as "Huh?". (Although from what I've seen, some of AT&T's staff
could fill those shoes!)  Basically, I want to be able to provide the
service without being taken to the cleaners.  I presently block NO
numbers going out of my PBX's.  My CO provides blocking for 900
numbers and those nasty 800 pay-per-call deceptions.  I then bill all
remaining 1+ calls at a fixed markup from our actual fixed rate.  But,
as I command a .0935 flat rate from our carrier, (who is NOT AT&T) I'm
afraid that I'll book a loss on 1-500 calls if I'm billed at calling
card rates by AT&T!

   On a self-preservation note, I'd like to make it clear to anyone planning
a pity party for me due to the widespread raping and pilfirage undertaken by
most hotels with regard to telephone charges, I absolutely do not and will
not gouge my guests to use my telephones.  It has become quite commonplace
in this industry to take whatever steps are necessary to recoup lost revenue
due to increased competition and lower occupancy rates by increasing tele-
phone charges.  Every chain franchisor/operator out there has a national
account with one LD carrier or another and NONE are paying more than .105/
minute for direct dialed, interstate calls.  Flat rate, any time, anywhere.
Most even have up to 50% off international calls.  Yet, if you make a 1+ call
from any one of thier rooms, you can expect to pay between $1 and $3 _per
minute_ (!) for that call.

So, as a result, most travellers are now using calling cards exclusively
when on the road.  Well, that really pissed 'em off.  In retaliation,
the AOS was born.  These cut-throat upstarts intercept calling card
traffic flowing out of hotels, lock 'em up in a Mitel SMT-1 Dialer box
and shoot 'em through someone's basement in Idaho, re-route through
who-knows where, mark up the charges to an astronomical rate, tack on
some profit to kick back to the hotel, pause a few months for effect,
then send billing data to the poor victim's telco.  Three months after a
trip, John Q. Customer has a $6 charge on his bill for a one minute call
placed from a number he doesn't recognize, but barely remembers visiting
the city.  A call to the telco provides the number of the offending
carrier.  Another call puts you in direct conversation with a real
live Auto Attendant with a menu longer than Denny's.  If (and I stress
IF) you reach a human (or at least their interpetation of such) you
can expect all the warmth and understanding of an iceberg.

Oh, dear, I'm ranting.  Sorry.  But you get my point.  After all, I guess
someone has to pay for those fresh lox and bagels on the complimentary (ha)
continental breakfast spread.  My point is that I don't condone these
practices.  The phones in my rooms are but another amenity I provide for my
guests comfort just the same as clean sheets and hot water.  Next thing you
know they'll be putting water meters on each room ... (Stop him before
he rants again!)

     At any rate, I'd appreciate billing procedures and rates for 1-500
service.  I'm assuming that 0-500 numbers are always billed to either the
callee or a calling card.  Thanks for listening.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Don't make too many assumptions. As 'they'
say, when you assume something, it makes an ass out of 'u' and 'me'. <g>
One option under the 0-500 menu is 'to charge this call to the number you
are calling from, press 1'. Now I think you can probably work around that
with billed number screening; that is, the feature offered by most local
telcos which forbids collect and third number billing. I am not sure. I
think if you have billed number screening, then billing option 1 under
0-500 is not given; or it may be given but when the caller chooses it
a response comes back that 'charges cannot be billed to this phone'. You
will want to clarify this with your local telco. It is true in most cases
that 0-500 works like any other zero plus call; you need to then use a
calling card or call 'collect' (which in this case is done with a PIN).
There is no option for third number billing. But make sure your telco
can block that 'bill the call to the number you are calling from' option.
This is not something to bother AT&T with; your local telco does all the
billing. I know when using payphones, the option 'bill to the phone you
are using' is not even given, so obviously they can tell the difference.

On calls dialed 1-500 and billed direct (or dialed 0-500 if the guest
slips it to you by pressing '1' in response to 'bill this call to the
number you are calling from') you will be billed by AT&T at the rate of
25 cents per minute during peak and 15 cents per minute at night and
on weekends/holidays. Peak is 8am to 5pm your time, Monday through Friday.
You *will* be billed by AT&T on your local telco bill (in most places)
and you will *not* be billed by whoever is your established carrier,
nor at that carrier's rates. You will receive none of the benefits
your carrier gives for discounts, etc. If you happen to be an AT&T
customer, then the charges for 1-500 calls are counted toward any
discounts for volume usage given by AT&T. It does not matter where in
the USA you are, the rate is 25/15 cents per minute, even if you are
next door. That much should be easy enough to program for. The catch
is, if calls are being forwarded outside the USA, *then international
rates apply*, billed to *whoever places the call*. In other words, you
can't absolutely count on the 25/15 rate. Most always it will be, of
course, and if the owner has his 500 number forwarded internationally
then the caller will get a warning from AT&T 'this call is going to an
international point and will be billed at international rates', but
can you count on your guest in the hotel (or the user on your PBX or
whatever) to tell you about this? You will get the charges for the
international call.  You will eat the charges for the international
call unless you have recourse to the person who placed the call.

So be careful of 1-500. You will almost always see the 25/15 per
minute rate *but not always*. I would say since there is no easy way
to discern whether a 500 call is going to terminate domestically or
internationally, other than the verbal warning given to the caller by
AT&T as the call is being set up, you'd be wise to set your rates
accordingly. Mark up that 25/15 to something you are comfortable with
for profit, assume (there we go again!) that for the immediate future
500 is mostly going to terminate in this country (at least until it
gets very popular, if it ever does) and accept your occassional (hopefully
very rare) losses on 500's which have been forwarded to the South Pole
or wherever. There are intra-state exceptions to the 25/15 pricing;
most states have gone along with it; check to see if your state has
slightly different rates for in-state calls.

Note to PBX admins: if you require your users to give a PIN as part
of their long distance call, or you can identify the user based on the
extension from which the call was placed, you have no problems. Just
pass along the charges accordingly; mostly 25/15, occassionally something
else.

Now on 0-500 as noted above, if you have 'bill to this number' as an
option removed, then the choices are bill to the caller's own credit
card (not your problem) or call collect using a PIN (again, not your
problem where the call terminates.)

And yes Mr. Kipps, hotels have lately had the attitude that every single
item in the house must be a profit center. I am surprised they don't charge
guests to ride the elevator ... there is a few square feet of floor space
not turning a profit!  Many years ago when my friend Mrs. Brown was the
resident manager of a hotel in Chicago, she explained about phone service.
She said the switchboard never makes a profit; " ...in fact we lose a little
on it, but you have to provide it ..." It was understood that it was a
courtesy for guests. You made your money renting rooms, not selling phone
service. She told me a funny story: she said she had an agreement with
'Kenwood Bell' (she was on the Chicago-Kenwood CO of Illinois Bell) which
was that she did not sell phone service and they do not have rooms for
rent ... <g>.  Hey, if business is that bad, start renting rooms by the
hour <g> ... oh, I guess you don't want that kind of a 'house' either.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Marc A Randolph)
Subject: Re: AT&T 500 Service
Date: 9 Feb 1995 07:14:15 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Texas  A&M University


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, you might check again. Very possibly
> [...]
> be busy).  When I do 0-500-677-1616 and tell it to bill the call to the
> phone I am using, it vanishes for a couple seconds and I get call-waiting,
> then after four rings (call waiting or not) it interupts and a voice
> message says it will try my alternate numbers. I did not bother with AT&T
> voicemail; I have voicemail up the kazooey from a few other places I rarely
> use. Anyway, feel free to call me at any reasonable hour: 500-677-1616.  PAT]

   So now that you've been though it Pat, do you mind telling us the
possible options/features of 500 service?  It sounds like you can set
up a hunt group, which I was not aware of.  Will it do a hunt on no
answer?  And if you don't mind, how much is it (i.e. for different
levels of options)?


Marc Randolph          [e-mail]  -or-  [e-mail]
PGP keyID: 4C95994D         ...!{uunet,gatech}!tamu.edu!mrand


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You dial 0-500-your number and when
requested, enter your master pin. You then get a menu which allows you
to modify your 'reach list', turn on/off override (of your reach list),
place a call to your home or override number, check voicemail, and
do a few other things.

In the reach list, you can give up to three numbers to try and reach
you at. When someone calls your 500 number, it starts at the top of
the list, working its way down until some one of the phones on the list
is answered or it reaches the bottom of the list. For instance, your
reach list can have your home number (abbreviated H# if desired when
you enter it), your cellular number (abbreviated C# if desired) and perhaps
your work number or voicemail.

It starts at the top of the reach list and rings that phone the number
of times you designate (default is four rings, but you can set it as
desired). If no answer or busy, a voice comes on the line and says, "please
hold, we will try to reach your party at another number." It then tries
the second number on the list, and if necessary this repeats and the third
number is attempted. You can have as many 500 calls simultaenously as you
have terminating facilities. In other words if you have two lines at home
set up in hunt, then you can have two 500 calls. If both those lines are
busy a third 500 call would look on the reach list for the next place to
try. I don't think there is any limit to the number of 500 calls that can
be aimed at you at any one time other than whatever number of calls you
(and the various places on your reach list) can handle at one time.

You might have your 500 number point to your PBX (as the first number
on your reach list) during the day. At night when your PBX does not
answer, calls would go to the second number on your reach list, which
is your office in another state which is open all night, etc. If your
PBX can handle 20 incoming calls, then you can have 20 incoming 500 calls
if desired. Maybe the third number on your reach list is someone who
takes calls on weekends. By calling in with your master pin, you modify
the reach list as desired anytime. If you want only one number on your
reach list which you call in and change throughout the day as you travel
around, that's okay also. Just scratch the other two. You can have up to
three to be attempted if desired. If you are going to be at one place
on a temporary basis and don't want to change your reach list, then a
provision is made called 'override the reach list'. You enter a single
number to *always* be used until you turn off this feature and tell it
to go back to using the reach list again.

So it truly can be a national number just like 800, but with more
flexibility because you can require the caller to pay for it unless he
has a pin, and you are not tied down to any one location as you are
with many old-fashioned 800 numbers, although companies like 'My Line'
and Arch Telecom have eliminated that problem.

You can use your 500 number to make outcalls also and not have to bother
with a calling card or calling collect. At the present time, you can
only call your home number (H#) or your override number, but that will
be changed later this year so you can call anywhere. Now with 'My Line'
and Arch Telecom, you can presently use your 800 number for outcalls
to anywhere. AT&T says 500 will eventually have that also.

If desired, you can have what is known as 'Final Stop' with 500. This
has to be either AT&T provided voicemail or voicemail from the vendor
of your choosing. If all the numbers on your reach list are busy or
do not answer, then calls go automatically to 'Final Stop'. If you wish,
you can override the reach list and send calls to 'Final Stop' directly.

If desired, call screening is also available. You can toggle options which
allow only calls made with pin numbers to reach you, sending all other
calls to Final Stop (voicemail). There is an option where calls deemed
'urgent' can get through the call screening while all other calls go to
voicemail.

You get recorded help at any time by pressing *H, and *0 will transfer
you to the business office at any time for further assistance. Prices
for the different options vary, and I do not have them all here. Right
now everything is one dollar per month through April. For more information
call them at 1-800-982-8480.    PAT]


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

From: [e-mail] (Patrick Wolfe)
Subject: Re: Motorola Flip Phone and Low Battery
Date: 8 Feb 1995 17:01:52 GMT
Organization: MCSNet Services


Erik P. Larson ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Motorola ... flip phone ... does anyone know how to disable the low
> battery warning beep?  It's really annoying
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I'll second you on that (is anyone from Motorola listening?).  My
phone has tons of controllable options, but not how many times or loud
to make that damned beep.

One thing that's interesting is that when I'm using the phone, it only
beeps about four or five times (maybe one to two minutes) before the
battery drains and the phone shuts off.  When I'm not using the phone,
it'll beep about once every minute for at least 15 minutes.

My instructions for my xt-pak ni-cad batteries say to maintain long
lifetime, I should discharge them fully before recharging (all the
time, not just the first five times), so I've found I must stuff the
phone under the couch cushions overnight so it won't wake me up.

Maybe this is an opportunity for a third party product - a cell phone
silencer (sound proof box), or a battery drainer (something that just
puts a load on the battery until it drains completely).


Patrick Wolfe ([e-mail])

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Re: Atlanta Toll-Free Calling Zone Growing?
Date: 8 Feb 1995 18:57:03 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] says...

> I heard a very brief report on one of the local radio stations that
> Southern Bell was planning to increase the size of the "local Atlanta
> calling zone by 50%" by "adding 34 new exchanges" to it ...

Thanks to the PUC, we got to vote on this about a year ago.  The
ballots were included in our telephone bills and was going to result
in an increase on all residential and business telephone line costs.
It passed.  Now they are implementing the expansion of the calling
area as well as splitting up 404 into two area codes in the same
calling area (yes, this means you may need to dial another area code
to get across the street).  I don't remember what the new area code
will be.


Ed Goldgehn                          E-Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr. Vice President                   Voice:   [phone]
Open Communication Networks, Inc.    Fax:     [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn)
Subject: Re: Directory Assistance Vendor Wanted
Date: 8 Feb 1995 19:10:08 GMT
Organization: The INTERNET Connection, LLC


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

> I am looking for a vendor who can provide me with up to date Directory
> Assistance data for the United States that can reside on a LAN and be
> accessed by any user.  I'm not sure if a CD-ROM that is updated
> frequently is the way to go or an on line connection with a per
> request charge.

> We have about $3,000 per month in Directory Assistance charges.

Contact DirectoryNet, Inc. in Atlanta about this.  They have on-line
connections to most telephone companies in the country and offer the
type of service you are looking for.

Their telephone number is [phone].


Ed Goldgehn                         E-Mail:  [e-mail]
Sr. Vice President                  Voice:   [phone]
Open Communication Networks, Inc.   Fax:     [phone]

For more information about ISDN in general and our TURNKEY ISDN Solutions,
send e-mail to [e-mail]  (There are humans at the end of this address).

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin P. Carter)
Subject: Re: The Philosophy of CallerID
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 23:26:25 GMT


[e-mail] (Malcolm Slaney) writes:

> This article should be required reading for anybody who wants to enter
> into the debate.

> Caller ID and the Meaning of Privacy

> Laurie Thomas Lee (Univ of Nebraska-Lincoln) Robert LaRose (Michigan
> State)

> The Information Society, Volume 1, pp 247-265, 1994.

So anyone unable or unwilling to find this publication in a library is
by definition too ignorant to discuss issues relating to caller ID?

Can the material be accessed electronically?  If not, then I submit
that it should *NOT* be required reading.


Ben Carter    internet address: [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Hey, chill out, Ben. 'Should be required
reading' is a favorite phrase of book reviewers everywhere. It does not
mean the Congress is going to pass a law sending you to prison if you
don't read the book and still choose to postulate on the subject matter.
Look at me. What do I know about anything, yet I talk all the time.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: North Pacific Cable Cut?
Date: 9 Feb 1995 06:51:10 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Stephen Palm) writes:

> We have 56kbps digital leased line between Tokyo and California that
> used the North Pacific Cable (NPC).  Apparently NPC was cut on 2 Feb
> 1:00 AM JST (1 Feb 8:00 AM PST) and we are now on satellite backup.

> Does anybody have any more information?  Does anyone know when they
> are planning to fix NPC?

There appears to be a problem between the first and second repeaters,
which would put it approximately 60 Km off the coast of Oregon.

In addition to Asian traffic, the NPC has a spur to Alaska, and all
traffic is currently using satellite re-route.

I'll have a chance to check later tonight on the current status and if
there is anything actually useful to anyone I'll try to post it in the
morning.  Considering the three previous occasions when the NPC has been
out of service, expect 10-12 days for repair.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Finn Stafsnes)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Organization: Norwegian Telecom Research
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 11:11:35 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(Robert Lindh) writes:

> I think Norway switched to seven-digit telephone numbers for all
> calls, including "local" calls, approximately one year ago.

Make it eight-digits.

 ... and in Denmark, a similar change was made some (five?) years ago.

>> The reason given was something like "to prepare for new functions in
>> the future".

The main reason, as I have got it, was that the old numbering plan was
beginning to run out of numbers for some areas.


Finn Stafsnes

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

Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 08:49:05 -0500
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: When Will PBXs Go Away?


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

> What is the current thinking on when a PC (powerPC, whatever) replace
> the PBX? i.e. when can I run my T1 from the telco with my voice trunks
> on it into one card on a PC and have it route voice over the LAN to
> other desktop computers that double as phones? It will probably be a
> time curve: first available for small offices (ten users) on an ethernet,
> then a while later available for 200 lines on a faster LAN, etc. What
> says the net? My Mitel sx200 lite has a 68000 for a processor: it's a
> MacPlus! Surely the cpu horsepower is available to replace lots of
> dedicated TTL and switching hardware. I was just at a briefing from
> Apple and they're working with the PBX makers for a Geoport Mac to be
> a voice terminal behind a "big maker" PBX. But who are the startups
> that are out to kill the PBX makers?

The "startups out to kill" are the PBX makers themselves.  NEC,
Toshiba make computers now.  Instead of the PBX going away, see it as
yet another server on the LAN.  I work with NEC systems involving
about 50 trunks by 100 to 200 lines, (a small switch) It takes a lot
of power to drive this thing, making analog sets ring, driving digital
sets etc.  I am also sure that the bandwidth on a LAN will ever
increase to be able to handle the increased voice traffic, just as the
PC will become more stable -- not needing the three fingered salute
from time to time.  The reported weakness of the PBX, the closed
system approach also was a a foundation of its strength, amazing
durability.  Today the PBX is augmented by the computer (integrated
messaging, authorization code database, ACD) and that forms a network
of distributed -- not dedicated, processing.  That is the powerhouse for
communication networks, not the warm-fuzzy, shrinkwrapped software do
everything in-a-box world of Harry Newton.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael D. Sullivan)
Subject: Re: LD Termination Fees to RBOCs
Date: 9 Feb 1995 00:32:32 -0500
Organization: Wilkinson, Barker, Knauer & Quinn (Washington, DC, USA)


[e-mail] (Ed Goldgehn) writes:

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

>>> BTW, the method of charges is entirely different for LD service in the
>>> cellular industry.  With cellular, it is not unusual for local cellular
>>> carriers (RBOC's or otherwise) to provide FREE or flat rate termination
>>> charges to LD carriers.

>> Why not, if they extend the T1s to your MTSO?  It's that many less
>> erlangs going out on the other (paid) trunks.  I assume the B carriers
>> probally must provide this for free or are limited to some max rate by
>> Da Judge (that's Greene, not Ito :-))

No, Judge Greene doesn't have any jurisdiction over what the RBOCs
charge for providing access.  He does require them to provide equal
access, however (see below).

> Actually, it was a matter of marketing -- or necessity depending on
> your point of view.  The cellular industry needed to attract long
> distance carriers to make connections to their networks in order to
> sell their services.  It didn't do much good to provide local
> cellphone service without LD capability.  But, the LD carriers weren't
> going to make those connections on the same basis that they make their
> existing LD access (by the connection and by time).  So, since the
> cellular industry needs the LD capability to sell its local calling
> service, the fee structure was virtually eliminated.

> I don't know which cellular carrier was first to do this (I would take
> a guess that it was McCaw, but don't quote me on that).  But, from
> what I've heard, this practice is now widespread.

I'm not sure who was the first to do it, but the first cellular carrier
to file a tariff providing free access was U S WEST NewVector Group.
Judge Greene got in a snit that USWNVG didn't have an equal access
tariff, so it filed one with the FCC specifying $0 charge.  The FCC
staff wanted to reject it, but ultimately allowed it to go into effect.


Michael D. Sullivan | INTERNET E-MAIL TO:  [e-mail]
Bethesda, Md., USA  | also [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: CCITT Class A
Date: 8 Feb 1995 22:33:54 -0800
Organization: Rockwell International - CMC Network Products


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jesus
Ruelas) writes:

> I read about the committee CCITT that is formed by 5 class groups,
> they are class A, class B, ..., class E; and know that only the group
> class A has the voting right while proposing a Standard specification.
> Does anybody know why only this group has this kind of privileges?.

The CCITT is a division of the ITU (International Telecommunications Union);
it has recently been renamed ITU-TS (Technical Standards division). The ITU
is a United Nations agency. That means only governments get to vote.


Lars Poulsen            Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
  Rockwell Network Systems    Phone:        [phone]
  7402 Hollister Avenue     Telefax:      [phone]
  Santa Barbara, CA 93105    Internets: designed and built while you wait

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

From: [e-mail] (David Bezar)
Subject: Cash For Telecom Experts Who Want to be Published
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 16:21:47 MST
Organization: Primenet


$$$$ Money $$$$ to be made and the bragging rights to being a published
author.

I am currently writting a book on Computer Telephony.  There are dozens of
chapters on different topics pertaining to the Telecommunications industry.

I am looking for people who are interested in writting approximately a
20 pages including some diagrams on each of the following subjects:

    Wireless Communications
    Fax processing, Fax on demand, Fax broadcasting
    ISDN Communications
    International Communications
    Asynchronous Transfer Mode
    The Cable/Telecommunications Industry
    Video Conferencing / Distance Learning
    Microsoft's TAPI, Novell's TSAPI
    Telephony and the Internet

If you are interested in obtaining more information about becoming a
published author with one of the largest publishers in the world, and
you are knowledgeable about one or more of these topics, write me back
at:

[e-mail]

Please tell me which topic(s) you may be interested in / qualified
for, along with a little information about yourself, and if possible,
but not necessary a voice telephone number and a good time to reach
you.

If you are selected there is some money $$$$ to be made, but far more
important is the fact that you could be published by a MAJOR publishing
company.

Details to be disclosed to those who respond.

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

From: [e-mail] (Rob Mitchell)
Subject: Information Sought on RF Data-Comm Chips/ (1/4 mile Range)
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc.
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 20:05:58 -0500


This post's not as interesting as Dick Tracy, but ... ;)

I am looking for product information about IC's which will allow me to
transmit data using RF about a quarter mile or so.  I'm looking for
something with either an async, or possibly SDLC interface, to work
with a micro-controller (TI 370 series).  I'm also interested in board
level products.  Which companies participate in this field?

Also, can anyone recommend any good, practical design guides covering
this subject?  What frequencies are 'best'.  What bands are reserved?
Types of antennae and driver circuits?


Thanks in advance for the information!

Rob Mitchell

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #88
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa19770;
          9 Feb 95 17:53 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19912; Thu, 9 Feb 95 12:09:29 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA19903; Thu, 9 Feb 95 12:09:25 CST
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 12:09:25 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #89

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Feb 95 12:09:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 89

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: Emergency Cellular Phone (Matthew Dukleth)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (James Carlson)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Stephen Palm)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (John Combs)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Ken Culbert)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (John Lundgren)
    Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is (Kevin Kadow)
    Re: POCSAG to be Upgraded to APOC (Matthew Cheng)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Carl Moore)
    Re: Unit to "Speak" CLID (Mike Roche)
    Re: Clock Slips Again (Martin McCormick)
    Looking for Hands on Networking Experience (Al Gharakhanian)
    Re: Who Belongs to 10732 Five-Digit Access Code? (Peter M. Weiss)
    Re: GTE PCS/Global Roam (John Mark)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (David Buerger)

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] (Matthew Dukleth)
Subject: Re: Emergency Cellular Phone
Date: 9 Feb 1995 17:50:51 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Yes, such a product is being developed.  Here is the information I have:

1. Beta tests of the phone have been underway for about two months, and
will be completed, sucessfully, soon.

2. Service is contemplated in about three months.

3. The phone will have alkaline batteries, and a cigarette adaptor, so
it can be stored in a car glove box for an extended period of time, and
still work.

4. And, the cost will probably not be zero, but will be very low
compared to current cellular service.  Also, the per minute charge will
include long distance, as well as cellular airtime, for a fixed price --
to anywhere in the United States.

If anyone would like more information, please contact either:


Beth Walsh, The National Dispatch Center, [e-mail]
Jack Nargundkar, The National Dispatch Center, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (James Carlson)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: 9 Feb 1995 18:02:04 GMT
Organization: Xylogics Incorporated
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In article <[e-mail]>, Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
writes:

>> 1.  Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or
>> 14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression?

> The raw data rate for a modem will be from 110 to 28,800 baud (or
> 14,400 baud) depending on what the other side agrees on.  The rate
> will be the lowest of whatever the two modems agree on. If you call up
> a service that has only 14.4 modems, or 9600 baud modems, or even
> 2400, you will only get 14.4 or 9600 or 2400 even though your modem
> can do more.  If both modems are 28.8 and both have their highest
> speed enabled, you should see 28,800 baud before any compression
> occurs.

> The data is not sent at 28,800 bits per second, however.  Typically
> the modem will divide up the telephone line into six or more channels,
> and run each channel at 2400 to 4800 bits per second.  By multiplexing
> six channels at 2400 baud, you get 14,400 baud, etc.

One or two minor nits: the data are sent at 28,800 bits per second, but not
at 28,800 baud.  The difference is that a bit is a binary digit (a single one
or zero) while a baud is a signal-element-per-second.  The signal elements
sent by the modem each represent several bits (actually, with 28.8Kbps, it's
a variable amount), thus with about 3200 baud and 9 bits per baud you get
28,800.

This is a synchronous data rate, so async framing conversion data and
data compression run on top of this 28.8Kbps pipe.

Unfortunately, too many sales and marketing folks have confused the bps
versus baud issue, and the terms have lost much of their original
meaning.  The language is all the poorer for this.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen [kiwin] PALM)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Organization: Rockwell International Japan, JEDC
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 12:20:03 GMT


Steve Midgley <[e-mail]> wrote:

> With sheepish apologies to the moderator and readers, I amend my
> previous post. I must have sleeping sitting down :-)

> V.32 is not the protocol spec for 14.4 modems. It's V.42.  Apologies,
 apologies.

Actually, you still have it wrong.

V.32bis is where the 14.4kbps full duplex modulation is defined.

V.42 is an error correction procedure (than can be used with several
different modulations including V.32bis).

Paul Robinson <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The raw data rate for a modem will be from 110 to 28,800 baud (or
> 14,400 baud) depending on what the other side agrees on.

Actually, it would be 110 to 28,800 bits ber second.

A V.34 28,800 modem can use one of 6 baud (or symbol) rates at a time:
  2400, 2743, 2800, 3000, 3200, 3249

> The data is not sent at 28,800 bits per second, however.
> Typically the modem will divide up the telephone line into six
> or more channels, and run each channel at 2400 to 4800 bits per
> second.  By multiplexing six channels at 2400 baud, you get
> 14,400 baud, etc.

This is incorrect for V.34 (28,800) modems.  A V.34 modem only uses a
single "channel".  During negotiation, the line is characterized by a
process refered to as "line probing". Based on that information, one
of the 6 symbol rates listed above is selected.  To achieve multiple
bits per baud, Trellis Coding is used.

[stuff deleted... now discussing FAX]

> There are two speeds for transmissions.  First, when the connection is
> being set up, each side will send an identifier sequence.  I call it
> the "answerback" after the similar sequence sent by a telex machine.
> This identifier sequence is called a TTI or CSI.  One of these will
> typically appear in the log that the fax machine prints after 20-40
> transmissions indicating the identifying machine.  The other is the
> telephone number or other identifier that appears in the display
> window.  The two items may be different.  This information is
> transmitted by each machine at 300 baud, which is okay since it is
> typically no more than 60 characters for each side.

This 300 baud (which is also 300 bits per second in this case) modulation
is the V.21 high channel.  Several other pieces of information (such
as machine capabilities, page width, etc) are also transfered in a
protocol defined in T.30.

> The sending machine then increases its speed and the transmission
> takes place in the equivalent of "half duplex" mode, except that the
> recipient machine typically acknowledges the end of each page and end
> of transmission.

Image transmission is done by V.17, V.29, or V.27ter which are all
Half Duplex only modulations.

> The ITU standard for fax machine transmissions supports 4800, 9600,
> 12000, and 14400 baud, but typically a fax machine that does printing
> will do 9600 tops, and can be downgraded to 4800 if line conditions
> are bad.

The bottom speed is 2400 bits per second for really crummy lines.

> 12000 and 14400 are typically for fax modems in computers.

But many expensive FAX machines support 14,400 (V.17) too.  And you
should see a lot more "cheaper" FAX machines supporting V.17 in the
coming year.


Regards,

Stephen [kiwin] Palm                        TEL (Voice mail): [phone]
Rockwell - Digital Communications Division                   COMNET: 930-1564
Japan Engineering Design Center      (JST=PST+17hours)   FAX: [phone]
  [e-mail]   [e-mail]   [e-mail]   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 23:41:00 EST
From: Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 28.8kbps modem


I connect to MCImail late at night via a 14.4kbps modem, with V.42bis
compression, which is theoretically 4:1.  I regularly get throughputs
of 4200cps or better, which shows a compression ratio of 3:1.  I
recently saw a review of 28.8kbps modems in {InfoWorld}, and they saw
true 4:1 bit compression on modems under "ideal" circumstances, i.e.,
very high- powered PCs, using V.34 modems with V.42bis compression on
parallel ports, or on specially-buffered serial ports.  This is not
what occurs in the "real-world" because the local PC, or the host/main-
frame, is often the slowdown, not the modems themselves.


John Combs, Project Engineer, TestMark Laboratories, [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 09 Feb 1995 12:35:10 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Ken Culbert)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Organization: Funk Software, Inc.


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve
Midgley) wrote:

> With sheepish apologies to the moderator and readers, I amend my
> previous post. I must have sleeping sitting down :-)

> V.32 is not the protocol spec for 14.4 modems. It's V.42.  Apologies,
> apologies.

Wrong again.  V.32bis is the modulation protocol spec for 14.4 kbaud;
v.42 is the reliability spec; v.42bis is the compression standard;
v.34 is the modulation protocol for 28.8 kbaud.

Not too confusing, eh? ;)


Ken Culbert           [e-mail]
Funk Software, Inc.   http://www.funk.com
222 Third Street      voice: 617 497-6339
Cambridge, MA 02142   fax:   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Lundgren)
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: 9 Feb 1995 10:39:49 GMT
Organization: Pacific Bell Knowledge Network


David Sacerdote ([e-mail]) wrote:

> If you purchased a modem which supports the v.34 standard AND are
> using a computer to modem communications speed which is faster than
> 28800bps it will actually travel across the wire at 28800bps, assuming
> no line noise, no error correction, and no compression.  I am also
> assuming that you are connecting to another modem which supports the
> V.34 standard, or whatever proprietary standard your modem supports.

What is 'it' in 'it will travel..' above.  I think that the above
isn't telling much of the story.  The link between modems may be at
28,800 BPS, but the bytes are being transmitted as octets,
synchronously.  They are not 10 bit asynchronous bytes as they are
between the PC and modem.  Also, there are other things done between
the two modems, such as error detection and correction, and
compression.  So what is going on between the PC and modem has little
relationship to what the modems are doing on the link.


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] (Kevin Kadow)
Subject: Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is
Organization: Ripco Internet BBS, Chicago
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 08:08:31 GMT


If they really are running out of numbers in the 708 area code, why
not allow people and companies to voluntarily 'give up' their 708
numbers for their choice of 630 numbers?

For example, businesses could release their DID lines, the 2nd ... Xth
lines of hunt groups, or give up a 708 number for a 'vanity' number in
in the new area code.

This would at least have the effect of freeing up enough phone numbers
that new residential lines could remain in the 708 code.


[e-mail]   Kevin Kadow
FREE Usenet/Mail, inexpensive Internet - Ripco... Wearing white hats since 1983
Dialup:[phone]|Gopher:gopher.ripco.com|Telnet:foley.ripco.com ('info')

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew M L CHENG)
Subject: Re: POCSAG to be Upgraded to APOC
Organization: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 13:48:04 +0800


In article <[e-mail]>:

> To everyone interested in POCSAG, and new more advanced terrestrial
> paging systems for communications in tommorrow's world:

> An overview of APOC, the upgrade to POCSAG, is now available by EMail.
> If you are interested, please send a request to me ([e-mail].
> philips.nl) stating the reasons for your interest.

I would like the overview of APOC. I am now pursuing a research
postgraduate degree in The Hong Kong University of Science and
Technology in the area of wireless communications and so anything in
this area such as paging, cellular radio and PCS is in my interest.
However, I have tried the email address twice to request for the
overview but all the emails are bounced back. Would the original
author kindly send the overview to me by email? My email address is:
[e-mail].


Thanks very much in advance.

Matthew Cheng   Wireless Communications Research Group  HKUST

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

Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 11:05:38 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing


Usually, the same three-digit combination has NOT been used as both a
prefix and an area code (that one or a nearby one).  Therefore, an area
code given in a telephone number in, say, spoken form in an advertisement
can be recognized by the listener as such.  Such courtesy became "legal"
in the Washington DC area (area codes 202,301,703) and along the 301/410
border in Maryland; in those places, local calls to another area code
are published as NPA +7D (can omit the leading 1, but you may include it).

Someone told me of having to use leading 1 on local call from Delaware
County, PA (possibly 610-485) to Philadelphia.

There are some exceptions to the above-stated use of area codes as
prefixes: I believe it is 909 which is used as a prefix somewhere in
southern California.  And I sent a 312-630 prefix to the Digest
recently.

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Roche)
Subject: Re: Unit to "Speak" CLID
Date: 9 Feb 1995 16:24:16 GMT
Organization: Tadpole Technology, Inc. Austin, TX
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Voice Powered Technology has a phone (Tel-It Phone I believe) which
holds 40 recorded names. Each name can have up to three numbers (home,
work etc). It will replay the recorded name between rings if the
number received via CID matches one of the stored numbers. The
recorded numbers can be dialed using voice recognition also (fair
accuracy, names are divided into two groups of 20 which you have to
tell it by pushing a button, up to two speakers with seperate memories
for the voice recognition ... this doesn't mean you can store 80
"names".)  Also has an Name and number CID with a one line LCD Display
and call timer, on-hook dialing (NOT a speakerphone! only mike is in
the handset).  A good value IMHO at $129.95. I bought two and a friend
got one after seeing mine. Available through Sharper Image etc. Also
available direct although I've found VPT diffficult to deal with
directly (bad delivery times and they initially quoted a higher price
when it came out, terrible order line people, customer support poor
and excellant in two calls. I own a Voice Organizer also.)  I wanted
the phones for the CID recital function.

Nits:

-Display bezel makes reading the upper edge of the display very difficult at most angles;

-When the voice recognition feature is used, it will replay the recorded
entry it thinks you said before dialing (good), but if it's wrong you
have to hang up and retry (bad!!!). I wish it would recognize a spoken
"NO" and "guess again" the way the Voice Organizer does.  (Feedback
for the VPT lurkers who I once promised some opinions to after they
responded to an earlier post.)


Mike   [e-mail]

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

From: Martin McCormick <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Clock Slips Again
Date: 8 Feb 1995 16:27:31 GMT
Organization: Oklahoma State University  Stillwater, OK


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

> If you believe the clock slips are in the LEC's internal network
> then attack it as a quality issue that they must resolve.

    Several people have suggested the method of using a modem with
error-correction turned off to find clock slips.  I have been trying
this and determined that the problem is still there but is very small
compared to what it has been in the past.  The lines leading from the
campus to Southwestern Bell are analog and there is some question about
what they connect to after leaving the campus.  There are definitely no
T1's between here and there.

    What we will probably do is wait until we get another trunk
that is really bad and keep it seized until it can be identified.
This will make it easier to point it out to all concerned and maybe
eventually lead to procedures to automatically watch for the problem
before customers tell us about it.

    Many thanks to everybody who has sent past discussions of the
problem or suggestions on how to identify or solve it.


Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
OSU Center for Computing and Information Services Data Communications Group

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

From: [e-mail] (Al Gharakhanian)
Subject: Looking For Hands on Networking Experience
Date: 9 Feb 1995 10:52:08 GMT
Organization: Netcom


I have a significant amount of product development experience in the
field of FDDI, ATM, SMDS, LAN and T1/T3 networking.  I am looking for
a way to gain some hands on network design and implementation
experience in an IS or Systems Integration environment.

I would be willing to dedicate a portion of my time (free of charge)
to work toward this goal.

Does anyone have any recommendation?


Thanks.

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

Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 10:42:14 EST
From: Peter M. Weiss <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Who Belongs to 10732 Five-Digit Access Code?


10-732 is also used for AT&T-customer' employee "deals" E.g. PSU has a
True PSU (sm?) deal with AT&T.  Similar but not the same as True USA
(sm).  The only time you need to dial 10-732 is when you want to call
intra-LATA (from your home phone), otherwise it is your PIC.

Billing is NOT handled by the LEC.


[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Mark)
Subject: Re: GTE PCS/Global Roam
Organization: Third Millennium Industries
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 23:44:50 GMT


CO/NY has already launched a similar service (January 1995). CO/NY
customers get a SIM card (they call it a CellCard) for $49.99/year.
They can then purchase or rent a GSM phone and can roam in 23 GSM
countries. The agreement is with Vodaphone in the UK. Incoming calls
must be routed through the customer's NY cellular number. The cost of
roaming is a flat $2.49/minute for outgoing calls regardless of
destination (local or international) and $2.49/minute + toll from NYC
for incoming calls.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Buerger)
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?
Date: 9 Feb 1995 09:11:01 -0500
Organization: The Pipeline


TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

>>  Adam Gaffin correctly mentioned that AT&T's Bell Labs were connected to
>> the network.

>> Most amusing was Brayall's assertion that people should not have called
>> that number since it was never listed or advertised.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wonder where Adam has been lately? We
> used to get some very nice articles from here here once in awhile, but not
> for a long time now.  PAT]

Adam Gaffin is a reporter for {Network World}.  I believe he's about to
become more involved with reporting on the Internet.  You can reach him at
[e-mail].


David J. Buerger            v: [phone]
[e-mail]   f: [phone]
3455 Peachtree Industrial Blvd. Suite 271
Atlanta, GA 30136-2657


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I wish he would stay in touch with us more
often. His reports were always quite good.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #89
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21592;
          9 Feb 95 20:20 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25589; Thu, 9 Feb 95 14:47:16 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA25574; Thu, 9 Feb 95 14:47:09 CST
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 14:47:09 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #90

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Feb 95 14:47:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 90

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Conference - "Business Opportunities in Asia-Pacific" (Spencer Hu)
    What is a Channel Bank? (William Wood)
    Books About Telecom Standards Wanted (Roman Rumian)
    Re: Cellular Telephones Built Into Watches (Ray Normandeau)
    Voice Traffic For ATM Switch (Arvinder Pal Singh Malhotra)
    Eleven-Digit Dialing For Local Calls (Benjamin L. Combee)
    Pre-Paid Phone Cards - Evening Rates? (Philip Winston)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Brian Klippel)
    Re: Emergency Cellular Phone (Berton Corson)
    Re: Emergency Cellular Phone (Matthew J. Zukowski)
    Re: Cell Phone Programming - Follow-Up (John Levine)
    Re: MCI Strikes Again (Steven H. Lichter)
    Re: Stand-Alone Fax Box For PC (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: Video Dial Tone Information Wanted (Drew Smith)
    Re: Canadian (Northern Tel) in India? (John S. Nelson)
    IVR Systems Information Wanted (Jason Middleton)

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] ([e-mail])
Subject: Conference - "Business Opportunities in Asia-Pacific"
Date: 9 Feb 1995 10:51:53 -0500
Organization: Delphi Internet Services Corporation


"Business Opportunities for the Information Industries in Asia/Pacific"

ABSTRACT:    As a result of worldwide enthusiasm towards the
initiative of Information Superhighway in the US, information
industries are now migrating to utilize multimedia and interactive
technologies.

        A new domain of business overlapping the information
and the entertainment industries are in formation. Meanwhile, fast
economic growth in the Asia/Pacific has accelerated the growth of
information industries, which has been utilizing new technologies for
its own nature of applications.

        This conference will focus on articulating the nature
of information industries in the US and Asia/Pacific, it will promote
dialogues among large organizations, startups, and individuals.

TIME:    Saturday, March 11, 1995

PLACE:    World Trade Center, Boston, MA, USA

AGENDA:

8:00 -    9:00    Registration (at Auditorium)

9:00 -    9:40    Opening Remarks
        Dr. Shih-Chien Yang
        Mr. Sidney Topol (Chairman, Mass. Telecom Council)

9:40 -    9:50    Coffee Break

9:50 -    11:00    Session One:     Information Business in Asia/Pacific
        This Session will focus on outlining specific
        nature of the information business in fast growing
        countries, on their needs and infrastructure projects.
        Analyses from financial institutions will be provided.

            Mr. TEO Ming Kean (Singapore)
            Mr. Tony Daza (World Bank)
            Marc Cabi (Cowen & Co)

11:00 - 12:10    Session Two:     How to Conduct Information Business in
        Asis/Pacific
         Assessments and advices from corporations will be
        provided to enhance practical view on the international
        trade.

            Mr. Joseph Chou (Taiwan Telecom Network Service)
            Dr. Rau Chang (AT&T)
            Ian Davison (Loren International)

12:10 - 1:40        Lunch
            Keynote Speaker
            Dr. Henry Lee

1:40 -     2:40        Session Three:    Leading Edge Technologies
            This Session will outline technologies of
            tomorrow by leaders of the fields.

            A. Enabling Technologies for Information Superhighway
            Prof. H T Kung (Harvard Univ.)

            B. Visual Communication and Its Products
            Dr. Wen Chen (Compression Labs)

2:40 - 2:50        Coffee Break

2:50 - 3:40        Session Four:    Panel Discussion --- A.
            This Session will discuss market reaction to
            exporters from the US.

            A. On the Needs of Information Industries in Asia/
            Pacific

            B. On Financing and Finance-seeking in Asia/Pacific

            C. "Hot Products" for Asia/Pacific, and Why?

3:40 - 4:30        Session Five:    Panel Discussion ---

            B. This session will discuss the technology
            pipelines leading to the Asia/Pacific market

            D. On Technology Needs to achieve Breakthroughs for
            Information Industries

            E. On Problems brought by the Information Industries,
            e.g., Property Rights

            F. On "What's Exportable" to Asia/Pacific

1:30 - 5:30 (Run Concurrently)    Product Show

            Compression Lab
            Commercial Div. TECO
            Supernetics
            MCI, AT&T
            Wang Labs

4:30 - 5:30        Social Hour

FEE:    Registration for the Conference and Product Show:
        Monte Jade Members    $50;    Non-Monte Jade Members    $65
        Students        $40.
    Application Fee for the Product Show
        Monte Jade Members    $160;    Non-Monte Jade Members    $200
    Note:     Lunch included in the fees above

PLANNING COMMITTEE:
        New England Monte Jade Science & Technology Association
    PO Box 120090, Boston MA 02112-0090
    Tel: [phone], Fax: [phone]

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

Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 09:04:54 -0800
From: [e-mail] (William Wood)
Subject: What is a Channel Bank?


In his response to what is a channel bank <[e-mail]> (Matthew P.
Downs) wrote:

> Not every one works on DLC's

He is right. But, he seems to have chosen a narrow perspective on his
answer because he referenced DLC's as though they were the only system
with channel banks. Channel banks have been around since the 1930s
under the name of carrier terminals. We started calling them banks in the
early 60s when T type digital hardware began to be installed.

Digital Loop Carriers (DLCs) come from many vendors and may use channel
banks at the subscriber end (a.k.a. RT for Remote Terminal). At the
central office or switch end, they may terminate in a channel bank (LT
for Local Terminal) or be directly connected to a terminating card in
the switch. Generally, a direct connect system is called an IDLC
(Integrated Digital Loop Carrier). The switching folks often have never
seen a channel bank on the subscriber (phone) side of the switch because
so many SLCs (Subscriber Loop Carrier, of which DLCs are but one form)
are directly connected. Even the interoffice (trunk) side can be
integrated, so the use of individual channels in a bank of channels may
seem strange to some of the newer folks in telecommunications.

All SLCs are LINE or LOOP extension/multiplexing devices. The earliest
ones were, of course, analog and I'm sure there are still some in use
around the world. Most are now digital. The term slick came from the
SLC abbreviation.

Interesting to note the different terminology of our industry relative
to interoffice and local loop carrier systems. I worked on short haul
carrier systems for the phone company as a toll transmissionman from
1965 to 1981, and we always just called them carrier systems. The
outside plant folks on their SLC systems called theirs pair gain
systems. When I first heard that term I kept asking where the amplifiers
were on the wire pairs which added the gain to the signal. Took a while
to figure out what they meant was that using a multiplexing carrier
system requires fewer pairs of wires than individual metallic circuits
and thus they gained the use of more pairs in any particular cable by
converting over to a carrier system. Duh!

I was teaching a class on LAN/WAN interconnection issues last week and
this very question came up. I'm always a little surprised at the very
deep, but incredibly narrow, technical knowledge base of so many people
in this industry. I know it is a natural result of the specialization
necessary to hold a job these days, but it sure creates some challenges
in installing and maintaining networks that could be better met by
having a few more generalists around. Lots of  LAN folks are beginning
to stretch their nets and need a path out that appears to be technically
slippery for them, or may be it just looks SLC from where they're standing.


WE Wood    Techtrans Animatics Group
Techish to English Translation

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Books About Telecom Standards Wanted
Date: 9 Feb 1995 17:36:56 GMT
Organization: AGH, Inst. of Electronics


Hi netters!

Could anybody recommend me o good introductory book about computer networks
(fiber, cable, twisted pair) standards, protocols and management?

I will appreciate any help.


Roman Rumian    [e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Cellular Telephones Built Into Watches
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 8 Feb 95 23:51:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York NY - 212-274-8110
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


> I am a MBA student and I am currently doing market research on
> the combination cellular telephone-wristwatch product.  Does your
> company offer this product or something that would be considered a
> competitor to this product?  Do you know where I might obtain some
> information about a product like this?

Unless you used an earplug with this, you would have to wave your
wrist from your ear to your mouth.

The buttons would be too small to suit most users.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Someone else wrote to say that the
battery would be the largest and heaviest component to the whole thing.
Powering the unit while keeping the battery at a reasonable size and
weight would be very difficult.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Arvinder Pal Singh Malhotra)
Subject: Voice Traffic For ATM Switch
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 02:24:42 GMT


Hi,

I would appreciate if someone could help me with the following.

1) I am looking for an equation or a piece of code(preferably c/c++)
to generateaggregate , 64Kbps PCM encoded, CBR traffic load for an ATM
switch.

2) I am also looking for the equations or code for modelling superposition
of VBR voice sources again for doing some simulations for voice on ATM.


Thanks a lot.

Arvinder PS Malhotra    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Benjamin L. Combee)
Subject: Eleven-Digit Dialing For Local Calls
Date: 9 Feb 1995 07:13:42 -0500
Organization: ROASF Atlanta
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Hello, TELECOM Digest readers.  In reading the recent talk here about
Chicago possibly requiring 11-digit dialing for all calls, I was
wondering about current practice.  Currently, here in Georgia, you
dial seven digits to make a local call, but any long-distance, even
intra-LATA is made with eleven digits.  If you were to call a local
number using the eleven digit sequence, would the call go through as
a local call, or would billing be as a intra-LATA call?  If I were
to call across campus using 1-404-NNN-XXX instead of just NNN-XXXX,
would I be billed for that call?


Ben Combee  [e-mail]
http://www.gatech.edu/acm/combee.html


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I doubt the call would even complete, if
things work the same there as here. In this area, if I dial 1-708 my
call is intercepted with a recording saying 'when dialing a call within
your area code, dial only the seven digits.'  Most telcos I have heard
of are the same way. They do not allow 1+AC within your local area. They
do allow -- in fact require -- 0+AC within the local area when you wish
to place a collect, credit card or third number billing call.

Now assuming your telco is different and that it does allow 1+AC on
local, same area calls, you probably will find that the local telco does
as it pleases with the call anyway. For instance, although we can dial
1-xxx plus 1 plus AC and a local number, Ameritech does *not* hand the
call off to the designated 10xxx if it is a call within the immediate
area they are entitled to handle. An exception is calls to points more
than 15 miles away (to us, that would be the 'C' or 'D' zone) dialed via
10288. That is allowed through an agreement betweeen Ameritech and AT&T.
So although (if such dialing is allowed in your area) the call would go
through, it would probably be your local telco transparently handling the
call, and it would probably be billed like any other local call with
the long distance carrier(s) not even seeing it.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Philip Winston)
Subject: Pre-Paid Phone Cards - Evening Rates?
Date: 9 Feb 1995 08:21:56 GMT
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA


I was thinking about tracking down some of those pre-paid phone cards
(even AT&T has them now I think) as a gift for someone.  When I have
seen them advertised before it seems like they are a pretty lousy deal
though -- at least if the "units" were minutes.  I was wondering if
any of them work for evening only or give you more time for evening
calling.  That seems like they only way they could even in the same
ballpark as normal evening LD rates.  Maybe a "unit" is different
depending on when you call?  Anyway, just looking for some information.


Thanks,

Philip Winston   [e-mail]
http://www.cs.hmc.edu/people/pwinston


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They are a pretty lousy deal. Most charge
fifty cents per minute, in one minute increments. That's not surprising,
considering there are so many hands in the pot trying to cash in on them.
Many/most pre-paid card are multi-level-marketing things; everyone wants
a commission. For example, a couple years ago I experimented here with the
Digest readers with a type of pre-paid card called 'Talk Ticket'. For
two dollars, you got four minutes of time in increments of one minute each.
I paid, I think, $1.45 per card and resold them for the published price
of $2.00.  Whoever I bought them from got them for about 85 cents each
I believe. A unit is a unit is a unit; day or night, weekdays or Sundays;
it does not matter. You could also, if desired, spend the four minutes
on the extra features offered such as voicemail, news weather and sports,
hot chat on a conference bridge, etc.

Prepaid cards are promoted as a way to allow someone to use your telephone
card a limited amount of time -- presumably for calls made to you -- without
the worry of that person abusing your regular card. They are also promoted
as a way to greatly reduce toll fraud, since if you lose the card or get
shoulder-surfed at the train station all stand to lose is the remaining
balance on that card. Those are good reasons, but the other side of the
coin is you pay so much for them by comparison.  I put prepaid phone cards
in the same category as American Express or Traveler's Express Money Orders.
You pay them money for the privilege of lending them money until you
get around to cashing it in.

Did you know American Express typically has a float of about two million
dollars per day on their money orders? You want to let *me* borrow two
million dollars just for the day?  Just for a few hours? ... I'll happily
take you up on the offer and return your two million with interest. So
Amex and the other money order people *should* issue their money orders
for free, for just the face value of the check. People are loaning them
a lot of money; there should be no need to pay a fee in addition. Ditto
with prepaid calling cards: The Big Three should sell them at steep
reductions over the regular cost of a call since they are getting to use
your money until some future time. If they sold for something like five to
eight cents per minute, that would make them worthwhile. But they can't
go that cheap because it costs that much to connect you via 800 with
their switch, plus whatever they pay for the outcall. So, let's say they
charge 20-22 cents per minute. That would still be sort of reasonable,
but not the 50 cents or more per minute most of them sell for.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Klippel)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 17:21:47 GMT


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

> Recently there has been a lot of talk about having to do ten digit
> dialing to call even local numbers that are in a different phone
> number.

> I have a number of users who are going to be affected by the above and
> am looking for a good explanation for them.  I'm myself am not
> completely sure myself of all the reasons for making the changes to
> out-of-area dialing and would like to get it right the first time :-)

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, it is eleven digit dialing, not
> ten digit if you count the '1' on the front. However, one would think that
> when this becomes universal all over the USA that we could in fact get by
> with ten digits since the '1' would no longer be needed; there would be
> no 'local' calls to distinquish from 'long distance'. Since everything that
> we dial would consist of area code plus seven digits, there would be no
> need for a '1' to indicate that 'what follows is an area code' -- everything
> that follows would be area codes!  It would be nice to see the '1' vanish
> under those cirucmstances. Or maybe they will insist on keeping it using
> as their rationale that '1' is also -- by coincidence -- the country code
> for the USA and Canada, and that what we are really dialing is country code,
> area code and seven digit number. As to *why* they are imposing it on calls
> within the same area -- as is supposed to be the case in Chicago beginning
> sometime in 1996 -- I do not know. Various reasons have been given.   PAT]

Atlanta will be ten digit in June of this year. The way I understand it, it
is necessary for the discrimination of more than 9,999,999 (in theory)
numbers. We can of course reduce that by two million, in numbers that start
with 0 or 1.  Basically, the '1' as a country code, is necessary to disting-
uish long distance toll calls.  Atlanta will be ten digit all local calling
area -- almost a 100 mile radius fee zone I believe.  Not imposing ten digit
on your own area code would put great strain on the switching system, as
prefix and area code would be dificult to distinguish. You could say,
"well, if I only dial seven digits there is no area code.", but would you
then like to wait 30 seconds for the system to make sure you were
done?  how else would it know you werent calling an area code equal to
the prefix you dialed? Well, we could rule out all area codes as valid
prefixes ... but that would really cut into valid numbers, at least
eventually it would. '1' will still be needed for long distance, to
signal that you need to be passed to the control of your LD co, and
out of the local. This might not be needed if Ma Bell were still the
only phone company, but which would you rather have ... Ma Bell, or '1'?

Im sure the switch wont be 'easy' for some of the less gifted, but
come on, its only three buttons, and most of us have speed dial. What if I
wanted all internet ip's to be only two sets of three? :-)

Now that that's off my chest ...


Brian Klippel  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not that I am saying your comparison is
quite correct, but I would not mind having Ma Bell again. The competitors
are fine also, but Ma Bell should have been left intact. I think Greene
should have opened the door to competition, absolutely required that AT&T
work fairly, at arm's length with all competitors regards interconnection
and let it go at that, with a short speech saying something like this:

"The telephone network in the United States is a carefully woven togther,
highly sophisticated entity. It has taken a century to build. I am not
going to allow you to rip it apart and move in, skimming the cream from
a century of work by AT&T, its associates and employees. What I will do
is permit you to compete fully with them. Build your own telephone exchanges,
string your wires, develop your customer base, install instruments, convince
AT&T's customers to sign up with you instead, operate a major research
laboratory in the process, do it all -- local and long distance. Put
together a national telecommunications company and convince the public
yours is better. If you want to leave out a few parts here and there and
people still think you have a better deal, then fine. I am requiring that
AT&T, the Bell Companies and other independent telephone companies inter-
connect their lines and exchanges with you. They are required to cooperate
with you in the assignment of telephone numbers and area codes. When you
come to their door seeking interconnection, they are required to promptly
turn over sufficient cable and pairs to interconnect. They are not required
to allow you to set up your shop inside theirs. You may build yours next
door if you wish. They are required to do nothing but allow your customers
to interconnect transparently with theirs and vice versa. You may contract
with them if desired for directory and operator services and I require
them to give you this on the same terms as they give it to their own
companies and the independent telcos."

Now that would have been true competition, and the American way. Instead,
Greene nearly guts AT&T. What were they supposed to do, apologize for having
been in business for a century, and deny all their accomplishments over
that period of time just so MCI could make their money a little sooner?

Regards needing a time out in the event of variable-length, variable-
context phone numbers, what do you suppose the pound key (#) under the
9 is for?  It is the carriage return, the indicator that the input string
has been finished. Have numbers of any length or composition you want
with the understanding that when you have finished entering the number
you press #, and the switch goes to work on what it was given. If you
put in seven or eleven digits now when the same is expected, the # does
nothing. If you put in less than seven (when at least seven is needed)
then it does nothing. But on variable length numbers such as pin versus
full card number and on international calls, it works just fine to get
rid of the time out. Why not develop that further and see how much more
flexible our numbering system could be?     PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Berton Corson)
Subject: Re: Emergency Cellular Phone
Date: 9 Feb 1995 00:13:10 GMT
Organization: California State University, Northridge


Testmark Laboratories ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I once heard of a cellular phone that was intended primarily for
> emergency use, something to carry in a car for instance.  One could
> purchase it, have it authorized, and pay no monthly fee.  If one used
> it, they paid a fairly high per minute airtime that was automatically
> charged to a major credit card.  Does anyone know of a product like
> this?

Supposedly, as long as your cellphone has an ISN (electronic serial
number) cellular providers can't block access to one number: 911, and
you can dial that even if you're not currently subscribed to any
cellular service.  Naturally, cellular phone companies don't publicize
this, as people would just buy cell phones and not subscribe to a
service, just having it handy for emergency use.  In California, 911
on a cell phone connects you to the California Highway Patrol.  It can
be very handy on the road, as the CHP will connect you to the Auto
Club if you're a member and are having car trouble.  It sure beats,
and is safer, than going to a freeway callbox, that does the same.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't think people would buy a cellphone
for just that purpose. How many calls to 911 would they need to make
to amortize or justify a two or three hundred dollar cellphone?  You
don't think without contracting for service the dealer is going to sell
the phone for the cheap price do you?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew J. Zukowski)
Subject: Re: Emergency Cellular Phone
Date: 9 Feb 1995 12:27:52 GMT
Organization: NW NEXUS, Inc. -- Internet Made Easy [phone]


> I once heard of a cellular phone that was intended primarily for
> emergency use, something to carry in a car for instance.  One could
> purchase it, have it authorized, and pay no monthly fee.  If one used
> it, they paid a fairly high per minute airtime that was automatically
> charged to a major credit card.  Does anyone know of a product like
> this?

    I've been told that unactivated cellular phones in the PNW
region are able to dial 911, and 711 (cellular operator), unless the
phone has been flagged as stolen.  I've also been told that one can go
though the cellular operator and place a collect/third party/credit card
call.  I'm under the impression that most cellular carriers play by
the above rules.

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

From: [e-mail] (John Levine)
Subject: Re: Cell Phone Programming - Follow-Up
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 95 00:38:04 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, its not quite *freely* given. You
> can purchase technical literature on most cellular phones which will
> tell you everything.

Communications Publishing, the same people who publish the Cellular
Roaming Guide (which I hear will finally be updated in a month or two)
will be happy to sell you a fat book that has the programming info for
every model of phone in use in the U.S.  They even have an update
service.  It costs something like $200, expensive for an individual,
but real cheap for anyone in the business.


Regards,

John Levine, [e-mail]
Primary perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies"

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

From: [e-mail] (Steven H. Lichter)
Subject: Re: MCI Strikes Again
Date: 9 Feb 1995 05:23:35 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)


If deregulation had not happened then there would not be problems
like this. I for one feel that only the real big users and the
telephone companies have saved on this, not Joe phone user.


Sysop: Apple Elite II -=- an Ogg-Net Hub BBS
Home of GBBS/LLUCE support
[phone] 12/24/14.4 V32/V42bis


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are correct that residence and small
business users have been shafted royally by divestiture and deregulation.
Now there are some readers here who over the years have contended that
all the technological advances of the past decade would never have happened
had not AT&T been running scared from the new competition, and that is
probably correct. But competition -- true competition -- does not mean
you rip apart your competitor. Let us say I run a large general store. I
sell everything there. One of the big hot selling items is on sale there
and I use some of the profits from that to subsidize other areas of the
store not doing as well.  You come along and want to do a hit and run,
quick and dirty sale on the profitable item. But you can't get people to
come in your little store and look at that one item you sell because they
are all roaming around over at my store. I am more than willing to have
all the customers standing around idly in my store looking at stuff which
does not make me much money -- even when they do buy it -- because I
know they will eventually wander over to the other area in the store
and look at the big ticket, hot selling stuff that I make my profit on.

To you this is quite unfair and you complain that if the customers were
not allowed to hang around in my store, they would come over to your
store instead. So you demand I have to get rid of my department X and
department Y, and futhermore you insist that I set my prices on the
profitable items in such a way that you can still sell yours for less
and make a profit yourself. When I reduce my prices, you have to reduce
yours also and that puts you in kind of a bind.

The forced divestiture of AT&T was a very immoral, unethical act by
Judge Greene. Yes, I know, they signed a consent decree. Please don't
start up on that one. If your head was on a chopping block and someone
offered to let you 'voluntarily' sign a piece of paper instead, what
would you do?  Charles Brown, the Chairman of AT&T at the time of the
divestiture said the *only* reason they signed off on it was because
of the way it was draining the company's resources. I think they realized
early on that a fair trial from Judge Greene was not going to happen,
and that when the US Department of (In)Justice gets a bug of some kind,
they will go on for years if neccessary. Thank goodness IBM did not
cave in.  I only wish AT&T had held out.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Stand-alone Fax Box For PC
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 11:49:48 PST


Kyle Cordes said:

> [e-mail] (Yongtao Chen) writes:

>> I am looking for some kind of "stand-alone fax box" for PC.  The box
>> should be able to receive and store coming faxes automatically when I

> The device will probably need a hard drive, memory, and a FAX modem.
> It would be nice if it also had a keyboard, screen, and maybe a mouse
> so it could have a neat interface.  This is called a computer (sarcasm).
> Your box will probably consist of another PC (maybe an old, abandoned
> 286 ...)  with a FAX modem in it, with some sort of networking hard/software
> so you can access its hard drive from your PC.

> It sure would be a lot simpler to leave your PC on; cheaper, too.  Is
> there a reason you can't do this?  With the monitor off, it consumes
> very little power.

Kyle,

That wasn't much help.  I am sure there is a _reason_ Yongtao doesn't want
the computer tied up. Actually, Hello Direct sells two stand-alone boxes
that with answer the phone and store the fax for later download.  You can
either have it route to another FAX, or download it directly to the
computer.


Steve  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Drew Smith)
Subject: Re: Video Dial Tone Information Wanted
Date: 9 Feb 1995 11:25:55 GMT
Organization: Netcom


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

> I am looking for information on the following topics regarding Video
> Dial Tone:

Phil,

  There is a newsletter that covers Video Dial Tone in depth called
the Video Information Provider Newsletter.  If you want some more
information, write me at [e-mail]


Drew

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

From: [e-mail] (John S. Nelson)
Subject: Re: Canadian (Northern Tel) in India?
Date: 9 Feb 1995 18:19:46 -0500
Organization: NetAccess Systems Inc., Hamilton, Ontario


Rohit Sharma ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Why is it that there is virtually no Canadian telecom equipment supplier
> (e.g Northern Telecom) trying to market any products in India?

According to last month's {Canadian Business} magazine, its because NTCL
got into the Indian market too late -- by the time they arrived, the
Indian government had set standards for their switching network in
conjuction with other vendors. That's the popular press's version --
perhaps we'll hear from a Northern type who's in the know!


John Nelson  Bell Canada  Access Network Provisioning
[phone]   FAX  [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jason Middleton)
Subject: IVR Systems Information Wanted
Date: 9 Feb 1995 19:40:58 +1030
Organization: Department of Employment, Training and Further Education, S.A.


Hi all,

I am looking for any pointers to IVR hardware/software.  If anybody
knows of any products could they please email me with the details or
alternatively if this is a info store somewhere with the details that
would help.

Thanks in advance for any response.


jason ([e-mail])

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #90
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22638;
          9 Feb 95 22:06 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29215; Thu, 9 Feb 95 16:32:09 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA29205; Thu, 9 Feb 95 16:32:05 CST
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 16:32:05 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #91

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Feb 95 16:32:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 91

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Now Five Million Sites on the Net! (Internet Society via Stephen Goodman)
    Chip Sets For 150 Mbps DPSK (Rohit Sharma)
    TI "Voice Print" Cellular Anti-Fraud System (Jason Hillyard)
    Re: Atlanta Toll-Free Calling Zone Growing? (Carl Moore)
    Re: Old Phone Number Format Question (Robert Bonomi)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Stephen Denny)
    Re: MCI Gave me a Deal (Ron Schnell)
    Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money? (Toby Nixon)
    Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers ([e-mail])
    Re: When Will PBXs Go Away? (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: AT&T 500 Number Problems (Philip Gladstone)
    Re: Bell Atlantic ISDN, Part II (Shuang Deng)
    Re: IT-Consumption in USA (Lynne Gregg)

TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not
exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere
there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of
public service systems and networks 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, 9 Feb 95 14:33 EST
From: Stephen Goodman <[e-mail]>
Subject: Now Five Million Sites on the Net!


Pat,

This was forwarded to me, thought I would pass it along.

Stephen Goodman
MCI  [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And I am really glad you did. The news
is rather incredible. Check out the three *thousand* percent (!) increase
in sites in the .us domain over the past three years, and the several
other domains with increases of several hundred percent. Its just
incredible. Note that in the attached, they give the figure as 4.85 million
sites as of a few months ago; dare we say five million at this point?
I think we can.  Assuming that some sites are but one or two users, while
others are hundreds of users, what does that translate out to in terms of
actual, living people behind a keyboard somewhere even as this is being
typed?  Would anyone care to take a guess at that figure? I've told you
in the past how this Digest was growing in terms of readership and
participation ... and it just keeps going. I add anywhere from three to
ten new readers daily. Two or three drop off daily, with a net increase
daily of three to five readers. So, read the attached and marvel, as I
am doing ...   PAT]


PRESS RELEASE
INTERNET SOCIETY

LATEST INTERNET HOST SURVEY AVAILABLE:
The Internet Is Growing Faster Than Ever


Reston VA, USA. 6 Feb 1995.  The Internet's most important measurement
data indicating its size and growth was released yesterday by Mark
Lottor of Network Wizards.

The Domain Survey attempts to discover every host on the Internet by
doing a complete search of the Domain Name System.  The latest results
gathered during late January 1995 are listed.  For more information
see RFC 1296; for more data see the zone directory on ftp.nw.com, or
http://www.nw.com.

Worth noting are the new host computer count - 4.851 million - and the
26% growth rate for 4th Quarter 1994 - the largest jump in the recent
history of the internet.  Internet hosts in the .com domain continue
to surge ahead as the largest group.  It's also worth noting that
www-named host computer now constitute the most numerous on the
Internet.  The host count encompassed 90 countries having direct
connectivity, as well as 7 transnational domains (com, edu, gov, mil,
org, net, and int).

The following extracts of Lottor's data were prepared by the Internet
Society. Powerpoint graphs depicting host growth can be found on the
Society's server at ftp://ftp.isoc.org/isoc/charts/hosts3.ppt and will
be updated with this latest data tomorrow.

      Top 31 Country and Global Domains by Size in Jan 1995

                           ---------Growth---------
          Jan.95 Hosts     4Q94     1994  3yr growth

 com **      1,316,966      25%     132%      628%
 edu **      1,133,502      15%      60%      366%
 UK            241,191      24%     112%    1,171%
 gov **        209,345       8%      62%      351%
 Germany       207,717      23%      77%      569%
 Canada        186,722      22%      96%      590%
 mil **        175,961      21%      70%      541%
 Australia     161,166      20%      50%      409%
 org **        154,578     114%     206%      705%
 net **        150,299     192%     616%    1,796%
 Japan          96,632      17%      86%    1,029%
 France         93,041      28%      68%      615%
 Netherlands    89,227      20%      98%      599%
 Sweden         77,594      22%      83%      318%
 Finland        71,372      24%     103%      493%
 Switzerland    51,512      -4%      40%      306%
 Norway         49,725      15%      57%      387%
 USA **         37,615      51%     475%   31,155%
 New Zealand    31,215      52%     441%    2,698%
 Italy          30,697      14%      80%    1,029%
 Austria        29,705      25%      92%      793%
 Spain          28,446      19%     141%    1,613%
 South Africa   27,040      29%     147%    2,805%
 Denmark        25,935      75%     181%    1,344%
 Belgium        18,699      31%     125%    5,220%
 Korea          18,049      24%     101%    1,103%
 Taiwan         14,618      25%      83%    1,710%
 Israel         13,251      34%      96%      552%
 Hong Kong      12,437      18%      52%    2,725%
 Czech          11,580      58%     153%
 Poland         11,477      35%     121%


                         Regional Growth - 1994

                   Jan.94     Jul.94     Oct.94      Jan.95   4Q94 Growth

 North America  1,685,715  2,177,396  2,685,929   3,372,551        26%
 CC&S America       7,392     11,455     14,894           *         *
 Europe, West     550,933    730,429    850,993   1,039,192        22%
 Europe, East      19,867     27,800     32,951      46,125        40%
 Middle East        6,946      8,871     10,383      13,776        33%
 Africa            10,951     15,595     21,041      27,130        29%
 Asia              81,355    111,278    127,569     151,773        19%
 Pacific          113,482    142,353    154,473     192,390        25%

 Total          2,476,641  3,225,177  3,898,233   4,851,873        24%

 *  Accurate Latin American host counts were not obtained.
 ** Most global domains are attributed to the USA.

Also note that the RIPE NCC Network Information Center for the
European region makes monthly host counts that are more definitive.
Graphic profiles of the RIPE NCC are now available on the Society's
server at ftp://ftp.isoc.org/isoc/charts/ripe3.ppt and are current as
of the end of January 1995.


The Internet Society is the International Organization for coordination
and cooperation for the Internet, its technologies, and applications
worldwide.  For more information see:

      http://www.isoc.org

 For further information contact:

  Internet Society
  12020 Sunrise Valley Dr. suite 270
  Reston VA  22091     USA

  tel: [phone]
  fax: [phone]
  email: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Rohit Sharma)
Subject: Chip Sets For 150 Mbps DPSK
Date: 9 Feb 1995 19:55:06 GMT
Organization: University of Alberta Electrical Engineering Department


A fellow student here is looking into optical line links for 150Mbps
wireless LANs.  Does any company make QDPSK/DPSK mod/demod chip sets?

The operative factors here are time (need to put together something
quick 'n dirty ... and *cheap*)


Please reply to  :   [e-mail]

rohit

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

From: [e-mail] (Jason Hillyard)
Subject: TI "Voice Print" Cellular Anti-Fraud System
Date: 9 Feb 1995 18:16:39 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Barbara


A couple days ago there was an article in the {Nando Times} (http://www.
nando.net/newsroom/nt/nando.html) about wireless communications technology.
The article mentioned a new cellular anti-fraud system that Texas Instruments
has developed:

   Texas Instruments Inc. unveiled a new technology here that
   requires an individual's "voice print" before it puts through a
   cellular call.

   The new system requires to callers to speak their personal
   identification numbers. The voice sample given much match the
   sample on file.

   "Nobody has ever done a voice print before," said Rich
   Birckbichler, general manager of sales and marketing for Texas
   Instruments Telecom Systems.

Does anyone have more information about this system?


jason

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

Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 13:45:47 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Atlanta Toll-Free Calling Zone Growing?


Is this referring to area code 770?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Is 770 one of the codes going in down
there in the Atlanta area?  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Bonomi)
Subject: Re: Old Phone Number Format Question
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 19:05:00 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, Charles Shukis <[e-mail].
com> wrote:

> I don't know what the laws were then, but I probably committed my
> first felony, or at least misdemeanor, before I was five years old!
> As we got older, we found another way to use the phone for entertainment:
> "prank" calls.  Call the local drugstore ... "Do you have Prince Albert
> in a can?" ... 'Yes, we do.' ... "Well, you'd better let him out before
> he suffocates!"  Such shenanigans are a thing of the past, killed by
> ANI, CID, auto call-back, auto call-trace, and the like ... perhaps it's
> just as well.

My grandfather, proprietor of such a store, on one Sunday morning, got
such a call from a young lady. He recognized the voice -- it was the
second time she'd made such a call -- and replied to the initial question
with: "Why no, my dear, we've just let the old chap out to go to _Sunday_
School_!".  There was an astonished gasp, followed immediately by a disconn-
ect.  No more such calls, either.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: For those unaware, 'Prince Albert' was a
> type of smoking tobacco used in a pipe. I guess they still make it.

Yup. Still around.  Still available 'in a can', too.  FWIW, the
alternative is in a 'pouch'.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have been a cigarette smoker for forty
years. I began when I was 12 years old. I continue to smoke because it
shows that I am sophisticated, and it makes me glamorous and very attrac-
tive. People give me this incredible look when I tell them that when I
began smoking, cigarettes were *twenty-four* cents per package at the
Walgreen's Drug Store, but you could get them for twenty-one cents per
package at Safeway. Cigarette vending machines were incapable of giving
back pennies as change, so you had to insert a quarter; when the cigarettes
came out there was a single penny inserted in the pack under the cellophane
wrapper. There were no warnings on the packages; where the warning goes
now was taken up with further advertising or logos, etc. The warnings
started sometime in the late 1960's I guess ... I don't remember.  I vowed
I would quit when the price reached a dollar per pack; then I made the
same promise about two dollars per pack. Now I hunt for places to buy
them that are less than $2.75 per pack.  [Sadly shaking my head.]   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Stephen Denny)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Date: 9 Feb 1995 17:51:00 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corporation, Plano, Texas USA


In article <[e-mail]>, Terrence McArdle <mcardle@paccm.
pitt.edu> wrote:

> Just for clarification's sake, I assume the phrase "local numbers that
> are in a different phone number" means dialing a destination existing
> in separate exchange, but the same area code, as the originator?
> Calls that cross a LATA boundary currently require eleven digit
> dialing, do they not?

Let me try to explain the Dallas/Ft.Worth LATA dialing issue in
slightly more detail.

The Dallas LATA is in area code 214, the Ft.Worth LATA is in area code
817.  Both are served partially by Southwestern Bell and GTE, parts of
each in each.  (And no you don't get your choice yet, but for dialing
purposes this doesn't matter.)

If you get normal un-metered service in Dallas you can have unlimited
dialing in Dallas LATA only.  Likewise in Ft.Worth, you can dial in
the Ft.Worth LATA only.  To dial from Dallas to Ft.Worth is long
distance and requires 11 digits.  To dial from Ft.Worth to Dallas is
long distance and requires 11 digits and you get charged for it.

Now here's the kicker.  For roughly $11 a month more (total residential
local bill about $40/month), you can get a "metro" number that allows
both incoming and outgoing calls from either LATA without charge using
ten digit dialing.

Example:  I live in the Ft.Worth LATA and have a metro number 817-329-xxxx.

          I call Ft.Worth by using xxx-xxxx.
          People in Ft.Worth call me by using 329-xxxx.

          I call Dallas by using 214-xxx-xxxx.
          People in Dallas call me by using 817-329-xxxx.

You tell people your phone number by saying: "metro 817-329.xxxx".

Works nicely and I got used to it quickly enough, although this is
apparently too difficult for some portion of the population.  The deal
is, if you don't have metro, whenever you want to call a number in the
other LATA, you always try ten digit first in case they have metro.
I've had people who lived here all their life and won't try to call
across LATA because they're afraid it is long distance.  I guess they
are just technologically-challenged.

BTW people that live right near the edge of the LATA are basically
hosed without metro.  There is a mall (Irving Mall) that lies right on
the border.  Some stores have Ft.Worth LATA numbers, some have Dallas
LATA numbers.  Nothing like a challenge, eh?

There are some alternate service providers that have setups that allow
metro-like service without having a metro yourself, but most of them
are not too handy for a business.


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

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

From: [e-mail] (Ron Schnell)
Subject: Re: MCI Gave me a Deal
Date: 9 Feb 1995 17:56:33 GMT
Organization: MIT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Michael P. Deignan) writes:

> In my opinion, Sprint is the real winner now, with their penny-per-minute
> promo. At least you know what you're paying and when the rate is applicable.
> With the other two, its a percentage crap-shoot over some elusive "basic"
> rate.

By the way, AT&T's Reach Out America Evening Plus is much better than
Sprint's Pennies/min.  ROA/E+ gives you 10 cents per minute as well,
but from 5pm until 8am (as opposed to Sprint's 7pm to 7am).  Their
commercial is the most sleazy, in that at the end, Bergen says, "ten
cents per minute, why didn't anyone else think of that?"  Gee, AT&T
has had ROA/E+ for at least four years!

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

From: Toby Nixon <[e-mail]>
Date: Thu,  9 Feb 95 12:25:12 PST
Subject: Re: Cellular Fraud: How Much of it is Real Money?


In comments attached to an article submitted by gary.novosielski@sbaonline.
gov, our Esteemed Moderator wrote:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The product is worth whatever the seller
> says it is worth, period. Its his product to be defined however he wishes.
> Whether or not anyone else agrees with his assessment is another matter.
> Generally we buy things we don't need based on our belief they are worth
> more than the seller is asking, not worth less than he is asking. If he
> says the apple is worth a million dollars, then that is what it is worth.
> If the cellular carrier says a fraud call was woth $X, then that is what
> is is worth.

I humbly differ. This is a ridiculous proposition. Go out and ask your
county tax assessor how they determine the worth of real estate for ad
valorem tax purposes. It is certainly NOT whatever the owner says it
is -- if that were the case, I'd declare the value of my house to be
$1, and have to pay only a few hundredths of a cent a year in property
tax.  OR, I could make myself look very rich on a loan application, by
declaring the property to be worth $10,000,000, but then I'd have to
pay the high taxes every year.  No, property value is determined by
what a WILLING SELLER _and_ a WILLING BUYER, neither of whom are under
undue pressure, are willing to spend/take for it.  An apple is NOT
worth $1,000,000 just because that's my asking price -- its worth will
not be established until a sale actually takes place.


Toby


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: But what if you don't have a buyer and
a seller? What if all you have is a willing seller and a willing thief,
err, I mean hacker?  Does the thief get some input into setting the value
as well? If that is the case, then please send me your home address. I will
come there and rip the place off, later claiming none of it was worth
anything so I should not be punished all that much. Of course if it was
the other way around, and you came here to steal from me, it would be
true that its all junk!  <g>   This is getting ridiculous.    PAT]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Five Digit Phone Numbers
Organization: you must be kidding. there's NO organization around here.
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 05:25:35 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


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

> Carl Moore ([e-mail]) wrote:

>> I am originallly from Wilmington, Delaware.  For many years, what
>> became the {News-Journal} newspapers were on what became 302-654-5351.
>> (Please don't call that number; it was changed long ago!)  Originally
>> (and I had to read about this since I am too young to remember that
>> far back) it would have been printed as "Wilmington 4-5351" or simply
>> "4-5351" with Wilmington being understood; I believe you had to ask
>> the operator if you wanted to reach such a number. "Wilmington" was
>> replaced by "OLympia" (OL for short) when it came time for customers
>> to be able to dial directly.  Then, in 1966, Diamond State Telephone
>> stopped printing exchange names in the Wilmington phone book, and
>> existing numbers of form OLx-xxxx began to be printed as 65x-xxxx.

Growing up in GTE-land, they of course did things differently. Exchanges
on phone numbers were single characters (ie H-5048 was Harrison, 'A'
for Anthony, 'E' for Eastbrook exchanges, etc, and named based on the
location of the exchange).  Interestingly phone numbers were five OR six
digits.  Private lines were the five-digit numbers.  Party lines were six
(same five numbers for those on same line, with differentiating last
digit for each party.  I'm guessing this is the old Strowger mechanical
switches, and them somehow the last digit was used on some type of
stepper switch to determine the ringing frequenty to ring the specific
party on the line?)



Doug

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

Date: Thu, 09 Feb 1995 09:52:18 -0500
From: Fred R. Goldstein <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: When Will PBXs Go Away?


Brent Laminack asks,

> What is the current thinking on when a PC (powerPC, whatever) replace
> the PBX? i.e. when can I run my T1 from the telco with my voice trunks
> on it into one card on a PC and have it route voice over the LAN to
> other desktop computers that double as phones?

I can approach this two ways.  One, when will the PC (powerPC, whatever)
replace the automobile?  The microprocessor in the average car is very
weak.  The microprocessor in a PBX is somewhat more central than the
one in the car, but if you halted the CPU on most PBXs, calls would remain
up.  Clearly, the PBX is a lot more than the embedded programmable
controller!

Two, when will PCs be so reliable that they won't go down for more than two
hours a year?  When will PCs have hot swap of all cards, including the CPU
and memory?  (PBXs, except little ones,  usually have fully duplicated
controls running in a hot standby mode.)  When will PCs have synchronous
time-division buses for carrying isochronous traffic?

> It will probably be a time curve: first available for small offices
> (ten users) on an ethernet, then a while later available for 200 lines
> on a faster LAN, etc.

Etherphone is an ancient undergraduate project that comes up every
couple of years.  You _can_ hack voice onto Ethernet "but it would be
wrong" for various reasons I won't detail, such as Ethernet's lack of
timing determinism and delays.  PBXs depend on isochronous bandwidth.
There are LANs that have it, like IsoEnet and FDDI-II, but the
economics aren't there ...

> My Mitel sx200 lite has a 68000 for a processor: it's a MacPlus!
> Surely the cpu horsepower is available to replace lots of dedicated
> TTL and switching hardware. I was just at a briefing from Apple and
> they're working with the PBX makers for a Geoport Mac to be a voice
> terminal behind a "big maker" PBX. But who are the startups that are
> out to kill the PBX makers?

The startups were there ten years ago.  Following the 1979-1983 failed
move to "voice and data PBXs", a couple of startups got fair dinkum
change to "merge the LAN and PBX".  The two best known were CXC and
ZTEL.  CXC eventually gave up on the LAN side and built a PBX/ACD that
may have sold okay, I don't know.  ZTEL was a major disaster, never
really worked, and lost its investors many millions of dollars.
Folklore has it that some of the founders really knew it was unlikely
to succeed, but figured that the pitch would attract venture capital
and make them rich in the meantime.  (Of course, that can be rumored
of a lot of venture-funded startups.)

There's a good reason why all successful PBXs are based on architectural
notions first widely deployed in the 1970s and only marginally refined
since then!

(P.S.  Back in '77, I assisted in writing a book called "Dimension PBX and
Alternatives", which surveyed the early computer-controlled PBXs.  The
implementation details have changed since then but the fundamentals haven't.)

The real excitement in PBXs is in open inter-CPU links, allowing
external processors to communicate in real time with the PBX.  This is
the whole Computer Integrated Telephony business which is finally
making a big splash in the call center arena, and in some other
markets.


Fred R. Goldstein      [e-mail]
Bolt Beranek & Newman Inc.  Cambridge MA  USA [phone]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: AT&T 500 Number Problems
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 95 10:01:35 EDT
Organization: Onsett International Corp.


> My 500 number isn't scheduled to be ready until Feb 3, but I've been
> trying it pretty much everyday.  Well, AT&T completed the call today
> (the local switch has been accepting 1-500-367-XXXX for sometime) and
> the only billing option was calling card.  Well, I tried that, and
> someone other than me answered the phone.  I have no idea who it was,
> but I guess I'll have the number when I receive my calling card bill!

My number was enabled last weekend, and is reachable from Nynex-land.
There have been a number of problems, both temporary and permanent.
The worst problems are that 500 numbers are not reachable from overseas
(by design according to AT&T), and that you need to use an AT&T
accepted calling card to call them from payphones, hotels etc.  This
last one is a real kicker -- especially as the messages that you get
when trying to call the 500 number give you no idea as to what went
wrong. [The MCI operator asked me if the number was an international
one!]


Philip Gladstone

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

From: [e-mail] (Shuang Deng)
Subject: Re: Bell Atlantic ISDN, Part II
Date: 3 Feb 1995 21:49:33 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories, Waltham, MA


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

> In no case did we actually use that much access.

> If anyone has any experience with how ISDN is billed and if similar
> problems have been experienced, please let me know.  We know we didn't
> use nearly this much time.

It may, or may not, be the same problem.  But once I had a problem
with ISDN connection to stay on forever, no matter I was using the
remote site or not.

Later I found out that, whereas the ISDN card/driver is supposed to
automatically disconnect the call upon detecting a period of
inactivity on the line (default one minute), NetBeui under the Windows
for Workgroup generates house-keeping messages about once every
minute.  So, the either the call could never be disconnected, or was
always automatically re-dialed almost immediately after the call was
disconnected.  My problem was taken care of by manually executing the
utility script to set up and disconnect a call.


Shuang Deng              Email:   [e-mail]
GTE Laboratories            or     [e-mail]
40 Sylvan Road           Phone: [phone]
Waltham, MA 02254, USA   Fax  : [phone]

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

From: Lynne Gregg <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: IT-Consumption in USA
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 95 11:05:00 PST


>Sara Fortea                           work [phone]
>Ericsson Mobile Communications AB     memo: ECS.ECSSAFO

Sara inquired about companies in the US that report on telecom and
computer installations.  Through the years I've used a couple of the
leading firms.

In my personal experience, I favor CI for their data on the U.S. install
base (I've used them for data on telecom systems and mainframes).  On the
other hand, if I'm looking outside the U.S., I'd go to IDG.


COMPUTER INTELLIGENCE CORP
3344 N TORREY PINES CT
LA JOLLA  CA  92037-1083
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]


IDG COMMUNICATIONS INC
5 SPEEN ST
FRAMINGHAM  MA  01701
Telephone: [phone]


Best of luck!

Lynne Gregg

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #91
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa22959;
          9 Feb 95 22:27 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01926; Thu, 9 Feb 95 17:36:22 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA01920; Thu, 9 Feb 95 17:36:20 CST
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 17:36:20 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #92

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Feb 95 17:36:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 92

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Switch Architectures Literature (Walter Zielinski)
    Time-Outs Arising From Published Instructions (Carl Moore)
    Caller ID Questions (Mike Harris)
    Low-Tech Question About Outdoor Terminator Boxes (Jon Tara)
    Re: Who Belongs to 10732 Five-Digit Access Code? ([e-mail])
    Re: When Will PBXs Go Away? (Mat Watkins)
    Request for Video On Demand Information (Ulrich Seldeslachts)
    Re: Motorola Flip Phone and Low Battery (Matthew P. Downs)
    Re: ISDN in Florida (pp000413@.interramp.com)
    Re: Voice Response Unit Question (Joe Sulmar)
    Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines (Patton M. Turner)
    Re: Plumber Arrested: Fraudulent Call Forwarding (Tad Cook)
    Re: Another Look at the 'Old Days' (Steve Cogorno)
    Re: RS449 - Help Please! (Peter T. Overaas)
    Re: Cellular Service in the Lincoln Tunnel (Stan Schwartz)
    Long Lost Reporter Checks in (Adam M. Gaffin)

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, 9 Feb 1995 21:02:58 +0000
From: walter zielinski <[e-mail]>
Subject: Switch Architectures Literature
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd, Ottawa, Canada


I am looking for some papers/books that would describe switch
architectures . My interest is in both hardware architectures and
software architectures and their developement over last few decades.
Could anybody please direct me to right sources on the area in the
forms of thesis/articles/books.


Thank you,

Walter Zielinski

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

Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 17:40:31 EST
From: Carl Moore <[e-mail]>
Subject: Time-Outs Arising From Published Instructions


I don't what current exchanges can handle time-outs.  I know of only
two cases where PUBLISHED instructions had some ambiguities arise
which could only be resolved with time-out.  They are both in the
history file:

1. for many years after 1973, area 213 in California continued to publish
0+7D for 0+ calls within it.  This would have created ambiguities such
as 0-413-xxxx and 0-413-xxx-xxxx.

2. Denver and Adamstown, PA are served by Denver & Ephrata telephone
company, which used to serve parts of 215 and 717.  Denver and Adamstown
were in 215 but did not adopt the "no 1" which Bell of Pennsylvania was
advertising for long distance within area 215 ("no 1" meant to stop
using the leading 1 for what had been 1+7D) when NNX prefixes were
running short there.  (Denver and Adamstown later switched to area 717,
having been faced with an area code change anyway due to the 215/610
split.  Denver switched from 215-267 to 717-336 because of 717-267
being in use elsewhere; the 484 prefix at Adamstown merely switched
area code.)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Carl is referring to the 'history.of.area.
splits' file in the Telecom Archives; a file which gives in great detail
the dates when area codes broke away from other codes, the geographic
areas involved, etc.  It is a very interesting file, in case you have not
ever seen it. He updates it regularly.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike Harris)
Subject: Caller ID Questions
Date: 8 Feb 1995 18:29:52 GMT
Organization: Tektronix TV Products


Hello,

I'm interested in learning how Caller ID works.  The data rate, how
the data is formatted, etc.  Any explanations or pointers to books, or
standards would be appreciated.


Thank You,

Mike Harris


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm sure some of the experts here will
write you direct with 'all you ever wanted to know about Caller-ID'.
In addition, you might check the Caller ID Frequently Asked Questions
file in the Telecom Archives.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jon Tara)
Subject: Low-Tech Question About Outdoor Terminator Boxes
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 1995 08:19:12 GMT


OK, here's a REAL low-tech question for the Telecom whizzes ...

I've been experiencing modem problems with the recent S. California
rains, and I suspect my outdoor termination box has something to do
with it. I have a six-pair cable coming in off the pole (plus two for
the downstairs neighbors terminated in little single-line boxes and a
forrest of abandonded lines) into a six-line screw terminal box.

One line is my voice line, one is my "modem" line, one is for a roommate,
and one is for a room normally occupied by another roommate. I'm also
planning on installing ISDN soon, and was wondering if they would wire
it into that box or give it it's own. I'd kinda prefer that it go into
this box (or it's replacement) since that gives me more flexibility
going into the house wiring.

The box is kinda-sorta weatherproof -- it has a flip-open cover, but
the openings for the wires to come in and out are on the side and
pretty big. The terminals don't seem to grip the wires too well,
either.

What kind of boxes are in current use (and which is the "best"?) for
outside termination? (I don't know if this is the right term - what I
mean is this is the point where it interfaces to subscriber lines...)
Will PacBell change the box for me if I complain? Or is the box my
responsibility? Will they move it into the garage (other side of the
house) if I request it? Or are they only responsible for getting it to
a point close to the drop?

What about the ISDN line? Are they going to put another box on the
side of the house, or will they put it in the garage? Or use another
pair on the 6-pair box?

Any suggestions appreciated - snap, crackle pop is for rice crispies!


[e-mail]  A new picture of San Diego Bay every half hour:
<A HREF="http://www.cts.com/~jtara/baycam.html">San Diego BayCam</A>
[e-mail] Tools and services for CD-ROM and online catalogs:
<A HREF="http://www.mediashare.com/mshare/">MediaShare Corporation</A>

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Who Belongs to 10732 Five-Digit Access Code?
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 16:35:28 -0500
Organization: Delphi ([e-mail] email, 800-695-4005 voice)


Thomas Grant Edwards <[e-mail]> writes:

> OK - obviously this number is 10732-1-404-988-9664.  Which provider is
> the 5-d code 10732?  Anyone know mroe details on the 1-404-988-9664?

10732 is the AT&T PIC code for customers on their SDN (Software
Defined Network) service.  (MCI calles their version of the service
Vnet and Sprint calls their version VPN or Virtual Private Network.)
Customers on AT&T's SDN service have their ANI PIC changed from 10288
to 10732.  AT&T then programs their switches with the 'software
defined' information about the ANI's (calling privleges, etc.).  MCI
Vnet customer don't have their pic changed, MCI codes the ANI in their
switches for the service, I think Sprint does the same.  I found out
about all this last year when we switched from AT&T's SDN to MCI's
Vnet service.  After we cancelled AT&T we had several sites reporting
that 'private network recording.  We forgot to give all our ANI's to
MCI and a few dropped through the cracks.

Hope it helps!!

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

From: Mat Watkins <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: When Will PBXs Go Away?
Date: 9 Feb 1995 22:30:23 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Comp. Sci., Victoria Uni. of Wellington, New Zealand.


One thing that worries me about CTI is the requirement to re train users.
I manage a PBX network for a university.  One of the major problems we have
is the ability to get people to learn new ways of doing their job.

It seems that a hazard with voice is that a lot of peoples attitudes
regarding their telephone is that it interupts their work.  For this
reason it is hard to get them to learn ways of improving their use of
it.

CTI in a large enviroment like ours maybe inexpensive to install, however what
about the costs of training the users in using the technology, and getting
them to use it.

Don't get me wrong, I think the technology has its uses eg 0800 call
centres, small offices etc, but in an enviroment of 1000 + users who
do not comprehend its benefits, it could prove to be a nightmare.


Cheers,

Matt

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

From: [e-mail] (SELDESLACHTS ULRICH)
Subject: Request for Video On Demand Info
Date: 9 Feb 1995 18:43:42 GMT
Organization: Brussels Free Universities (VUB/ULB), Belgium


Dear world,

I would like to request for any kind of information on Video On Demand
Services. V.O.D. is a service provided by a public or private
telecomoperator for the public to use at request. It enables consumers
to make a choice between videotitles and to choose interactively from
the list, and (at a higher level) use it like a normal VCR (Play,
Stop, Pause, Qfd, Rwd, ...).

All sorts of information on this subject is welcome, from all over the
world.

Thank you very much.

Greetings from Brussels.


Ulrich Seldeslachts     [e-mail]
Student Communicatiewetenschappen
Vrije Universiteit Brussel   home phone [phone]   fax at request

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

From: [e-mail] (Matthew P. Downs)
Subject: Motorola Flip Phone and Low Battery
Date: 9 Feb 1995 21:24:13 GMT
Organization: ADC Telecommunications


Erik P. Larson ([e-mail]) wrote:

> Motorola ... flip phone ... does anyone know how to disable the low
> battery warning beep?  It's really annoying

Use the quick charger, it drains the battery fully, before recharging.


Matt

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

From: pp000413@.interramp.com
Subject: Re: ISDN in Florida
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 95 15:02:45 PDT
Organization: PSI Public Usenet Link


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

In article <[e-mail]>, Evon Bent says:

>> 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.

> The local SB folks here know squat.  But, I went to a BellSouth
> get-together a few months ago touting Intel's ISDN application
> ProShare, and BellSouth announced an 800 number for ordering ISDN
> services.  The event was in August of last year, and I don't have my
> notes with me (meaning I don't have the 800 number), but you might try
> 800 Info for "BellSouth ISDN Service".  I don't have my BRI yet,
> probably will order it in the next few months.

Call BellSouth's ISDN hotline at 800 428 4736 to get the names of
contacts in your area. Each metro area should have an ISDN product
manager who can give you the best info. Don't call business or
residential service numbers because you are going to get "ISD What's
That?"


Hope this helps.

Bruce W. Glassford
Digital Communications Consultants, Inc.
Orlando, FL [e-mail]

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

From: Joe Sulmar <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Voice Response Unit Question
Date: 09 Feb 1995 17:42:27 GMT
Organization: North Shore Access/Eco Software, Inc; ([e-mail])


[e-mail] (Christian van der Ree) wrote:

>> 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.

One possibility is for you to order Centrex service from your local
carrier.  With Centrex, the telephone company will do the switching
for you.  You can program your system to flash the switchhook, just as
if you were connected to a local PBX.


Good Luck,

jjs

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

From: [e-mail] (Patton M Turner)
Subject: Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 1995 04:03:52 GMT


Since you want to use the digital line most of the time switched lines
(ISDN and SW 56) are out.  That would leave a 56/64 kbps circuit as the
remaining choice.  You can get 7.5 KHz out of it with ITU-T G.822
standard codecs, even more with Musicam.  I guess you are aware of the
Herb Squire Tests?  This should never be a problem on a carrier current
station unless everything in the audio chain is over compressed everytime
it gets processed.

So price a DDS line to your remote sites and if it is cheaper, start
adding up the cost of the CSU and codec, otherwise stick with what you
have, it's probally more reliable anyway.

FWIW, reqular program channels are often digital anyway.  The LECs us a
program channel card in a D4 channel bank with one time slot used for
each 2.5 KHz bandwidth.


Patton Turner  KB4GRZ  [e-mail]  FAA Telecommunications

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

From: [e-mail] (Tad Cook)
Subject: Re: Plumber Arrested: Fraudulent Call Forwarding
Date: 9 Feb 1995 22:57:10 GMT
Organization: Seanet Online Services, Seattle WA


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:

> What goes around comes around:  Does anyone remember the old anecdote about
> the original development of automatic switching involving Alvin Stroger?

Actually, that was Almon B. Strowger.

> Mr. Stroger was an undertaker a hundred years ago; he believed that the
> operators on the manual exchange serving his community had been bribed to
> divert calls from the public seeking funeral/burial services to his compe-
> tition. So the story goes, he developed the switch which came to bear his
> name as a way to be certain that manual operators at telephone exchanges
> could not wilfully give away his business to his competitors.   PAT]

I think the wife of his competitor worked at the manual exchange, and was
routing all undertaker business away from him.  The first Strowger switch
used a rotating mechanism inside a shirt collar holding some contacts, back
when shirt collars were a stiff item supplied separately from the shirt.


Tad Cook    [e-mail]   Seattle, WA

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Cogorno)
Subject: Re: Another Look at the 'Old Days'
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 10:32:33 PST


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Channel 1 was gone from television sets by
> around 1949-50 I guess. There is a national organization which provides
> educational (but some say infomercial) television to school students on
> closed circuit called 'Channel One'; you may have heard of them.

When I was in high school, about four years ago, our school was the first
public school in California to contract with Whittle Communications for
Channel One.  There was a bit of local controversy about thecommercial
content, but the parents and staff decided that the two minutes of
commercials was worth getting 100 televisions, a campus ethernet network,
and CD-ROM on demand, and a television editing/broadcasting studio.
Whittle actually paid for everything (except for the ethernet) -- I
guess we were too good of a "Captive audience" to pass up.

The interesting part is that the California Superintendent of Schools
(at that time Bill Honig) sued our district in state circuit court.
THe state legislature also tried to make such agreements illegal.
Neither attempt was successful though.

The system was actually quite impressive.  At 4:00am, the satellite
dish tuned to the proper channel and began recording that day's
program.  Then at 10:15 (when the school decided to re-broadcast the
show to the classrooms) a second timer started up the VCR and played
the tape (the librarian could also hit the "red button" to make the
tape play immediately).  The interesting part is that the tape had
some kind of signal that automatically turned on ALL of the TV sets on
campus.  When the program was over, the TV's would go off.  Any idea
how this was done?


Steve  [e-mail]

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

From: Peter T. Overaas <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: RS449 - Help Please!
Organization: chevron
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 02:32:36 GMT


> I want to connect my hardware to a sort of cisco router. They say I
> have to match my output connector with RS449 interface. I couldn't
> find any hints what RS449 is. People who own the router cannot help
> me.Can anybody give me advise were to look for schematic of
> connections with RS449 and its signals description?  Every help will
> be appreciated: hints on Internet locations of docs, titles of printed
> books or articles etc.

Look in the back of the Black Box catalog under the Technical
Reference section. I would've typed it in but the CTS is setting in
tonight.


Good luck.

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

Date: Thu, 09 Feb 1995 17:27:08 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Cellular Service in the Lincoln Tunnel


>> In New York City, there are also the Queens-Midtown Tunnel and the
>> Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel.

>> For the Lincoln Tunnel, what do you mean by "'Temp' I-495 between NY
>> and NJ"?  This was to be I-495, which: split off NJ Turnpike at what
>> is now exit 16-E; was to cross Manhattan from Lincoln Tunnel to the
>> above-mentioned Queens-Midtown Tunnel (this stretch was never built)
>> and then emerged from there as the Long Island Expressway, becoming
>> N.Y. 495 at or near the Clearview Expressway in eastern Queens.  The
>> latest I remember now is that the stretch in NJ is state route 495,
>> and I-495 signs were erected from Queens-Midtown Tunnel all the way
>> to the expressway's end in Suffolk County (eastern Long Island).

At one time, I-495/NY ran East from the Manhattan side of the Midtown
Tunnel to the Queens/Nassau border.  A few years ago, New York State
convinced whatever federal agency it is that controls the interstates
to assume control (and maintenance!) of the entire stretch of the Long
Island Expressway.  As the road was upgraded, the I-495 signs started
to appear farther east.

Currently, a driver can receive AM radio signals in both the Holland
and Lincoln tunnels (which are controlled by the Port Authority of
NY/NJ), but not in the Midtown and Brooklyn Battery tunnels (which are
controlled by MTA Bridges and Tunnels, formerly TBTA).  I assume that
the Lincoln Tunnel's cell is somehow tied in to the AM antenna, since
I've been told that the Holland should become active shortly.

I'm not holding my breath for the MTA tunnels, though, considering
this is the same agency that "runs" the Long Island Railroad.

>> Old maps had I-78 crossing the Manhattan Bridge, passing near the JFK
>> airport, then turning north to the Throgs Neck Bridge (into the Bronx
>> and hitting I-95.  Now the last reference to I-78 is the New Jersey
>> Turnpike Extension. (From there, you have to go through two intersections
>> to reach the Holland Tunnel.)

How long ago is this?  On the Brooklyn/Queens side of Manhattan, the
loop is an offshoot of I-78.  It consists of the BQE (I-278) and the
Van Wyck/Whitestone (I-678), which runs between JFK and the Whitestone
Bridge.  The Clearview (I-295) was built as an alternate to the loop,
running from the Throgs Neck Bridge to JFK, but was never completed.
Someone also had the idea of extending the loop into the Rockaways and
Nassau County via the Nassau Expressway (I-878), but that has since
been turned into a local-access highway (NY-878).  The Verrazano
Narrows Bridge almost completes the loop back to New Jersey along the
Staten Island Expressway (I-287) from the BQE.

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

From: [e-mail] (Adam M Gaffin)
Subject: Long Lost Reporter Checks In
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 16:46:26 EST


Hi, Pat!

Thanks for the recent kind words in the Digest.  I'm alive and well,
only now working at {Network World}, where I cover client/server
applications, E-mail, groupware and stuff like that -- so not much
chance to do fun telecom stories anymore (like the one David Rohde had
recently about the impending shortage of 800 numbers).


Adam


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, thanks for checking in. Many long
time readers here remember your articles in the Digest from a couple
years ago. I hope you will send other material as time and your present
employment obligations permit.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #92
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa23744;
          9 Feb 95 23:43 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03248; Thu, 9 Feb 95 18:19:04 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA03241; Thu, 9 Feb 95 18:19:01 CST
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 18:19:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #93

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 9 Feb 95 18:19:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 93

Inside This Issue:                         Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Re: How I Fooled Caller ID (Testmark Laboratories)
    Re: 700 Problems = 500 Problems (Phil Ritter)
    Odd Phone Calls (Alan Guisewite)
    Re: Looking For Voice Mail For Panasonic Key Switch (Greg Habstritt)
    Windows TAPI/TSPI Sources Wanted (M. G. Petersen)
    Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines (Alan Boritz)
    Re: 900 Providing Advice Sought (Joe Sulmar)
    Re: Long Distance Caller ID (David Lemson)

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, 9 Feb 95 18:07 EST
From: Testmark Laboratories <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How I Fooled Caller ID


In TELECOM Digest #78, [e-mail] (John Combs) writes
(about ADSI):

>> Bellcore deserves praise for this well thought out service, laid out
>> in several Bellcore standards.  Another smart move on their part is
>> that they didn't bother submitting the standard to an international
>> standards body to try to get it adopted.  (We all know how long that
>> takes.)  Instead, they have been visiting the PTTs of dozens of
>> countries, and trying to convince them to sign on to the ADSI standard
>> as defined by Bellcore.  Several European nations have expressed
>> interest already, as have Pacific Rim nations, including China.
>> ...It is my opinion that ADSI, along with V.34 modems giving
>> true 115 kbps data throughput (via compression), could be an ISDN BRI
>> "killer" one-two punch...By the way, even though ADSI works on POTS lines,
>> it qualifies as PANS.  (Pretty Amazing New Stuff.)

Anthony Chor <[e-mail]> responded in TD#87:

> ADSI is state-of-the-art technology -- for 1975. However, it is 1995,
> and Bellcore's low speed, asymmetrical protocol doesn't meet today's
> expectations for a multimedia information terminal.

> A little background: ADSI provides 1200 baud signalling to the CPE and
> a DTMF backchannel. So, ADSI is really slow sending info to the user,
> and the user can only signal back in DTMF. This is inherently limiting,
> as you might imagine. ADSI also defines presentation capabilities
> which allow the server to write text and options on the CPE screen.
> However, this capability is text-only.

> So, here we are on the brink of the Infobahn with cable companies and
> on-line services promising users a rich multimedia world replete with
> full motion video and CD quality sound and here's Bellcore offering
> 1200 baud text only services. OK, maybe the Infobahn stuff is a little
> way out, but ADSI adoption hasn't exactly been earth-shattering.

> By the time there is any appreciable penetration of ADSI phones (if
> ever), people will have truly state-of-the-art capabilities in their
> TVs and PCs. Meanwhile, the phones, phone companies, and telecom folks
> (us) will look dumb showing off ADSI stuff. Furthermore, we would then
> have a backward compatibility issue with these installed devices as we
> tried to move into some new technology.

> Therefore, we in the telecom industry should be pushing for a more
> modern voice/data solution than ADSI, one which will carry us into the
> next century. For instance, the Radish VoiceView protocol is a fully
> symmetrical switched voice/data solution which allows data (anything,
> not just text) to be carried at much higher speeds; the protocol also
> allows negotiation for fax (unlike ADSI). We should see VoiceView
> modems appearing later this year. Plus, digital simultaneous voice/data
> (DSVD) standards are coming soon (i.e. next year) which will allow high
> speed data connections plus voice on the same analog line.

> Finally, I'm not sure how v.34 and ADSI finish off ISDN. If I'm
> running v.34, I can't talk on the line. ADSI makes no provision for
> interrupting a data call with voice or a voice call with v.34 data, so
> these two things are unrelated. (Besides, I'd like to meet the person
> who gets 115kbps reliably over real phone lines using v.34.)

> (Other random thoughts: when the head of any RBOC talks about the
> Information Superhighway, none of them has ever mentioned ADSI as a
> key technology in making our future happen. If they don't believe in
> it, why should we? Something else to keep in mind: who will be the
> torch bearer for ADSI? Last I checked, Bellcore was for sale. Given
> the uncertainty of their future, I wouldn't count on them to propagate
> any standards.)

> Thus, ADSI is hardly new (technology wise) and not very amazing. Just
> say 'no' to ADSI.

I actually agree with most of what Tony has to say, and his attitude
is perfectly understandable, as he was nice enough to note what
company he works for.  My point is that not only is ADSI here NOW, it
is low-cost and will work on the current, analog lines which everyone
has.  Let's face reality here -- if just 10% of the CURRENT Internet
users suddenly had full WWW capability, and used it, they'd bring the
Internet to its knees.  And WWW is a far cry from full-motion video
and CD-quality audio bandwidth!  (Remember what happened to the
Internet bandwidth that Friday two Decembers ago when the DOOM
shareware was released?  And that was just a bunch of users trying to
FTP a 3meg shareware game!)

I would personally LOVE to have all the pie-in-the-sky things that
AT&T advertises in their commercials. (Especially that neat gadget the
guy uses to send faxes from the beach, but it sure ain't no Newton.)
However, lets face reality for a moment.  None of that will happen in
five years, a little of it may be in place by the turn of the century,
but only in major markets.  Oh, I'm sure Redmond, WA will be wired to
the hilt with fiber optic cable, and be a marvel, but what about the
rest of the world?  No one will front the money to increase the
network bandwidth that much! (Including cable companies...)  GTE's
long-term Cerritos experimental cable project showed that people were
mildly impressed with the gee-whiz stuff, but when it came time to
pony up hard cash, they were nowhere to be found.

On the topic of ISDN BRI ... even in the cities where it IS offered,
AND you are lucky enough to be in the part of town where the only
ISDN-capable CO is placed -- if you live more than a few kilometers
from the CO, no ISDN BRI for you.  And, the way it is priced locally,
it is cheaper for me to have two POTS lines, one for my modem, one for
voice.  (Actually, I live in a rural area, and Bell just changed my
local service from a crossbar switch to a 5ESS a mere two years ago.
Plus, I am STILL on a loop extender, so, no ISDN BRI for me either.)
We won't even talk about what an ISDN BRI telephone with data capability
costs.  By the way, don't forget that all those new, be-here-any-day-now
voice and data-simultaneously modems working on analog lines are going
to have to do considerably better than a mere 4:1 compression ratio.
And, there ain't no way they'll connect through an AT&T SLC96 which
has channel compression turned on, but the ADSI phone will.

In the REAL world, most households do NOT have PCs that are multimedia
-capable, and they are losing ground now that MPC-II is out.  (I have
an aging 486/33, 8 meg of RAM, with a sound card and single speed
CD-ROM, and when I recently installed Microsoft Encarta on it, the
install program smirked and informed me my PC was barely adequate.  So
depressing ...)  Those households with PCs mostly don't have modems.
If they DO have modems, most never use them to connect to an on-line
service.  Super, two-way cable boxes aren't here now, and won't ever
be here for us rural sorts who don't have cable anyway.  (Half the
country.)  I DO have a satellite dish which accepts full-motion video
with CD-quality audio, but its only return path to civilization is a
built-in, dial-out only 1200 bps modem that goes off-hook secretly in
the night and informs Big Brother each month as to what pay-per-views
I bought.

The point is, ADSI is a simple, cheap technology that provides Caller
ID on Call Waiting, and has an extra feature that also allows simple
text interaction between home and businesses.  It is targeted at the
majority of the population that eyes a PC with suspicion/derision, but
has no qualms about using a telephone, even if it DOES have a screen.
And, it doesn't need Bellcore to champion it -- the RBOCs will take
care of the issue by offering to sell/lease the hardware at cost,
knowing they'll make their money by increased sales of calling
features on home phone lines.  Bell Atlantic did this a couple of
years ago with simple Caller ID number-only boxes, and moved more than
a half-million in no time.  (Of course, they regret that now, as they
are meeting resistance from those purchasers when they suggest trading
up for a fee to get a Calling Name and Number ID box.)

I have a brief war story that helps demonstrate the real world of
telephony vs. the world of Microsoft. (Is it Win96 yet?)  Several
years ago, GTE shipped tape units intended for installation for their
COs.  Each unit came labelled all over with warnings that one in five
units were known to catch fire when powered up!  The reason this seeming
idiocy occurred was that the tape units were pivotal to complying with
a new telephone numbering plan that was to go into effect on a given
day.  These cutovers are planned years in advance, and once agreed
upon, they WILL HAPPEN that day.  There was no time to fix the tape
units, so, GTE installers stood by with fire extinguishers when the
units were first powered up, and the cutover took place on the
appointed date.

Until Bill Gates understands that sometimes dates DO matter, Microsoft
won't qbe replacing COs with super PC servers running NT.  (Remember
that brag?)


John Combs, Project Engineer, TestMark Laboratories, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Phil Ritter)
Subject: Re: 700 Problems = 500 problems
Organization: AirTouch Cellular, Los Angeles
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 23:08:29 GMT


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Doug
Reuben) writes:

> Hoping that AT&T learned from its mistakes with the 700 service, I
> anxiously awaited the availability of their 500 service. ...
> there are a few impressive features on the system, overall, many
> people can NOT reach me on it and/or find it awkward. Here are some
> observations:

> 2. Configuration is the same as the 700, ie, I dial 0-500-442-4CID, and
> enter my PIN. The menu is exactly the same for the "middle" tier service,
> and is slightly more complicated for the higher-end ("Navigator"?)
> service.

> BUT - dialing 0-500 is also the problem. From a cellphone, you need
> pay for this. I don't want to have to pay each time I want to re-forward
> my calls to my cellphone, or from one phone to the other. There is really
> no technical reason why AT&T has to return supervision on 0+500 calls
> (or 0+ calls in general)...I mean, so if it doesn't work on the last
> remaining Step-By-Step exchange in Vermont or whatever, fine, but
> I think there are good deal more people using carphones than served
> by SXS exchanges where 0+ tone dialing requires a supervision return. The
> service is useless to me if I need to re-forward it and have to PAY each
> time I do it. I have no problem paying for use, but to pay airtime to
> my cellco just to reforward calls is too much.

Actually, there is a reason for them to return supervision on 0-500
calls.  If they did not, it is unlikely that the cellular companies
would allow such calls at all!  While you may not "PAY" for the time
that you spend programming the service, I do not really want to give
you free use of my most scarce resource (radio channel time) while you
are setting things up.  It is not really AT&Ts place to chose for me
which calls I bill for and which I do not by selectively manipulating
the return of answer supervison.  If the call is answered, even if
answered by a machine, AT&T needs to return supervision.  The only
exception to this is when they return call routing exception
recordings (which is certainly not the case here).

> 5. Most cellular companies do not allow 1+500 billing (even those which AT&T
> owns), so you need to dial 0-500, resulting in an airtime charge to the
> caller even if no one answers or the line is busy. This was one of the
> biggest problems with ER700 -- no one wanted to call me from their
> carphones after about a month of using the service and seeing all these
> calls at 80 cents per minute to my 700 when I never even answered.

Actually, most cellular companies do not perform ANY form of casual
billing.  This includes 900, 976, 800-chargeback, 10XXX billing, and
now 500.  Its not clear when this will (or if it will, or if it even
should) change.


Phil Ritter   [e-mail]

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

From: Alan Guisewite <[e-mail]>
Subject: Odd Phone Calls
Date: 9 Feb 1995 15:32:10 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Reply-To: [e-mail]


    Over the past few weeks, I've been getting some odd calls on my
home (apartment) phone. Here's the scenario:

1. the phone rings and I answer;

2. no one answers me, but it's a live connection (sometimes I can hear
very faint music/voices/office noises);

3. after 20 - 30 seconds I hear a ring (much fainter than if I was dialing);

4. after that ring I get the standard "Your call can not be completed...."
tone and voice message.

    Any ideas? Should I report it to the phone company?


Thanks!

Carnegie Mellon University        Alan D. Guisewite
Robotics Institute            Research Technician
Intelligent Sensors Laboratory        [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Greg Habstritt)
Subject: Re: Looking For Voice Mail For Panasonic Key Switch
Date: 09 Feb 1995 21:52:42 GMT
Organization: Intellitech Communications Group


In article <[e-mail]>, Rebecca Brooke
<[e-mail]> says:

> We have a Panasonic 616(KXT) key switch and want to add auto-attend/voice
> mail.

> Can voice mail be added to this system at all?
> Is there a "generic" component we can add on that will do the job and
> acts like a separate extension?

The Panasonic switch is kind of strange, because it is a hybrid in
that it can use either its own proprietary sets, or simple 2500 sets
(like a home telephone), without adaptors (a switch like the Northern
Telecom Norstar can use a regular phone, but you need an ATA adaptor .. $)

The first solution is that Panasonic makes its own voice mail package
that integrates with the switch.  I'm not sure what the cost is like,
but if its like many vendors' prices, it's ridiculous.

Your other option, third party stuff, may be limited.  I know we
played around with a Panasonic switch and found that when you utilize
a regular phone (ie: voice card) on the system, it does not pass any
station or trunk ID to you.  In other words, if a call came in for
Bob, the system could answer it and then transfer it to his extension.
(you can use a dumb set of key commands to accomplish this).  However,
if Bob does not answer, or his set is busy, there is no way to tell
the system where it should go (ie: to his voice mailbox).  This is
avoidable if you set up a different extension on your switch as a
personal voice mailbox, but you need a voice card line for each one,
etc ... etc ... etc.

Bottom line: setting up a system on a Panasonic would be pretty
involved, and would not be very integrated.  If you can expand on your
explanation of exactly what you are using it for, maybe there is a
different way to approach.  But if you are looking for typical
corporate voice mail, it will be a challenge if you're not using OEM
add on stuff from Panasonic.


[e-mail]     Greg Habstritt
Intellitech Communications Inc.
Calgary, Alberta, Canada

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

From: [e-mail] (M. G. Petersen)
Subject: Windows TAPI/TSPI Sources Wanted
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 1995 12:01:28
Organization: South Carolina SuperNet, Inc.


In my work as an INDEPENDENT Consultant, am interested in finding
sources of Windows TAPI applications software or hardware products
designed to Windows TSPI.  Have found one phone manufacturer so far.

Would appreciate any info or comments.


[e-mail]

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

Subject: Re: Radio Station Transmission Lines
From: drharry![e-mail] (Alan Boritz)
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 95 07:11:53 EST
Organization: Harry's Place - Mahwah NJ - [phone]


[e-mail] (Ron Kritzman) writes:

>> I am working for a small radio station that is now using two 8kHz
>> lines to feed four tansmitters (AM).  On one line we feed three
>> transmitters since they are for buildings next to each other; the other
>> line is for a building some 150 blocks from here.

>> Should we stick with analog lines or slowly move over to other types
>> of communication by phone? The fact that we have to branch off led me
>> to believe that we should go for digital transmition, so that we would
>> have less noise and a better signal.

> This sounds like the typical "carrier current" scenario.  We had the
> same sort of setup when I was in college.  Since the 8 kHz line well
> exceeds the bandwidth you can cram thru an AM radio, the two remaining
> questions are noise and cost.

Garbage receivers are never a factor in AM broadcast program circuits.
Most AM broadcast transmitters manufactured today are essentially flat
up to 10 kHz, with some rolled-off to comply with occupied bandwidth
regulations.  However, I used to have a 5 kW RCA plate-modulated
transmitter that was flat to 15 kHz, at one place I worked.  Program
circuits with quality less than 8 kHz generally make the station sound
like a garbage can with the top in place. ;)

> One more thought, especially if you want to save money.  Does the
> school have some sort of dedicated carrier already connecting the
> locations?  A T-1 maybe? And can the Telecomm or MIS dept or whomever
> runs it, spare you a bit of bandwidth?

Radio stations require full-period circuits with no interruptions, and
very fast response time.  Do you really think any MIS group would keep
someone on-call to drop everything and service their circuits after 5 p.m.?

It really depends upon whether the radio station is important to anyone.
If it is, they'll find the funds to keep operating.  If it isn't, they won't.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: New York City has twenty blocks to the
> mile?  Gee whiz ... they must be very small blocks.

They're only "small" in one direction, and much more consistent in
size than you're use to.  However, because of the density of occupied
space, and poor plant management practices by New York Telephone,
circuits may not take the paths you might expect to get from point A
to point B.

> In Chicago we have eight blocks to the mile with the exception of
> one area just south of downtown where there exist twelve blocks to the
> mile, and that's only for about one mile.

But you also have a downtown area that's literally dieing, municipal
incompetence that resulted in flood damage to a mind-boggling number
of buildings and tenants with incalcuable financial damage, and a
highway system that's in worse shape (as a whole) than New York
City's.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I'm not quite sure what the number of
blocks to the mile has to do with the incompentence of our city
fathers and the general undesirability of living in Chicago these
days. I agree with your assessment completely, and have so stated many
times in the past here. But one thing they possibly do right in Chicago
is have some consistency in the street numbering. New York is quite
hard to figure out; at least here it all starts from State and Madison
Streets downtown and goes off rather consistently in all directions.  PAT]

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

From: Joe Sulmar <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 900 Providing Advice Sought
Date: 09 Feb 1995 17:35:08 GMT
Organization: North Shore Access/Eco Software, Inc; ([e-mail])


[e-mail] wrote:

> 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.

The costs of installing 900 lines of your own for one project will
almost certainly be prohibitive.  You should contract with an
established service bureau for your project.  Most service bureaus
have the capability to program your application on their equipment
(they can dynamically allocate the equipment to serve many client
programs, so they get very good efficiency from the use of the
equipment and phone lines).  They will probably charge you a one time
set up fee for the programming (approx $1000 for your application, I
would guess), and a "cents per minute" fee for call processing (possibly
with a monthly minimum).  Let me know by e-mail if you want referrals
to quality service bureaus.

A few service bureaus will allow you to provide your own equipment.
The bureau will provide space, and carrier hookup for 900 service.
You'll need to install and maintain your own equipment at their
facility, so you need to select a vendor that is close to you.  They
may charge you a fee (maybe about $250/mo.), and they will provide you
with the 900 hookup at the published carrier rates (they earn some
profit by re-selling the 900 service to you, so they usually do not
charge you an explicit usage fee when you provide your own equipment).

 From your email address (...mit.edu), I assume you are located in the
Cambridge, MA area.  You might want to call Thad Ward at Tele-Publishing
[phone] for advice and a quote for your project.

Let me know if I can help further.  FYI I am an independent consultant,
specializing in Computer Telephony systems integration.  Although I am
no longer directly involved in the 900 industry, I know quite a bit
about it because until recently I owned and operated a 900 service
bureau business which I founded in 1986.

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

From: [e-mail] (David Lemson)
Subject: Re: Long Distance Caller ID
Date: 09 Feb 1995 23:13:41 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Paul J Zawada <[e-mail]> writes:

> 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.

> 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?

> [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]

I am in Champaign, IL's service area, and have had a total of *one*
long-distance call number come through on my Caller-ID.  When a friend
who lives about eight blocks from my parents near Ballwin, MO called
me, I got his number on my box. However, when my parents, who are in
the same exchange (314-458), call me, I always get an OUT-OF-AREA.
Something is pretty screwy.  I have one guess -- I know that my parents
are actually in the Pond, MO exchange, so they have an FX 314-458
number.  It's possible that my friend is just close enough that his
number isn't FX, so SWBT is passing the number through the LD carrier.

It's also possible that my friend is using AT&T or some other carrier,
which is passing the information through SS7, and my parents' LD
carrier (Sprint) isn't.  In any event, the Champaign switch *is*
receiving a LD Caller-ID number somehow.


David Lemson   [phone]
University of Illinois Computing & Comm Services Office
System Administrator Internet : [e-mail]
BITNET : LEMSON@UIUCVMD


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I don't think the possibility of FX
has anything to do with it. If 314-458 is handing out ID's carriers
it connects with, then it is doing it for all customer's on that
exchange. If your parents had an FX line, you'd know about it, because
they would have gone to bankruptcy court long ago!  Those things are
quite expensive; I have yet to see one in a residence, and these days
you don't find many in business places either with so many other alter-
native ways of processing calls which are less expensive.

If anything, I would check with your friend and see what long distance
carrier he used to call you, and then find out what carrier your parents
used.  We are told here in the Digest recently that Willtel is passing
along the ANI to the distant end where it is converted to Caller-ID. See
if there is a difference in carriers used by your friend and your parents
as that more likely is the reason you got ID on one and not the other.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #93
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29171;
          10 Feb 95 6:19 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA15187; Fri, 10 Feb 95 01:25:10 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA15180; Fri, 10 Feb 95 01:25:08 CST
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 01:25:08 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #94

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 10 Feb 95 01:25:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 94

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    256Kbps Overseas Circuits at 56Kpbs Costs ([e-mail])
    UCLA Short Course on Fuzzy Logic, Chaos, Neural Networks (William Goodin)
    UCLA Short Course on Telecommunications Networking (William Goodin)
    800 Vanity Number Lists (Graeme W. Smith)
    How to Revive Nicad Batteries (Richard White)
    Local Calling Areas (Mark Rudholm)
    Service Quality (Robert Patrician)
    Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles (Mark Fletcher)
    Re: Newsgroup For SONET? (Jim Millar)
    Re: How I Fooled Caller ID (Linc Madison)
    Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Juan C. Amaya)
    Re: Now Five Million Sites on the Net! (Chris Garrigues)
    Re: MCI Gave me a Deal (Darryl Kipps)
    Re: Cattle Call (David K. Bryant)
    Re: Cattle Call (Ray Normandeau)

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, 9 Feb 1995 22:17:14 -0800
From: [e-mail]
Subject: 256Kbps Overseas Circuits at 56Kpbs Costs


For how to have 256Kpbs lan to lan thruput on overseas circuits at
56Kpbs cost, contact [e-mail]. We also can piggy back
seperate asyn or sync low speed (up to 19.2) applications at no charge
on the same circuit. For dial up overseas lan to lan transmissions we
have a V.34 product that has a V.35 interface with SDC (sync data
compression) with a thruput of 85Kpbs sync.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Why don't you tell us a little more
about it right here, rather than requiring people to write to you
about it?  You might have a very good product we should all hear about.
When sending in messages like this, more specifics, please.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (William R. Goodin)
Subject: UCLA Short Course on Fuzzy Logic, Chaos, and Neural Networks
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 17:52:00
Organization: UCLA Extension


On May 22-24, 1995, UCLA Extension will present the short course,
"Fuzzy Logic, Chaos, and Neural Networks: Principles and Applications",
on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles.

The instructor is Harold Szu, PhD, Research Physicist, Washington, DC.

This course presents the principles and applications of several
different but related disciplines -- neural networks, fuzzy logic,
chaos -- in the context of pattern recognition, control of engineering
tolerance imprecision, and the prediction of fluctuating time series.
Since research into these areas has contributed to the understanding
of human intelligence, researchers have dramatically enhanced their
understanding of fuzzy neural systems and in fact may have discovered
the "Rosetta stone" to decipher and unify these intelligence
functions.

For example, complex neurodynamic patterns may be understood and
modelled by Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) governed by fixed-point
attractor dynamics in terms of a Hebbian learning matrix among
bifurcated neurons.  Each node generates a low dimensional bifurcation
cascade towards the chaos but together they form collective ambiguous
outputs; e.g., a fuzzy set called the Fuzzy Membership Function (FMF).
This feature becomes particularly powerful for real world applications
in signal processing, pattern recognition and/or prediction/control.

The course delineates the difference between the classical sigmoidal
squash function of the typical neuron threshold logic and the new
N-shaped sigmoidal function having a "piecewise negative logic" that
can generate a Feigenbaum cascade of bifurcation outputs of which the
overall envelope is postulated to be the triangle FMF.  The course
also discusses applications of chaos and collective chaos for
spatiotemporal information processing that has been embedded through
an ANN bifurcation cascade of those collective chaotic outputs
generated from piecewise negative logic neurons.  These chaotic
outputs learn the FMF triangle-shape with a different degree of
fuzziness as defined by the scaling function of the multiresolution
analysis (MRA) used often in wavelet transforms.

Another advantage of this methodology is information processing in a
synthetic nonlinear dynamical environment.  For example, nonlinear
ocean waves can be efficiently analyzed by nonlinear soliton dynamics,
rather than traditional Fourier series.  Implementation techniques in
chaos ANN chips are given.

The course covers essential ANN learning theory and the elementary
mathematics of chaos such as the bifurcation cascade route to chaos
and the rudimentary Fuzzy Logic (FL) for those interdisciplinary
participants with only basic knowledge of the subject areas.  Various
applications in chaos, fuzzy logic, and neural net learning are
illustrated in terms of spatiotemporal information processing, such
as:

 --Signal/image de-noise
 --Control device/machine chaos
 --Communication coding
 --Chaotic heart and biomedical applications.

For additional information and a complete course description,
please contact Marcus Hennessy at:
[phone]
[phone]  fax
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (William R. Goodin)
Subject: UCLA Short Course on Telecommunications Networking
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 18:17:41
Organization: UCLA Extension


On May 22-26, 1995, UCLA Extension will present the short course,
"Telecommunications Networking: Local, Metropolitan, and Wide-Area
Networks", on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles.

The instructors are Izhak Rubin, PhD, Professor, Electrical Engineering
Department, UCLA, and Michael A. Erlinger, PhD, Professor, Department
of Computer Science, Harvey Mudd College.

This course presents the integration of communication, switching,
networking, traffic, service, computer engineering, and management
principles, and highlights continuing trends in telecommunications
network technologies, architectures, planning, management, evaluation
and design.  Elements essential to the implementation and control of
cost-effective, reliable, and responsive telecommunication networks
are thoroughly discussed.

Key networking implementations and experimentations are presented and
evaluated.  Test cases involving multimedia networking over FDDI,
Ethernet, Token-Ring, TDMA, ALOHA, Wireless, internetworked
packet-switched networks, and B-ISDN ATM networks are demonstrated
using the IRI Planyst program.

Specific topics include: network fundamentals; narrow-band and
broadband ISDN services; communication and network protocols;
multi-access algorithms, schemes and protocols; local area networks;
internetworking; high-speed fiber-optic local area networks;
high-speed metropolitan area networks; networking methods for cellular
wireless networks; network management; ATM network protocols and
architectures; ATM switch architectures; traffic, flow and congestion
control by ATM wide area networks; and ultra high-speed communications
networks.

The course is designed for communications, computer, telecommunications,
and system engineers; managers; system analysts; project leaders and
scientists.

For additional information and a complete course description,
please contact Marcus Hennessy at:
[phone]
[phone]  fax
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Graeme W Smith)
Subject: 800 Vanity Number Lists
Date: 10 Feb 95 01:57:56 GMT
Organization: Bolt, Beranek and Newman Inc.


I'm looking for pointers to where I might find a list of 800 vanity
numbers online that I can access via ftp or WWW.  You know the type of
numbers like 1-800-MATTRES, 1-800-MORTGAGE, etc etc ...

Any help greatly received.


Thanks,

Graeme

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

From: [e-mail] (Richard White)
Subject: How to Revive Nicad Batteries
Organization: Communications Security Establishment
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 02:42:15 GMT


I recall scanning some news in this newsgroup about a year ago, discussing
the technique of "shocking" nicad batteries: a technique used to give
new life to dead/old nicads. One of my MicroTac batteries died after
about 18 months service, and I'd like to restore it to life again if
possible.

Has anyone out there tried this technique with success? Could you tell
me how this is done, what precautions I should take when doing this,
prognosis for success, etc?


Thanks,

Richard

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

From: Mark Rudholm <[e-mail]>
Subject: Local Calling Areas
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 19:49:40 PST


Here in the Los Angeles area, GTE and Pacific Bell offer flat-rate
calling to residential customers for "Zone 1" and "Zone 2."
Basically, if you are calling anywhere inside about 18 miles from a
flat-rate line, the call is free and unmetered.  If you live on or
near the shoreline, you could theoretically only have 50% the "free"
calling area of someone who lived at least 18 miles from the ocean,
since half of your 18 mile radius could be out on the Pacific.

Since the "basic monthly fee" is in theory supposed to cover those
"local" calls, aren't those of us on the shoreline getting cheated,
since we pay the same basic-rate?  Should unmeasured service therefore
cost less if you live near the ocean?

I'm curious to know what everyone thinks of my idea.


Mark

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

From: Communications Workers of America <[e-mail]>
Subject: Service Quality
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 09:28:43 EST


With the advent of an increasingly competitive environment for RBOCs,
there has been rapid downsizing and re-engineering of work.  Are these
changes the result of opportunities offered by technological change or
simply driven by competition?

Is there a tension between a focus on customer service and cost
cutting?  Has service quality been affected by this process?  Has the
level of investment in maintenance changed?

Is there knowledge or experience among TELECOM Digest readers which
might help to inform this process?


Thanks for your help.

Robert Patrician
CWA Development and Research Department
[e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 05:23:41 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Mark Fletcher)
Subject: Re: Privately Owned Cables on Public Utility Poles


John Jacobsen ([e-mail]) writes:

> We are trying to do this on a smaller scale and here are some things
> you might consider.

> HDSL signaling.  I know very little about it but Bell uses this 'protocol'
> for extending the T-1 transmision distance to 12,000 ft.  It behaves
> the same as a T-1 link in that you can have two pieces of equipment on
> each end of 4 wires that establish their own TDM, 24 Chnl., 'link'.
> Equipment needed is a T-1 (channel bank) interface to your phone systems,
> a data interface (V.35 off router most common), a HDSL compatable
> CSU/DSU, and 2 pr copper between sites (LAD).  I have been told Adtran
> makes a 'HSU' series of products based on this standard by Four Corners
> Tech., 303.721.0546, Richard Kimmel.

> Microwave.  Haylcyon (ftp.halcyon.com) claims to have a microwave T-1
> device that can go up to 192 channels (8, T-1 ports).  Voice and data
> could be run to multiple sites if they do.  As with all microwave count
> on some downtime during lightning storms and do not (my opinion)
> broadcast any voice or data without DES encryption of all channels.
> Copper backup could still be used.

> Racal Datacoms PremNet system.  Works over fiber at 100 Mb/s and can
> carry voice and data.  $30k per box list, up to 50k btwn boxes, and
> very reliable, 800.217.2225

T1 costs for us have been quoted at $398.43 per month from the local
RBOC. This saves 30% over the leased copper lines of the same
capacity.  What drives the cost and payout up is the equipment on each
end. To get an even more cost effective T1 is Halcyon's product that
will take a 4 wire dry circuit and convert it to T1. This has been
quoted at $3000 per end, but the monthly leased 4 wire circuit is only
$28. This pays out much faster.

Telco Systems makes a T1 interface that will give us 48 2500 or
digital extensions from the Northern Telcom for $25,000 per end, but
couldn't I do that with just multiplexors? I would think so, especially
with 2500 sets.

Where my knowledge is lacking the most is the T1 connectivity to the
PBX and the 2500 sets at the remote end. Does a MUX covert 2500 set
dial tone to T1 compatible signalling and then back to dialtone on the
remote MUX? If so my answer would definately be 4 wire dry pairs with
the Halcyon T1 convertrs.

Alot of people suggested microwave. Interesting, but I would imagine
that the DES encrypting is expensive. I also worry about weather and
lightining storms. If the microwave went out, 1/3 of our operations
would be dead without a copper backup. If we have to keep the copper
backup, why bother with the microwave?

Getting really close to the final answer, thanks to all for all of the
input, product info, and help on the phone!


Mark Fletcher   The Great Gorge Resort
20 827-2000 Ext. 404

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The above error in the phone number was
that way when I got it. I don't know what the missing digit is.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jim Millar)
Subject: Re: Newsgroup For SONET?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 06:12:34 GMT


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
(-E.RICE) wrote:

> What newsgroup contains discussions of SONET?

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You will find them here from time to time.
> Does anyone know of a group specifically on the topic?   PAT]

comp.dcom.cell-relay and comp.dcom.frame-relay often have discussions
on SONET.


Jim Millar

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

From: [e-mail] (Linc Madison)
Subject: Re: How I Fooled Caller ID
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 01:04:14 GMT


John Combs @ Testmark Laboratories ([e-mail]) wrote:

> It is my opinion that ADSI, along with V.34 modems giving
> true 115 kbps data throughput (via compression), could be an ISDN BRI
> "killer" one-two punch.

V.34 modems will *NEVER* give "true 115 kbps data throughput"!  That
is the theoretical *maximum* burst throughput.  In reality, even with
highly compressible text files, you're lucky to get more than half
that.  With files that are already compressed, such as ZIP/StuffIt/gzip/
etc. or JPEG/GIF/etc. files, you will get negligible compression from the
modem.

As a test, I once took a text file that was a PostScript page.
Compressing it with gzip, I got a compression ratio of over 30:1 --
the compressed file was barely 3% of the original size!  Running it
over my modem, it was compressed by a ratio of 2.2:1.

Thus, it is entirely fair to say that a 56K ISDN line is twice as fast
as a 28.8 modem, and a 112K ISDN line is four times, because if you
are sending files of any significant size, you should compress them on
the computer, not on the modem.


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

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

From: Juan C Amaya <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem
Date: Thu,  9 Feb 1995 17:22:49 -0500
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


[e-mail] (Ken Culbert) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Steve
> Midgley) wrote:

>> With sheepish apologies to the moderator and readers, I amend my
>> previous post. I must have sleeping sitting down :-)

>> V.32 is not the protocol spec for 14.4 modems. It's V.42.  Apologies,
>> apologies.

> Wrong again.  V.32bis is the modulation protocol spec for 14.4 kbaud;
> v.42 is the reliability spec; v.42bis is the compression standard;
> v.34 is the modulation protocol for 28.8 kbaud.

> Not too confusing, eh? ;)

Wrong again. You got the units wrong, it's not kbaud but kbs!

he he ... did we finally get it right?


Regards,

juan
Elec. & Comp. Engineering  | Email: [e-mail]  Phone: [phone]
Carnegie Mellon University | For_more_info: finger [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Now Five Million Sites on the Net!
Organization: Microelectronics and Computer Technology Corporation (MCC)
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 23:06:56 GMT


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: And I am really glad you did. The news
> is rather incredible. Check out the three *thousand* percent (!) increase
> in sites in the .us domain over the past three years, and the several

>                           ---------Growth---------
>          Jan.95 Hosts     4Q94     1994  3yr growth
>
 ..
> USA **         37,615      51%     475%   31,155%

I think that's thirty thousand percent.

Howver, if there are 37,000 hosts today and it's grow by 31,000%, that
means there were only 37,615/311.55=121 hosts in that domain three years
ago.

I don't think the growth of a domain that's traditionally been used so
unevenly means much.


Chris Garrigues
At work:            (MIME capable) [e-mail]
At home:  (also MIME capable) [e-mail]
Please use this address for non-MCC related messages.
My pgp public key is on my homepage: http://www.DeepEddy.Com/~cwg/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are not the only person to write
and toss sour grapes on this report from the Internet Society. Someone
who asked not to be quoted by name wrote to say the figures were highly
suspect because of the many places which have obtained registered domain
names and then never actually connected up. I don't know how he would
tell that, but he seemed to feel it was correct. I agree there was a
miscalculation in my original notes, the percentage is as you describe
it. All I can really say with certainty is there is definitly a large
and steady growth going on ... much bigger than almost anyone would
have imagined five or ten years ago.   PAT]

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

Date: 10 Feb 95 01:25:20 EST
From: Darryl Kipps <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MCI Gave me a Deal


In TELECOM Digest V15 #91, (Ron Schnell) writes:

> By the way, AT&T's Reach Out America Evening Plus is much better than
> Sprint's Pennies/min.  ROA/E+ gives you 10 cents per minute as well,
> but from 5pm until 8am (as opposed to Sprint's 7pm to 7am).  Their
> commercial is the most sleazy, in that at the end, Bergen says, "ten
> cents per minute, why didn't anyone else think of that?"  Gee, AT&T
> has had ROA/E+ for at least four years!

     Ron fails to mention that the ROA/E+ plan requires you to pay for
your first 60 minutes of calls in advance at a rate of .125/min ($7.50).
However, no one plan can nor will ever be perfect for everyone.  I
have been on the ROA/E+ plan for a couple of years now and am very
satisfied with it.  It provides a discount off of intrastate calls as
well, and the time restrictions are perfect for me since I'm usually
not home when the plan is not effective.

     However, Sprint called me at one point and dangled some type of
incentive in my face to join their MOST plan.  I thought, why not?
I'll take their incentive ($50 I think) and switch back in a couple of
months and life goes on ... until I got my first bill.  I allowed then
to switch my modem line only, which I use almost exclusively to
connect to CI$.  As it turned out, the CI$ node I use apparantely was
also a Sprint line, and since that's who I called the MOST, I received
a 20% discount, giving me a .0975 rate, BUT only between 11pm and 7am.
It was great for a while, but as lifestyles change and such, 11pm
became the wee hours, and then AT&T changed the ROA/E+ plan to begin
at 5pm instead of the prior 7pm, and I switched back.

     Moral of the story?  Beats me, but I do know that it takes a lot
of trial and error to find a long distance calling plan to suit your
particular needs.  I personally wish these carriers would stop all
this cut-throat quasi-deceptive advertising with two-second fine print
and just give us the facts we need to make an informed decision.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Speaking of CIS, I found out recently
that apparently everyone can now connect right from the Internet. The
connection would be 'telnet compuserve.com'. That gets you the CIS
login prompt. For many users it may be a better way of connecting than
through the Compuserve network/dialups.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David K. Bryant)
Subject: Re: Cattle Call
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 04:11:59 GMT


[e-mail] writes:

> If not, this practice may lead to a worse problem.  What happens when the
> cow gets corrupted by the promise of easy fodder and starts moonlighting
> as a drug courier?

Bigger problem: what happens when the cow starts holding out for
bigger perks ... like a cell phone ... and call forwarding ...  and
voice (moo?) mail?

I'll tell you what happens ...  anarchy in the pasture.  No leader of
the herd.  That degenerates and next thing you know, instead of milk,
they're giving something else.  Like Lite beer.

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

Subject: Re: Cattle Call
From: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)
Date: 10 Feb 95 03:41:00 GMT
Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York NY - 212-274-8110
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Ray Normandeau)


> 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.

I use PageAmerica in NYC for $4.95 a month when paid 12 months at a
time for sixty dollars. Limit is 375 pages a year.

You can get transmitters for factory and constuction site use and
transmit directly to pagers without paying for air time or monthly
fees.  I have seen them in some catalogs but I don't remember where.

> [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?

Only the alphanumeric pagers might pose a problem as most cows can't
read the messages.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: What a wasted issue!  I am going to
call it quits and go to bed. Seven or eight issues of this Digest in
one day is quite enough.  Maybe I'll be back tonight with more.  PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #94
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08112;
          10 Feb 95 21:57 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08089; Fri, 10 Feb 95 16:58:15 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA08082; Fri, 10 Feb 95 16:58:11 CST
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 16:58:11 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #95

TELECOM Digest     Fri, 10 Feb 95 16:58:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 95

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Indian Supreme Court Ends State Control of the Airwaves (Rishab Ghosh)
    Book Review: "Data Link Protocols" by Black (Rob Slade)
    Re: "Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway" (Reid Goldsborough)
    Area Code 500: It Doesn't and Does Work - or Both (Paul Robinson)
    Re: AT&T 500 Service and the Hospitality Industry (Dave Ptasnik)
    A Strange Man Calls Me About 500 (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    976 Look-Alike Exchanges (Henry Becker)
    Ericsson GH337 Codes (Michael Holstein)
    BellSouth Joins World Wide Web (Nigel Allen)
    VocalTec Internet Telephone (Jeffrey Friedman)
    GSM-PCN Chipset, Radio, Baseband (Urban Nilsson)
    Pointers to Telecom Resource Server Sites on the Net (Robert Shaw)
    Need a Contact for Teradyne RFTS 4SIGHT System 2000 (Usager hqtel)
    Wanted: Used Business Telephone Systems and T1 (David M. Russell)
    Telco Signaling Requirements (Richard Brehove)
    Cellular Service in Palo Alto (Javier Henderson)

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: Indian Supreme Court Ends State Control of the Airwaves
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 13:11:48 EST
Reply-To: [e-mail]
From: [e-mail]


The Indian Supreme Court yesterday (9th February 1995) directed the
government to create an independent autonomous regulatory body for the
airwaves (like the US FCC) and end the state monopoly on broadcasting
and satellite uplinks.

The judges took an interesting position that the "GREATER IMPACT" OF
ELECTRONIC MEDIA and its "wider range of circulation of information"
as opposed to the press, CANNOT BE USED TO RESTRICT or deny THE RIGHT
TO FREE EXPRESSION. This may have important consequences, for all over
the world, including in the US and India, the electronic media is
denied freedoms allowed to the press with the excuse that it's somehow
different.

The three-judge bench, comprising of Justices PB Sawant, S Mohan and
BP Jeevan Reddy, made the ruling after an government appeal against a
previous ruling by the Calcutta High Court. The Calcutta High Court
had earlier upheld the right to telecast as fundamental, which would
theoretically prevent any regulation or censorship whatsoever. The
consensual Supreme Court judgement, while denying the government's
power of monopoly, upheld its right to subject the electronic media to
regulation and censorship.

However, Justice Reddy, in his separate ruling did not mention
censorship.  He pointed out that the century-old Indian Telegraph Act
of 1885, which has been ingeniously extrapolated to support the
government's monopoly over electronic media and right to 'licence'
data networks, was "wholly inadequate and unsuited for" electronic
media, and said that Parliament should enact new laws to govern such
media.

Unfortunately the Supreme Court has no powers to legislate, and new
laws have a habit (as seen with the Digital Telephony Bill in the US)
of increasing, rather than decreasing, government authority. The
explicit statement that the electronic media should not be more
restricted than the press will, hopefully, prevent that.

The legal battle started with the Doordarshan, the state TV monopoly,
objecting to the Cricket Association of Bengal's contract with Trans
World International granting the latter worldwide broadcasting rights
to a cricket tournament. Doordarshan used the 1885 Act to prevent TWI
from uplinking to satellite, till the courts intervened.


Rishab Aiyer Ghosh          [e-mail]           [e-mail]
Vox [phone] Voxmail 3760335       H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA

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

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 13:41:05 EST
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "Data Link Protocols" by Black


BKDTLKPR.RVW   941229

"Data Link Protocols", Black, 1993, 0-13-204918-X
%A   Uyless Black
%C   113 Sylvan Avenue, Englewood Cliffs, NJ   07632
%D   1993
%G   0-13-204918-X
%I   PTR Prentice-Hall, Inc.
%O   [phone] FAX [phone]
%P   270
%T   "Data Link Protocols"

Much of what goes on at the physical layer level in data communications
is mature technology, fixed in hardware.  The network, internetwork
and higher layers vary widely depending upon situation and application.
The data link layer is the one most in need of study and understanding.
This is the layer concerned with the actual transmission of data, and
its reliable receipt.

Three chapters relate to the basic concepts of the data link layer, an
introduction, error detection and correction, and controls.  The
remainder of the book concentrates on the specific protocols; BSC,
HDLC, LAPB, LAPD, LAN protocols, LLC and so forth.  Two chapters are
of particular interest to the online community, covering asynchronous
file transfer protocols (X modem and descendents, Kermit, and others)
and LAPM (Link Access Protocol for Microcomputers or V.42).  Frame
relay and Internet protocols are touched on.

This work deals with the concepts rather than implementations.  The
actual programming of specific protocols will require additional
detail.  However, for an understanding of the options at this layer in
the stack, this is a good starting source.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995   BKDTLKPR.RVW   941229. Distribution
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publications. Rob Slade's
book reviews are a regular feature in the Digest.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

From: Reid Goldsborough <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: "Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway"
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 10:45:17 -0500
Organization: Net Access - Philadelphia's Internet Connection


On Mon, 6 Feb 1995, Rob Slade wrote:

 ... a review of my book. Thanks for posting your views.

> The book is a collection of enthusiastic essays about life in the telecom-
> rich future, with a piece concluding each chapter by some politician,
> "industry leader", Famous Person, or other "expert".  Sometimes, it's
> hard to determine whether the "viewpoint" is an addendum to the chapter,
> the chapter is an introduction to the viewpoint, or whether both are related
> solely by proximity.

Are you sure you read *my* book? Straight Talk About the Information
Superhighway is not a collection of essays. It's a conventional
nonfiction book, with each chapter building upon the last, mostly
analysis on my part but with lots of quotes and other information from
those in private industry developing the technology, those in the
goverment promoting and overseeing it, those in the nonprofit sector
who are trying to steer it so it benefits the public interest, and
those using today's online services.

You may feel it's a collection of essays because this was a line used
by one of the publisher's promotion writers. Did you read the promotional
materials but not the book?

> The author must be sensitive, in advance, to possible charges that
> this material is all very "blue sky".  After the opening story, he
> argues that this is not a fantasy, but that future technology will be
> very much like it.  Of course, the technologies presented -- email,
> multimedia extensions, teleconferencing, voice recognition and
> macros -- are all available *now*, but it is obvious that Goldsborough
> is not really experienced in the most effective ways to use them.

There's a chapter in the book about all the hype surrounding the
information superhighway. You should read it.

> This is an extended series of the usual mass-media magazine articles,
> high on "gee whiz!" and low on content.

You seem very down on conventional media. Have you had bad experiences
here? In truth, there's quite a bit of content in the book, though as
the introduction points out it's not a technical book. I do talk about
the technical challenges involved, the need for vastly increased
bandwidth, better video servers, affordable set-top boxes, and so on.
But the book is mostly about how lifestyle and workstyle issues, how
the information superhighway will likely affect our jobs, the way we
educate our kids, how we vote, entertainment and shopping, how we
gather news, and how we communicate and relate with one another.


Reid Goldsborough~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[e-mail]
Computer columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer
Author of the book Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway

Places to read parts of Straight Talk About the Information Superhighway:
* Satore Township. Point your Web browser at
ftp://ftp.crl.com/ftp/users/ro/mikekell/html/satore.htm.
* Macmillan Information SuperLibrary. Point your Web browser at
http://www.mcp.com/, then click or choose Alpha.

To order the book, phone Macmillan Publishing at 800-428-5331.

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

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 07:07:52 EST
From: Paul Robinson <[e-mail]>
Organization: Tansin A. Darcos & Company, Silver Spring, MD USA
Subject: Area Code 500: It Doesn't and Does Work - or Both


Our next message on NPA 500 is subtitled "Fun and Games with Bell
Atlantic" for reasons which will become clear.

TELECOM Digest Editor noted:

> TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: [deleted] *my* 500 number started
> working perfectly today. [deleted] when I use my own phone to dial
> 1-500-677-1616 (my number) it rings once and I am told it will try
> my alternate numbers (because it found my home number to be busy).
> When I do 0-500-677-1616 and tell it to bill the call to the phone I
> am using, it vanishes for a couple seconds and I get call-waiting ...

I decided to try the number to see if it works here or not.

Here in Montgomery County, Bell Atlantic does the following:

       0-500-677-1616 returns a SIT tone ("<dew dew deep>") followed by
                      "We're sorry, the number cannot be completed as
                      dialed, please check the area code and the
                      number and dial again.  Thank you."  Then a rude
                      rattling noise and it repeats; this sounds like
                      a local recording.
       1-700-555-1212 "You have reached the AT&T Long Distance Network"
                      (Yes, I know the "official" number is 555-4141,
                      but this one has worked with AT&T, MCI, and Sprint
                      for over ten years and I've gotten in the habit
                      of using it.)
       1-500-677-1616 AT&T's sound mark ("<TRILL> AT&T") and it begins
                      a ring.  I hung up at this point.  (No offense
                      intended, Mr. Moderator, but I just wanted to
                      see if the system worked or not, I really didn't
                      have any reason to call you.)
 10288-0-500-677-1616 AT&T's sound mark ("<TRILL> AT&T") then "True
                      Connections" and then asks me for a pin or a
                      calling card number.
 10288-1-500-677-1616 returns a SIT tone ("<dew dew deep>") followed by
                      "We're sorry, it is not necessary to dial a
                      carrier access code for the number you have dialed."
 10222-0-500-677-1616 Gives me a live MCI operator, probably because they
                      cannot route this call.  (I wanted to check; I never
                      can be sure with Bell Atlantic what might happen.)

This was cute; real cute. I then decided to see how much fun I could
have reporting this to 611.  That was even *more* interesting. (Note:
I made the try via MCI's 10222 carrier code after calling 611 because
I didn't think of it until later.)

After going through a couple of voice mail menu prompts, the attendant
answers. When I give her my number, I gave her my virtual alternate
ring number, only to have her tell me that's not the number I'm,
calling from.  (I never use the "real" physical telephone number so I
don't even know it.) After I give her the main billing number which is
a different line, she then plays a game of asking me the main number
which I don't know, I already told her I don't know, and *which she
has on a screen in front of her, since later she proceeds to inform me
of the correct number*.  Finally we get that taken care of.  Also,
they *still* have the *former* owner of this number listed as the
subscriber.  I've had this number for over three years, but they still
don't have it right.

After I tell her that I *can* dial 1-500 or 10288-0-500, and *can't*
dial 0-500 or 10288-1-500, her response is to ask me if this is a
problem from other phones in the house, and "Could there be a problem
with your dial pad?"  I was about to try a different phone (which I
knew would have the same problem) when reality set in and I realized
that the question didn't make any sense.  I take a deep breath to calm
myself and explain carefully that if there was a problem with the dial
pad, it would not have worked when dialing the carrier access code
first, either, would it?  She then conceded this point.

Then she proceeds to suggest it's a carrier problem!  I explain to her
two points, first that the refusal to accept 0-500 sounds like it's
Bell Atlantic's recording, and that the carrier access code not
allowed recording must be theirs, and second, that the 500 area code
is similar to the 800 area code, the numbers are carrier specific and
shouldn't even *need* a carrier access code, thus I believe the
problem is in Bell Atlantic's switch.

Grudgingly, she agrees to write up a trouble ticket and I give her the
number so they can check on it; (Pat, if you get a "strange" call from
*Bell Atlantic* checking your 500 number from *AT&T*, I was the one
who caused it).  We shall see what happens.

Based on my prior experience will Bell Atlantic, I hope this is a
"difficult" problem; that they can fix easily.  If it's an "easy"
problem, then I'm worried they will make a mistake and I'll end up
getting my phone service switched over to foreign exchange service
from West Virginia or something else. :)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I got a weird response today when trying
my 500 number from the McDonald's Restaurant where I had lunch. O-500
worked fine, and as expected when I pressed # without a pin the response
was that the call had to be billed to a calling card. No other options
were given. So far so good.  Then I tried 1-500 and got the intercept
usually given out on phones restricted from 900/976, i.e. "the call you
have dialed cannot be placed from this telephone. An operator will not
be able to place the call for you." Instead of hanging up, I stayed on
the line and after a couple seconds, ringing started ... it rang twice
and a new intercept came on the line, "your call cannot be completed as
dialed, please check the number and dial again, this is a recording 708-1T".
This happened three times in a row, from 708-677.

Now didn't someone write here just a couple days ago and say that when
they tried 1-500 from a (genuine Bell) payphone that the call was auto-
matically dumped to 0-500 and dealt with that way?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Ptasnik)
Subject: Re: AT&T 500 Service and the Hospitality Industry
Date: 10 Feb 1995 16:36:35 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


Darryl Kipps <[e-mail]> writes:

> As MIS director for a small chain of hotels, I am concerned about
> the increasing number of comments I'm seeing here regarding the
> inability to access 500 numbers from most PBX's.

> At any rate, I'd appreciate billing procedures and rates for 1-500
> service.  I'm assuming that 0-500 numbers are always billed to either the
> callee or a calling card.  Thanks for listening.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:
> On calls dialed 1-500 and billed direct (or dialed 0-500 if the guest
> slips it to you by pressing '1' in response to 'bill this call to the
> number you are calling from') you will be billed by AT&T at the rate of
> 25 cents per minute during peak and 15 cents per minute at night and
> on weekends/holidays. Peak is 8am to 5pm your time, Monday through Friday.

Pat -

I called AT&T to ask about a 500 number I had reserved.  They had no
record of the reservation.  I then asked if I could reserve the number
again.  They said that they did not have the prefix I had requested
(467).  I presume this is why they dropped my reservation request.

All of which brings me to my point.  If different carriers "own"
different 500 number prefixes, I would expect each to set its own
rate.  While AT&T might charge .25/.15, Integreslime might charge
$5.00/$4.99.  This would be a big ouch to the hotels.  Keeping up with
all of the carriers and all of the rates would be challenging at best.
Were it my switch, I would probably block 1-500 calls.  Trying to
allow direct dialing and hoping to recharge accurately would not be
practical.  0-500 calls might be OK, but so many slime carriers ignore
billed number screening.  If the bill just appears on the local telco
statement, it is too hard to screen the bills looking for fraudulently
billed 0-500 calls.  The only way I would allow 0-500 calls would be
if the local telco refused to bill for the teleslime.  If the teleslime
has to send in a separate bill, it is easy enough to discard.


Dave Ptasnik     [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well you are correct that once the others
get into the act, it will be a lot harder to keep track of. I only answered
Mr. Kipps on the basis of AT&T, which is -- so far as I know -- the only
player in 500 right now, although other telcos do have prefixes reserved
for themselves. If anything though, I think the others will try to be
competitive with AT&T on this service. The only cases where you get the
outrageous, non-competitive pricing (such as your $5.00/4.99 example) are
when the teleslimes have a more or less captive customer base such as
COCOTS in out of the way places, correctional institutions, etc. They know
if you are at a COCOT on a street corner somewhere calling collect, you
probably -- for whatever reasons of your own lifestyle, etc -- do not have
much choice in the matter, so they pull out those high rates. And of
course, there is always sex: the teleslimes who specialize in hot chat
with very high billings per minute also have many users without a lot of
options (the user is aware of) ... and a need which requires attention.

But who in their right mind would sign up with teleslime for a 500 number
where *they* had to pay that $5.00 rate on calls made to them with pins
or where anyone calling them had to pay the same?  See my point?  People
who get 500 service are probably going to more sophisticated than that.
So you may get cases where Ameritech (one company proposing 500 service)
may charge 26/13 and Sprint may charge 24/17. Each one will offer some
different little gimmick in their version of 500, and as so often happens
it will be an applications-driven thing as to which works out best for
each individual user over a long period of time.  But I really cannot
imagine the teleslimes getting in on this and trying to adapt it to their
high prices and otherwise scam operations. Who would accept it?

With that in mind then, if I am correct, I would still maintain hotels
and other PBX admins can probably deal with 1-500 without too many
hassles. Whoever gets in the game will probably have rates that follow
AT&T closely or are cheaper -- probably never more expensive. So what you
do is, as long as everything coasts along in that 25/15 - 24/17 - range
I expect they will also use, live with it. Watch for the occassional big
charge, and when/if it starts to get out of hand, *then* clamp down.  PAT]

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

From: TELECOM Digest Editor <[e-mail]>
Subject: A Strange Man Calls Me About 500
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 12:30:00 CST


This happened several days ago. You may remember we had an article here
listing the prefixes assigned in 500 service, and the telcos they were
assigned to. A day or two after that article appeared, I got a note from
the sysadmin here saying he had received a call from someone who wanted
to know 'how to get in touch with TELECOM Digest'. Normally any inquiries
about the Digest mail, problems, etc are just handed over to me by the
admin. The fellow called the admin on the phone to ask how to reach me
and the admin wisely said he would take a message and relay it. I got
email from the admin and returned this fellow's call within five to ten
minutes. I called him on that MCI common-subscriber 800 number, where
you call it, then enter a pin to be directed to the subscriber.

This fellow answers the phone by using my name: "Ah hello Mr. Townson,
Thank you for returning my call." ... <suspicious at this point, I
decide to let him do the talking> ... this fellow said he did not have
an email account, and 'did not know that much about computers' but he
was hoping I could send him a copy of that list of carrier prefix
assignments for 500. He wanted to know where I got it. I told him it
was sent in by a reader, and mentioned the site where that reader could
be contacted if he had any questions. Ah, he said, he certainly was
familiar with that site, in San Jose, CA. I tossed out the phrase
"Bellcore" and he knew all about them also.

I told him I couldn't help wondering how, since he had no email and
no computer, he would have known about a not that well known public
access Unix site in San Jose. He claimed he read about it some magazine.
He claimed he wanted to obtain a particular 500 number -- a vanity
number -- but it was not available from AT&T so he thought he would
find out which company did offer it. I asked him how he heard about
TELECOM Digest. Now get this:

He told me he was located in Brooklyn, New York, on Avenue U near
Flatbush Avenue. He had gone to his local library to see what the
reference librarian could tell him. The librarian gave him a few sources
for telecom information and he 'decided' to try this Digest. In a book
giving internet resources he found that the Archives are housed at MIT.
He called some person on the staff at MIT who knew from nothing about
the Archives. Then he noted that this resource guide referred inquiries
to '[e-mail]' so he called Northwestern University
to ask about the Digest. He finally was connected with the sysadmin
who took the message for me.

All this, mind you, because he had heard 'from someone' that the Digest
had printed, a day or two before, a list of exchanges assigned to the
carriers doing or planning to do 500. I asked this fellow who he was and
what he did for an occupation. He claims he is 'a retired cab driver'.
He sounded to me like he was in his late sixties or even perhaps his
seventies. All this time I am thinking to myself he knows far too much
to be a retired cab driver in Brooklyn. For a retired cab driver in
Brooklyn who has no email, no computer, 'not much computer knowledge'
he certainly knows a lot about unix sites in San Jose and how to get
ahold of site admins at MIT and Northwestern. He claims he 'bought a
computer but never did take it out of the box; it is still sitting
in the corner, maybe I should set it up.'  I asked him how should I
send the message to him with the listing he asked about.  Maybe he
would like to give me a more precise mailing address. Ummm ... well ...
would I read the list to him over the phone?  He asked about a couple
of companies on the list; rattles off who they are subsidiaries of;
wants to know about a couple prefixes in particular. I asked if he
had a fax machine; if so, give me the number and I will fax the
list. He stalls me on that one also. He says he has a fax but would
have to set it up, and 'maybe I can get back to you in a couple days
with the phone number it will be on ...'

I am holding my nose ... something stinks at this point. I mention
that given his location, Avenue U and Flatbush, I believe he must be
right by the Bell System international cable which runs close to
there. He knows all about that also.  He told me he has 'half a dozen
700 numbers', a couple of 800 numbers, and he wants a vanity 500 number.
'Just an unemployed, retired cab driver from Brooklyn .. not much to
tell about me ...'. What ticked me off the most was when I called the
MCI 800 number using the pin he left, he *knew* it was me calling,
even though he claimed 'it was just a guess, I was not expecting any
other calls on *that particular* 800 number this afternoon ...'

Anyone have any ideas who he is?  It just all seemed very odd to me;
his persistence in locating me by telephoning MIT, getting no where,
then telephoning Northwestern, then knowing when I called back, claiming
no email or network connection of any kind -- indeed, not even a computer
installed -- but he immediatly recognizes the name of a site on the
other side of the country; he knows far, far too much about the industry
to be a retired cab driver in Brooklyn, 'living near Avenue U' and
wanting his own vanity 500 number to go with his 'several 700 numbers'.
He knows about Bellcore and obviously about 800 ANI.

I'd like his name and address please, if possible. He wouldn't tell me
himself.

Thanks,

PAT

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

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 05:47:34 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Henry Becker)
Subject: 976 Look-Alike Exchanges


I am trying to compile and maintain a complete list of 976 and 976
look-alike exchanges in the United States.  Does anyone know where I
can find such a list?

If you only know of exchanges in your local area I would appreciate
receiving this information.  With it I can compile and maintain this
list, and with Patrick's permission provide it for inclusion in the
Telecom Archives.

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

From: [e-mail] (Michael Holstein)
Subject: Ericsson GH337 Codes
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 07:52:45 GMT
Organization: Medizinische Einrichtungen Bonn


I am looking for the Code to get the IMEI no. of my Ericsson phone.
Does anybody know the sequence. I think it was something like *xx# but
I can't remeber it.


Thank you,

Michael Holstein

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

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 05:08:28 -0500
Subject: BellSouth Joins World Wide Web
From: [e-mail] (Nigel Allen)
Organization: Internex Online


BellSouth Corporation has set up a WWW server at http://www.atglab.bls.com
which may be of interest to Digest readers.

It contains general information about the company and its subsidiaries,
and a limited number of company press releases.

Stentor, the consortium of Canadian telephone companies, now has a WWW
server at http://www.stentor.ca which you may also enjoy looking at.
It offers a limited amount of information about Stentor and its member
companies.


Nigel Allen    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Friedman)
Subject: VocalTec Internet Telephone
Date: 10 Feb 1995 15:23:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom


I'm trying to track down information about a program mentioned in
today's {Wall Street Journal}.  It is supposed to be downloadable from
somewhere on the Net.  It is from a company called VocalTec, and lets
you use the Net as a telephone.  Anyone with a 486 or faster machine,
with a 14.4 modem, a sound card and microphone, can talk in half-duplex
mode with anyone else with the same equipment.


Jeffrey F. Friedman    [e-mail]    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Urban Nilsson)
Subject: GSM-PCN Chipset, Radio, Baseband !?!?
Date: 10 Feb 1995 15:46:38 GMT
Organization: yacc - the Computer Society at Lund University


Hello!

I have a small question for a friend. Is there someone who knows
anything about the GSM system, perhaps sourcecode, specifications or
anything at all *and* which GSM-chipsets are available and coming up
on the market?

Ill be happy for any info!


Thanks in advance!

Urban Nilsson, Kamnarsv. 5D:210, 226 46 Lund, Sweden, [phone]
[e-mail], [e-mail]

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

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 08:37:53 CET
From: SHAW [phone] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Pointers to Telecom Resource Server Sites on the Net


The International Telecommunication Union in Geneva is finalizing
development of its World Wide Web Server and we wish to include
pointers to other telecom resource servers on the Net.  We have an
extensive list but there are surely some we have missed so if you have
an interesting WWW, Gopher, or FTP server relating to telecom, send us
an email with the appropriate URL so that we can include it.


Thanks in advance,

Robert Shaw     Information Exchange Division
Information Services Department
International Telecommunication Union
Place des Nations  1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
X.400:G=robert;S=shaw;A=arcom;P=itu;C=ch
Internet: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Usager hqtel)
Subject: Need a Contact For Teradyne RFTS 4SIGHT System 2000
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Hydro-Quebec, Montreal, QC, Canada
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 12:21:35 GMT


I'm wondering if someone has an address, a telephone/fax numbers
and/or names of people working for Teradyne. We are interested to
receive information about their Remote Fiber test System 4SIGHT System
2000.


Thank you,

Dr. Jean Raymond    Hydro-Quebec
Telecommunications Control Centre
Montreal, Canada    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (David M. Russell)
Subject: Wanted: Used Business Telephone Systems and T1
Date: 10 Feb 1995 15:56:46 GMT
Organization: Integrity Telecommunications


Integrity Telecommunications        214-357-7484      Voice
David M. Russell                          214-357-7485      Fax
2970 Blystone Lane, Ste.102         [e-mail]  email
Dallas, TX  75220-1515

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

Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 09:59:30 PST
From: [e-mail] (Richard Brehove)
Subject: Telco Signaling Requirements


I will be specifying interfaces to our new facilities throughout the
world.  I will need to spedify interfaces to the local telephone
network in that country.  Short of going to each country and getting
their individual specs, given that they will give them to me at all, I
want to get a list of what country uses what signalling specification.
I have a list of the names of about 13 different signalling specs,
(R1, R3, C4, C5, etc.) and I need to know If this list is sufficient,
too many, or missing some.

Does somebody have a list of what country uses what signalling spec? I
would appreciate any information.  I will try to keep up with
comp.dcom.telecom, but I would appreciate direct email as well.

([e-mail])

Thank you,

Richard Brehove

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

Subject: Cellular service in Palo Alto
From: [e-mail] (Javier Henderson)
Date: 10 Feb 95 10:12:27 PST
Organization: Medical Laboratory Network; Ventura, CA


I tried posting this in comp.dcom.telecom.tech but got exactly zero
responses.

I'm moving to Palo Alto, and I'd like recommendations for a cellular
service provider up there.


Thanks,

Javier Henderson (JH21)    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Since most of the readers in the know about
the topic tend to read the Digest, perhaps a few answers will be forthcoming
here for you.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #95
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa04149;
          14 Feb 95 16:34 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07218; Tue, 14 Feb 95 09:49:03 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07210; Tue, 14 Feb 95 09:49:01 CST
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 95 09:49:01 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #96

TELECOM Digest     Tue, 14 Feb 95 09:49:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 96

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    MCI Selects Nextstep to Support Friends & Family Customers (M. Solomon)
    SNET/CT to Purchase NYNEX/RI, MA Properties (Doug Reuben)
    Technology Preferences for PCS (Alex Cena)
    Wireless RF Manufacturers ([e-mail])
    Directory Assistance Call Completer (Dave Leibold)
    Northern Bidding on European Network (Dave Leibold)
    500 Numbers - Where to Find Information ([e-mail])
    Need Help Finding 500 Exchange (Mike B. Fisher)
    Mexico's AT&T USADirect No Longer Connected ([e-mail])
    Does a High Speed Serial Interface for the VME-Bus Exist? (M. Rautenberg)
    Fixed Price Embedded, Network Development (John Stockenberg)
    Puerto Rican Telecom Research Help Wanted (William Smith)
    Still Waiting For Caller ID Spec From Bellcore (Charles Copeland)

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, 14 Feb 1995 02:24:07 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: MCI Selects Nextstep to Support Friends & Family Customers
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Forwarded FYI to the Digest.

Contact:
Karen Logsdon
NeXT Computer, Inc.
415-780-3786
or
Carol Aarhus
MCI
1-800-436-9749

MCI SELECTS NEXTSTEP TO SUPPORT FRIENDS & FAMILY CUSTOMER SERVICE SYSTEMS

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. - February 7, 1995-NeXT Computer, Inc. announced
today that MCI has selected its object-oriented software, NEXTSTEP,
for the development and delivery of custom applications for MCI's New
Friends & Family program.

Introduced in January, New Friends & Family offers customers who spend
just $10 a month 25% savings on all domestic direct-dialed calls, and
50% savings to other Friends & Family customers in their Calling
Circle.

To further streamline and improve its customer service applications,
MCI has placed a multi-million dollar order for NeXT products,
including the advanced PDO (Portable Distributed Objects) and
Enterprise Object Framework, which will help advance the company's
specialized customer service stations.

"We are excited to work with a leading telecommunications innovator
like MCI," said Steven P. Jobs, Chairman and CEO of NeXT Computer,
Inc.  "MCI's speed-to-market and track record with Friends & Family,
1-800-COLLECT and Friends & Family Connections is unmatched, and we
look forward to helping them bring more advanced products like these
to market even faster.  MCI's commitment to our technology is another
step in the marketplace acceptance of object technology in general,"
Jobs added.

"We believe in NeXT's object technology, because it speeds our
development cycles, keeping us ahead of the competitive curve, and
significantly improves our time-to-market with new products and
services," said Jim Folk, Vice President of Information Technology for
MCI Consumer Markets.  "We selected NeXT technology because
NEXTSTEP/OpenStep is a powerful object-oriented development
environment that allows us to build applications in shorter timeframes
and spend more time focusing on customer needs rather than in the
lab."

MCI

MCI, headquartered in Washington, D.C., has expanded 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 revenue of more
than $13.3 billion, the company today provides a wide array of
consumer and business long distance and local services, data and video
communications, online information, electronic mail, network
management services and communications software.

NeXT Computer, Inc.

NeXT develops and markets the award-winning NEXTSTEP object-oriented
software for industry-standard computer architectures.  Customers use
NEXTSTEP's advanced object environment to rapidly develop and deploy
custom, enterprise-wide, client/server applications.  NeXT is
headquartered in Redwood City, California, and has offices in North
America, London, Paris, Munich and Tokyo.

# # # #

NeXT, the NeXT logo, OpenStep and NEXTSTEP are trademarks or
registered trademarks of NeXT Computer, Inc.  All other trademarks
mentioned belong to their respective owners.

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

From: [e-mail] (Doug Reuben)
Subject: SNET/CT to Purchase NYNEX/RI, MA Properties
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 08:29:53 EST


I just got the SNET newsletter forwarded to me, and it seems like SNET,
the "B" side cellular carrier in Connecticut, is going to purchase the
NYNEX properties in RI, Southeastern Mass, and Western Mass.

Currently, SNET (00088), the B-side carrier serves all of CT (it is the
only company to do so, or will be after its agressive expansion into
Litchfield County), as well as the Springfield, Mass area, up I-91 into
Franklin County, and all the way to the Vermont line.

Bell Atlantic/Metro Mobile, the A-side carrier, which is owned by the Mid
Atlantic B-side carrier operating in NJ, PA, DE, VA, DC, MD, DE, and part
of West Virginia (?), operates in all Connecticut counties except
Litchfield, and in Rhode Island, Southestern Mass (e.g., south of I-495),
Springfield Mass (but NOT Franklin), and the US-7/Berkshire region.

Since Bell Atlantic (BAMS) and NYNEX plan to merge their services, (which
hopefully will not drain revenues from BAMS's outstanding B-side
Mid-Atlantic service), they need to shed their properties in RI and Mass
which overlap.

In an unusual, but logical move, NYNEX will be selling off its entire
Rhode Island/Southeastern Mass system (00028), as well as it's
Berkshire/Pittsfield, MA system (a woefully inadequate system) to SNET.
That is, in EVERY market where the BAMS/Metro Mobile A-side system would
have operated against a BAMS/NYNEX system, NYNEX has opted to sell its
properties to SNET.

SNET will now have a coverage area greater than Metro Mobile's, as it
will include all of Litchfield County (which BAMS/Metro Mobile does not
have the license for, and where it can offer services which MM/McCaw is
prohibited from offering), and Franklin County Mass. It will also
include all the NYNEX-B systems where Metro Mobile currently operates.

Currently, NYNEX/MA-RI customers get toll-free calling between both
states (or at least Mass to RI does if their literature is correct). How
this will affect the current billing regime between the two states is
unclear, but normally, B-side carriers can not carry Inter-Lata traffic
without a waiver. I assume NYNEX received a waiver for this long ago; I
do not know if the waiver will allow NYNEX/MA <-> SNET/RI calling in the
same manner. (The A side does not offer toll-free MA-RI calling, so this
isn't a terribly big issue, yet it is one of the advantages a NYNEX
customer used to have over a Cell One/Boston or a Metro Mobile/RI customer.)

Additionally, with SNET's "no roam charge" program(s), as well as those of
NYNEX (and I assume shortly BAMS), Metro Mobile, always one to assert
a roam charge when they can and which currently has some of the highest
roaming rates in New England and New York, will likely be forced to lower
these rates to be more competitive with a unified and roam-charge free
B-side roaming system from Virginia to Maine.

Currently, Metro Mobile/CT customer pay from $.60 to $.99 cents per minute
to roam in NY, and MM/RI customers pay $3 day/$.99 per minute. CO/Boston
customers pay $.44 peak/$.29 off-peak (plus the $2 roam-coordinator monthly
beer charge :( ) in NY and New England, and NYNEX customers pay between
$.50 to $.59 cents, and SNET customers pay between $.60 and $.75 cents.
Metro Mobile will need to come down to match its "A" side partners as
well as it's B-side "competitors".

Anyhow, that's the news for now!


Doug Reuben  *  [e-mail]   *  (500) 442-4CID / (203) 499 - 5221
Interpage Network Services -- E-Mail/Telnet to Alpha or Numeric Pagers & Fax

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

Date: Tue, 14 Feb 95 08:53:40 EST
From: Alex Cena <[e-mail]>
Subject: Technology Preferences for PCS


On Wed, 8 Feb 1995 11:58:17 GMT Simon J Wallace <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> 1)  What's the difference between Qualcomm's IS-95 and PN-3384 the new PCS
> derivative?

One works at 800Mhz the other at 1.g Ghz.

> 2)  Where are GO communications based?  I read this morning that they plan to
> bring GSM to North America.

Go Communications is based in the Washington DC area.

> 3) GO claim to be introducing GSM as CDMA looks unlikely to roll out
> in the near future.  What do other people think?

No one technology will dominate, especially in the 10Mhz bands.  The
Federal Communications Commission will not dictate a specific
technology standard that must be used by the industry.  In fact, the
FCC has embraced 7 common air interfaces and 2 signalling protocols.
I do believe CDMA and PCS1900 will be the common air interface of
choice for the 30 Mhz licenses or the A, B & C bands, while virtually
all 7 common air interfaces will be utilized by the winners of the
10Mhz licenses or the D, E, and F bands.  In addition, I believe
winners of PCS licenses with exisiting cellular networks are likely to
lean toward IS-41 compatible technology such as upbanded versions of
IS-95 CDMA and IS-136 TDMA, while those without legacy networks will
lean toward GSM MAP compatible technology such as PCS1900. See
Technology Preference Score Card below.

CDMA service availability (1) AirTouch already has "friendly users" on
their CDMA network in San Fernando and is on target for commercial
roll-out in June followed by coverage of entire LA region be year end
(2) US West New Vector is on target for pre-commercial service in the
entire Puget Sound Area by mid-'95.  In addition to Seattle, the Puget
Sound region extends to Bellingham to the North, Olympia to the South
and the Cascade Mountain range to the East.  Thus, US West will be
available able to offer digital service virtually everywhere it can
offer analog.


TECHNOLOGY PREFERENCE SCORECARD

--------------------------Cellular---------------------------

Service Provider     Air Interface   Comments

AirTouch                 CDMA        Full Service in June
Ameritech                CDMA        Construction starts 3Q95
Bell Atlantic            TDMA        Likely to switch to CDMA
Bell South               TDMA        Under Construction
GTE                      CDMA        Phase I Austin Done; On to Phase II
McCaw                    TDMA        Commercial
NYNEX                    CDMA        Trials
Southwestern Bell        TDMA        Commercial
Sprint                   CDMA        Under Construction in Las Vegas

 -------------Personal Communication Services-----------------

Service Provider     Air Interface   Comments

North American Wireless  CDMA        AT&T / Cable & Wireless joint venture
McCaw/AT&T/Cell One      Undecided   Leaning toward IS-136 TDMA
Bell South               DCS1900
ATI, NYN, BEL & USW      Undecided   Leaning toward CDMA
Wireless Co              Undecided   Leaning toward DCS1900/Sprint, Cox, APC
                                     TCI, Comcast & other cable TV operators

Ameritech                CDMA        Leaning toward CDMA
Southwesternbell         DCS1900
Pacbell                  DCS1900     Spun off AirTouch
GTE                      Undecided   Leaning toward CDMA
OmniPoint                DS1900      Pioneer's Preference
Advanced Wireless        CDMA        Announced
PCS Primeco              CDMA        AirTouch, Bell Atlantic, NYNEX & US West

The above information reflect my personal opinions and is incomplete.
I would welcome any comments, corrections, additions, etc so I can
update my files.  Moreover, the above scorecard only reflects the
carriers' preference where they are the managing operator.  It would
be more accurate to go on a market by market basis since there's so
much "coopetition" and cross-ownership in this industry.


Regards,

Alex M. Cena, [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Wireless RF Manufacturers
Date: 14 Feb 1995 00:51:54 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA


Anybody out there know who the "good" manufacturers of RF subsystems
for cellular systems are? Assuming there is at least one good one?

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 13 Feb 95 23:12:24 -0500
Subject: Directory Assistance Call Completer
Organization: Gateway: The Super Continental - North York, Canada


[from Bell News, 6 Feb 95 - content is Bell Canada's; the service
described is not necessarily a world-first]

New service saves callers time.

A new customer service, developed by Stentor Resource Centre Inc.
(SRCI), has created another revenue generating opportunity for Bell
and the other Stentor owner companies.

Automated Directory Assistance Call Completion (ADACC) gives local
directory assistance callers the option of having their calls
automatically completed to the requested number for a 35-cent charge.

It is now available in 905, 519, 705, and 416 area codes.

This month it will be rolled out in area code 613 and in March, 807.

Says project prime Sheila Philion: "Only a portion of local directory
assistance requests are chargeable. With this value-added service,
we've provided the Stentor owner companies (SOCs) with a vehicle that
helps increase revenue potential associated with local directory
assistance."

Sheila says SRCI worked closely with Bell Sygma through every step of
the project.

Bell Sygma worked on the technical and operational requirements of the
project, ensuring departments affected by the new system made all the
necessary changes to allow for a smooth implementation.

Says Bell Sygma team leader Art Brewer, "Bell Sygma overcame
technical hurdles to get the technology delivered on time."

"What I like about it is that it hits the customer right at the
decision-making point. We know there's a strong likelihood that they
will choose to use the call completion service. We're offering them an
easier option that dialing the requested number themselves," says
Janet Garrod of Bell's Consumer Market Management.

The service has two billing options. The 'sent paid' option carries a
35-cent fee for each completed call. The 'alternative billing' plan
adds an additional 75 cents to have the call charged to a Calling
Card[tm], collect or third number.


Fidonet : Dave Leibold 1:250/730
Internet: [e-mail]
Standard-disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:  We have had that service here in the
Chicago 312/708 area for about a year. I hate it because instead of
repeating the number twice as they did before, now it is read once and
the message about 'you may have this call automatically completed at
this time' immediatly starts playing after the first recitation. You
have to listen to the spiel about getting it dialed automatically twice
before the number itself is repeated a second time in case you missed
it the first time.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Dave Leibold)
Date: 13 Feb 95 23:12:18 -0500
Subject: Northern Bidding on European Telecom Network
Organization: Gateway: The Super Continental - North York, Canada


[from Bell News - 6 Feb 95 - content is Bell Canada's]

Northern bidding on European telecom network

Northern Telecom is among a select few world leaders to be asked to
bid on a new fiber-optic network to be built later this year alongside
the tracks of Europe's main rail lines.

Northern was approached by Hermes, a joint venture of U.S.-based
Global Telesystems Group (GTS) and a consortium of 11 European railway
companies, to submit a bid for the first stage of the planned network
which will compete with the national carriers of France, Germany,
Britain, etc.

GTS is aiming to attract big international corporations which complain
that the national carriers of Europe cannot meet their needs for
"seamless" communications outside their national borders. It also
plans to become a "carriers' carrier," selling capacity to public
network operators, service providers and cellular phone companies.


Fidonet : Dave Leibold 1:250/730
Internet: [e-mail]
Standard-disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly his own.

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

Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 02:50:56 -0500
From: goober <[e-mail]>
Subject: 500 Numbers - Where to Find Information


I've been reading comp.dcom.telecom, and a 500 number sounds just like
what I've been wanting. I called a friend at MCI (US Voice and Data) but
he didn't seem to know much about them.

Where could I find more information? Is there a FAQ that contains it?
Pricing?


Thanks a lot,

ted


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You've not been reading very closely here.
500 numbers have been the topic of conversation -- including how to order
them -- for the past couple weeks at least. You can reach AT&T to order
a 500 number by calling 800-982-8480. Scan over back issues of the Digest
for the past couple weeks to get quite a few of the details before you
call for best results.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mike B. Fisher)
Subject: Need Help Finding 500 Exchange
Date: 13 Feb 1995 18:47:21 GMT
Organization: EmeraldNet


I saw mention of a master "500" exchange list, but can't find it. Is
there one on this newsgroup, or should I be looking elsewhere?

And while I'm on the subject, is there a similar list for 800
exchanges?

(Don't worry - I'm not a "retired cab driver")


Thanks,

Mike Fisher    CEO, EmeraldNet    [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You're not that fellow who called me on
the phone a couple weeks ago?  The 800 list is located in the Telecom
Archives at lcs.mit.edu in a file called 'npa.800'.  The 500 list has
not been made into a separate file yet, however you will find it in
a back issue of TELECOM Digest, in volume 14 from last year, near the
end of the year. Check the last couple dozen issues or so of 1994. It
is an incomplete list but includes quite a few exchange assignments. Now
just because the exchange is assigned does NOT mean the company is yet
offering 500 service. So far as I know, AT&T is the only company to
actually have it up and running at this time nationally.

By the way, I heard from a couple readers with information on that fellow
and I will use their notes in an issue later today.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Jose)
Subject: Mexico's AT&T USADirect No Longer Connected
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 14:24:16
Organization: Computize Inc.


I was reading about the Atlanta airport not allowing the use of 800
numbers and I thought I'd mention that the Mexico City international
airport no longer allows use of AT&T's USADirect number.

I had found one phone in the new international terminal that did but
it has since been put out of service.

What's just as bad is that the special phones allowing connections to AT&T,
MCI, Sprint, etc. have all been smashed up and made unusable.

I guess that's why Telmex was the highest earning Telco in the world a
couple of years back.

Just a little FYI ...


jose
International Suppliers Inc.
25+ experience internat'l government sales ranging from screws to aircraft.
Also specializing in outsource manufacturing of your products in Mexico.
e-mail:  [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Mathias Rautenberg)
Subject: Does a High Speed Serial Interface For the VME-Bus Exist?
Date: 14 Feb 1995 09:47:59 GMT
Organization: Universitaet der Bundeswehr Muenchen
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Mathias Rautenberg)


Hi,

In our laboratory we have a Metropolitan Area Network (MAN) with
Distributed Queue Dual Bus (DQDB, IEEE 802.6) technology.  The nodes
of the network have a High Speed Serial Interface (HSSI).  For our
experiments I'm interested in a board for the VME-bus handling the
HSSI-protocol to send data generated by a workstation to the MAN.  If
anybody hears about such a board, please let me know.


Thanks in advance,

Mathias Rautenberg
Universitaet der Bundeswehr Muenchen
Institut 3.3 fuer systemorientierte Informatik
Werner-Heisenberg-Weg 39     Phone: (+49) 089 / 6004-2254
85577 Neubiberg                Fax: (+49) 089 / 6004-3560
E-Mail: [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (John Stockenberg)
Subject: Fixed Price Embedded, Network Development
Date: 14 Feb 1995 14:32:35 GMT
Organization: Prodigy Services Company  1-800-PRODIGY


DSS is a small business whose main products are networked, realtime,
digital signal processing (DSP) hardware/software systems.

Beginning with a description of your needs, DSS can design, implement,
test and document a complete product. These efforts include specifying
the processing algorithms and GUI, selecting the hardware platform,
designing and building custom hardware and software, integrating and
testing the system, and producing end- user documentation.

Over the past ten years, DSS has designed and developed both VME and
PC based embedded, DSP systems. Nearly all of the systems have
employed multiple, distributed and/or networked processors.

Two of the systems, one on each platform, are DSS products just
entering the marketplace in two different arenas. Both offer rugged,
compact, cost-effective, easy-to-use solutions to complex real-time
problems.

We are interested in bidding on all aspects of system and product
developments. We offer either FIXED PRICE "no cure no pay" pricing, or
a time and material approach.

For products of special interest, we will consider cost sharing for an
equity position.

Contact DSS via email, call Bill DiMarco or John Stockenberg at
[phone] or fax us at [phone].

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

Date: Sun, 12 Feb 1995 22:04:59 -0800
From: [e-mail] (William Smith)
Subject: Puerto Rican Telecom Research


Dear Mr. Townson,

    I wonder if you might have a moment or two to help steer me in
the right direction on some current research I am attempting via the
Internet for a University of Maryland Graduate course.  I am doing an
analysis of the Puerto Rican telecommunications industry (both the
business and social impacts) and have been reviewing your archives as
well as doing various library searches of journals like {Telephony},
{Computer Telephony}, etc.

    Once in a while I come accross a gem or two, but for the most
part, I haven't found much in the way of raw data or infomation, nor
has there been much beyond a multitude of articles written by a
journalist named Larry Luxner.

Any help you can give, as far as areas that might be worthwhile to
research, others that you may know are doing research in the
telecommunications field, etc., would be helpful.

Thank you for your help.


Sincerely,

William (Bill) Smith
[e-mail] ; [e-mail] ; [e-mail]

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

Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 16:40:14 -0600
From: Charles Copeland <[e-mail]>
Subject: Still Waiting For Caller ID Specs From Bellcore
Organization: Texas Metronet, Internet for the Individual  214-705-2901


Has anybody out there received their copy of GR-30 Caller ID spec by
Bellcore?

I ordered mine over a month ago and it still hasn't been shipped yet.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #96
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa21759;
          15 Feb 95 18:28 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07718; Wed, 15 Feb 95 09:24:05 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA07710; Wed, 15 Feb 95 09:24:03 CST
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 95 09:24:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #97

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 15 Feb 95 09:24:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 97

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Federal Charges in Internet Rape 'Fantasy' (TELECOM Digest Editor)
    II ISDN Interface Code Now in FreeBSD-Current (Roy A. Mccrory)
    Place-A-Call Now Available From AT&T 500 Service (Ted Trost)
    Fiber Optics Information Wanted (Ronald Whisenand)
    North America's New Toll Free Code: 888 (Greg Monti)
    Book Review: "The Z-Mail Handbook" by Nelson (Rob Slade)
    Underwriters Lab (UL) Information Wanted (David Weissman)
    Messaging Software for Windows (Bob Baxter)
    Celebrity 900 Numbers (Brian Redman)
    Call Blocking: by State? (Robert Perkins)
    Digital USR Total Control HUB and AT&T System 85/Definity? (David M. Meyer)
    Scam at UC Berkeley (John Sullivan)
    VocalTec and Camelot (Steve Samler)

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, 15 Feb 95 08:38:17 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest Editor)
Subject: Federal Charges in Internet Rape 'Fantasy'


Jake Baker, 20 is a sophomore student at the University of Michigan in
Ann Arbor.  He has been charged with interstate transmission of a
threat, a federal crime which carries a penalty of five years in
prison on conviction.

Mr. Baker published three stories in December on Internet in alt.sex.stories.
One of the stories dealt with raping a female classmate after breaking into
her home. He described the woman as 'shaking with terror' while several men
beat, torture and sexually abuse her.

Baker, whose home and parents are in Boardman, Ohio also exchanged messages
with a man from Ontario in which he said, "Just thinking about it isn't
enough, I need to do it."

Federal authorities said the item published on the Internet became a threat
and not just a fictional story when Baker identified his classmate by name.
Baker was arrested last Thursday in Ann Arbor and taken to the federal
correctional center in Detroit pending trial.

Although Baker admits writing the story, he claims he meant nothing by it.
He insisted the story was fictional and not intended as a threat. His
attorney David Cahill said, "Jake is obviously sorry that he did this;
he had no idea she would ever find out."

The victim found out after University of Michigan authorities were alerted
by an alumnus of the school who regularly reads Usenet and the various
alt.sex groups. He notified the school and they in turn notified the
subject of the article Baker had written.

On Friday, Baker was taken before United States Magistrate Thomas Carlson
for a bond hearing. After reviewing the matter, Magistrate Carlson refused
to set bond. He stated that Baker must be considered very disturbed and a
danger to the community; thus he will be held in prison pending his trial.

As he was being led away, Baker insisted this was nothing more than 'a
violation of my First Amendment rights and probably several other of
my rights as well.'

To protect the subject of the threat from further harassment she was not
identified by authorities, who also asked the news media to not identify her.

It must be remembered that in the United States, our consititution requires
a presumption of innocence on the part of Jake Baker until proven otherwise
to the satisfaction of a judge or jury in a court of law.


Patrick Townson

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

From: Roy A. Mccrory <[e-mail]>
Subject: II ISDN Interface Code Now in FreeBSD-Current
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 07:01:55 MST


Pat,

Possibly this might be of interest to some of your readers, FreeBSD is
one of two net groups advancing the BSD 0.1 unix operating system for
Intel pc's and other commonly available computers.

According to Jordan K. Hubbard:

> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 17:41:16 -0800
> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <[e-mail]>
> Subject: II ISDN Interface code now in FreeBSD-current

> The README file is appended.  This is a GPL'd driver, living wholly
> under /sys/gnu and /usr/src/gnu, and is being actively supported
> (commercially) by its authors.  The FreeBSD Project does not actually
> have to resources to deal with supporting it directly at this time,
> and so I'd suggest that any ISDN enthusiasts form their own support groups
> (and test this code, PLEASE!) and/or get in touch with the authors listed
> below for further assistance.  This driver is provided ``as is'' by the
> FreeBSD Project as a public service to ISDN people.  I personally would
> like to see it grow and blossom into completely seamless ISDN support
> for FreeBSD 2.1, possibly with a good deal of clean-up work as well!
> There's a bit of stuff it installs into /usr/sbin that I'm not altogether
> that sure of.  If we're going to get this WORKING in the 2.1 timeframe,
> then ISDN people NEED TO TEST THIS DRIVER!  None of the U.S. people I know
> of has any of the cards listed, nor do we use ISDN.  I would therefor like
> to see our European members take a leadership role in this part of FreeBSD!

> I am happy to work with anyone wishing to do so, but you will have to do
> it SOON.  The 2.1 cut-off date is just over a month away!  This means that
> if you're interesting in ISDN and FreeBSD, the time to start working on
> this is RIGHT NOW.  Not next week, and certainly not next month.  By then,
> it will probably already be too late for 2.1!

>         II ISDN Interface

> The ii packet is an ISDN interface for FreeBSD 1.x and FreeBSD 2.0.
> This is a first release. It is an idea. It will - hopefully - change a lot.
> It supports the EDSS1 and the 1TR6 ISDN interfaces.
> EDSS1 is the "Euro-ISDN", 1TR6 is the soon obsolete german ISDN Interface.

> Copyright: Its GNU Copyright see the File COPYRIGHT.

> It contains a set of driver's:

> Low level Drivers for Dr. Neuhaus NICCY 3008, 3009 and 5000 Cards.
> An intermediate level isdn driver.
> Some high level drivers for ip, tty, and telephone answering.

> The ip driver is rather stable. It is used to connect to the Internet.
> The tty driver is completely experimental. There are a few of them, as
> with every version of *BSD there is a new tty interface.
> The telephone answering is quite stable.

> Some support programs:
> Daemons to handle dialing and answering.
> Programs to load the intelligent cards.
> Debugging help.
> Programs to listen to your answering machine with soundblaster.

> What can you do with it:
> You may connect to the Internet through TCP/IP and a service provider
> supporting PPP or SLIP through ISDN.

> You may build up your proper ISDN TCP/IP network.

> You may use the tty interface to dial in or out.

> You may have the Unix System answering your telephone.

> The packet here includes only sources. It will compile with FreeBSD 1.x,
> FreeBSD 2.1. and an old version of NetBSD 0.9,

> Restrictions:
> Only one interface card ( with 2 B-channels ) is supported.

> In work:
> Low level driver for teles S0/NICCY 1000. A prototype is expected to be
> distributed around easter 95. Will not include X75 B-Channel support
> nor any Level-3 Protocols for the B-Channels.
> A complete Implementation of ip (PPP, VJ). (Might come with teles stuff)
> Better error handling specially for the tty driver.
> A real telephone answering machine and more telephone support.
> FAX support.

> Porting the system to Unix System V and SCO.
> These versions will be commercial products.

> Todo:
> Documentation and a lot other stuff.

> Rules:
> We want the help of as many people as possible to develop the packet.
> But if you develop something inside the packet or on top of the packet
> you have to put the sources to the public domain or to GNU copyright. If
> you distribute a binary packet on base of these sources you have to give
> complete sources to your customer, the Internet community and us.

> We charge for support. We want to be payed if you need support. We earn our
> living as consultants. We want to develop the packet.

> If you are a company or a service provider and want to use or distribute
> the packet please contact one of us. We want and need your support.

> Binaries and Support:
> This distribution includes sources only. You will get no free support.
> If you want binaries and support contact:
> [e-mail]
> Juergen Krause, Buchenstr. 8, D-66497 Contwig/Stambach, Germany
> [phone]
> [phone] (fax)

> Acknowledgment:
> Many thanks to the people at Dr. Neuhaus, Hamburg for their support.
> Specially Klaus Muehle, Stefan Nerke and Daniel Piper.

> Dietmar Friede, Las Hayas, E-38870 Valle Gran Rey, Spain
> [e-mail]
> [phone] (Tel./Fax) (9 to 16 WET at working days)

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

Roy A.& <[e-mail]> URL http://192.149.217.20/

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

Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 17:03:28 PST
From: Ted Trost, N1RDQ <[e-mail]>
Subject: Place-A-Call Now Available From AT&T 500 Service


AT&T is now making its promised "Place-A-Call" Service available.

Quote from post card begins here:

*Now you can use your 500 Number to call almost anywhere.*

Dear AT&T True Connections(tm) Subscriber,

Good news! As promised, we've upgraded the Place-A-Call feature of
your True Connections service.  Now you can use it to place calls to
any direct-dial phone number, (Pending tarriff effectiveness) in
addition to your home number.

With True Connections Place-A-Call, you can make calls from almost any
touch-tone phone.  Just dial your 500 number, enter your master PIN
and follow directions.  The rate for using this feature is $.95
non-peak/$1.05 peak for the first minute and $.15/$.25 for each
subsequent minute, only for state-to-state calls. (Calling prices
within a state may vary.)  When making several calls at once, press
"*R" between calls to return back to the menu.

Thanks once again for ... [GRATITUDE DELETED]

END OF QUOTED MATERIAL


Ted Trost, N1RDQ * [e-mail] * C-Serve:71175,1043



[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Ah, but it is *not* available *anywhere*
yet. That postcard was *mailed out in error*, and yes, I got one also
in the mail on Monday. I immediatly tried the new service, and when I
was unable to find it anywhere on the menu, I bailed out with *0 to
the business office where I was told, 'we are sorry, but that feature
is not available yet and won't be for awhile ...'. It seems someone
got over-eager and mailed out all the postcards which had been printed
up and were being held until the proper time. Talk about a screw-up!
I don't know what they will do now; maybe they wil try and rush that
new feature into service as soon as possible under the circumstances.  PAT]

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

From: Ronald Whisenand <[e-mail]>
Subject: Fiber Optics Information Wanted
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 19:28:22 PST
Organization: CallAmerica, San Luis Obispo CA USA


Hi, my name is Jonathan and I am in the sixth grade.  I have a report
on fiber optics and was wondering if any could send me info by E-mail.


Thanks,

Jonathan


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Jonathan, I hope some of our experienced
and well-versed readers on this topic will be in correspondence with
you over the next couple days, telling you everything you wanted to know
and more about fiber optics.    PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 22:43:32 EST
From: Greg Monti <[e-mail]>
Subject: North America's New Toll Free Code: 888


The newsletter {Communications Daily} reported a few days ago that the
Industry Numbering Committee (INC), a part of the Alliance for
Telecommunications Industry Solutions, would be meeting in Fort
Lauderdale on March 3.  On the agenda, assigning a second toll free
code, 888.

The article notes that the current 800 toll free code contains eight
million numbers, of which "more than five million" are in use.  New 800
numbers are being assigned at the rate of 30,000 per week (three new
800 numbers per minute) and will exhaust in the first quarter of 1996.


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

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

Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 15:58:11 EST
From: Rob Slade <[e-mail]>
Subject: Book Review: "The Z-Mail Handbook" by Nelson


BKZMAILH.REV   950105

"The Z-Mail Handbook", Nelson, 1991, 0-937175-76-5
%A   Hanna Nelson
%C   103 Morris Street, Suite A, Sebastopol, CA   95472
%D   1991
%G   0-937175-76-5
%I   O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.
%O   800-998-9938 707-829-0515 fax: [phone] [e-mail] or [e-mail]
%P   434
%T   "The Z-Mail Handbook"

This is complete documentation for the Z-mail mail user interface for
UNIX.  It covers the command line, full screen and X displays and
commands.  In addition, there are tips and shortcuts, as well as
chapters on customization, scripts, and macros.

The material is clear and fully explained.  Tips throughout the book
are identified by an icon.  More technical sections of the book are
written in a more technical manner.


copyright Robert M. Slade, 1995   BKZMAILH.RVW   950105. Distibution
permitted in TELECOM Digest and associated publiations.


Vancouver      [e-mail]
Institute for  [e-mail]
Research into  [e-mail]
User           [e-mail]
Security       Canada V7K 2G6

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

From: [e-mail] (WiseGuy)
Subject: Underwriters Lab (UL) Information Wanted
Date: 14 Feb 1995 13:23 EST
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA


I'm looking for contact information for Underwriters Laboratories.  I
found UL.COM, but there doesn't seem to be any on-line information.
Does anyone have a central phone number?

Any info is greatly appreciated.


David Weissman - Corporate Networking  [e-mail]
AlliedSignal Technical Services Corp.    [phone]
One Bendix Road,  Information Systems    [phone] - FAX
Columbia, Maryland         21045-1897

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

Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 13:23:37 EST
From: Bob Baxter <[e-mail]>
Subject: Messaging software for Windows


Hi,

My company is looking for some type of message retrieval software that
works under Windows 3.1 and runs under Novell v3.12.  The primary
users would be two receptionists at our switchboard.  Ideally, a call
would come in, the receptionist would take down the message, and file
it in the software.  Later, when someone calls in to check their
messages, the receptionist would simply call their name up and read
the listing.

Ideally, the software should also have report capabilities, i.e. print
out all unanswered calls, number of callbacks, etc.  I have had
absolutely zero luck in locating such a package.  Any help would be
appreciated.


Virtually yours,    [e-mail]

Bob Baxter        [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Brian Redman)
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 16:53:12 -0500
Subject: Celebrity 900 Numbers Wanted


Does anyone have a pointer to a list of 900 numbers associated with
"celebrities"?

brian redman - [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Robert Perkins)
Subject: Call Blocking: by State?
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 22:36:23 GMT


How can I tell if my call to another state is being blocked?

The relative in the other state is still there, but his phone number
gets the message that the line has been disconnected, and not further
information is available.  I doubt that he wants to block my calls.

Calling "Information" reveals that the name is not listed.  But I
know from others that he's still there.

Question: can call blocking be limited to one or more specific numbers? From
a specific area code? From a specific state?

Thanks for the information.


Bob Perkins   [e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: If there were unusual or esoteric kinds
of special blocking in place then you would not get a recorded announcement
that the number was disconnected. Yes, there are certain kinds of special
blocks available. But if, for example, he was using Call Screening to
specifically avoid your call, then the announcement would say 'is not
taking calls at this time'. If he was blocking calls with blocked caller-id,
(should you be doing that), then a recording would so indicate. I think it
may be something you have not thought about: he may have had his number
changed for whatever reason, and specifically had no referral given to
it by people calling the old number. If the new number is non-published,
then he would not be shown at that address, regardless of what you know
or have found out from others, etc.  Have you thought about that?   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (David M. Meyer 503/346-1747)
Subject: Digital USR Total Control HUB and AT&T System 85/Definity?
Date: 14 Feb 1995 22:58:12 GMT
Organization: University Network Services, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR


Here at the UO, all of our phone service goes through a AT&T System
85/Definity PBX. I'm wondering if anyone has any experience with the
USR Digital (i.e., Dual T1) Total Control HUB and this switch. In
scenario we're looking at, we'd get the T1's from the PBX, not
directly from our LEC.


Thanks,

David M. Meyer                  Voice:     [phone]
Senior Network Engineer         Pager:     [phone]
Office of University Computing  Cellular:  [phone]
Computing Center                FAX:       [phone]
University of Oregon            Internet:  [e-mail]
1225 Kincaid                    Eugene, OR 97403

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

Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 13:11:50 -0600
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Scam at UC Berkeley


This message was mailed around the Berkeley campus:

RE:  Telephone Fraud

If you receive a phone call from someone identifying themselves as an
AT&T technician checking on a telephone line problem, and asking you
to transfer the call to a designated number and put it on hold so they
can repair the problem remotely, DO NOT do so.  This caller is NOT
legitimate, and following his/her instructions can result in large
unauthorized long distance charges against your telephone number.

There have been multiple reports to Telecommunications repair today of
someone calling the campus with the above request.  If you are called
 - refuse and hang up.


Judy Roberts
Telecommunications Customer Relations Coordinator


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This is an old gag that goes around all
the time. Someone is always falling for it. Needless to say when you
answer your phone, don't feel you have to do whatever the person on the
other end of the line says. Above all, don't go transferring calls all
over the place without some thought about what's going on.    PAT]

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

Date: Tue, 14 Feb 1995 17:12:38 EST
From: Steve Samler <[e-mail]>
Subject: VocalTec and Camelot


Here's some info from their press release:

demo at ftp.vocaltec.com
web: http://www.vocaltec.com

e-mail [e-mail]

There was another product announced yesterday as well:

Camelot Corporation
Dallas    214 733 3005

Their product will be available in the second quarter.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #97
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa29079;
          16 Feb 95 4:40 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA15948; Wed, 15 Feb 95 23:39:06 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA15941; Wed, 15 Feb 95 23:39:03 CST
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 95 23:39:03 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #98

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 15 Feb 95 23:39:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 98

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Post Local Transport Restructure Strategies for Carriers (Jerry Harder)
    In Support of anon.penet.fi (Jonathan D. Loo)
    Phones in Jail (Wm. Randolph Franklin)
    BA Files Waiver to Prevent Higher ISDN Costs (Eric C. Carlson)
    Call Accounting/Telemanagement Software (Steve Morrow)
    GETS - The Government Emergency Telecommunications Service? (Rich Boswell)
    Autodialing PIC Codes on NOrthern Telcom Option 71 (Mark Fletcher)
    Fax Modems and Voice Lines (Randall C. Poe)
    Laws For Cell Phone Sales in CA (B_Phlat)
    Wholesale Debit Card Providers (Bill Vanvliet)

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: 15 Feb 95 20:22:23 EST
From: rta <[e-mail]>
Subject: Post Local Transport Restructure Strategies for Carriers


Post Local Transport Restructure (LTR) Strategies for Regional Facility Based
Carriers and Resellers

LTR raises a number of strategic issues for regional facility based
carriers, national facility based carriers, and resellers. Under the
MFJ, LECs were compelled to sell access, particularly switched access,
to all carriers at the same rates. Since 1994, LECs can legally offer
discounts and equivalent arrangements that reflect the underlying
economies of access service provisioning. The net effect has been to
favor AT&T with its economies of scale and disadvantage other carriers
and resellers.

How can regional facility based carriers and resellers overcome this cost
disadvantage?

1. Develop and exploit economies of scale where possible.

2. Where these cannot be developed, use other carriers and competitive
access providers who act as access aggregators to at least partially
achieve economies of scale.

If these strategies are not successful in bringing access costs down
to a reasonable level, switched based resellers in particular, must
determine if their approach to their marketplace is competitively
viable. If it is not, then the firms must determine if a migration to
switchless resale or service specialization are appropriate responses.

Before the firm can choose the appropriate strategy or mix of
strategies, it must understand its current and projected traffic
patterns. The firm should construct a current and projected traffic
matrix for all US end offices and international termination areas.
Using the LEC tariffs and projected network backbone costs, the firm
should identify for US end offices where direct transport makes
economic sense given the current LEC tariffs. Obviously many end
offices will have such a small amount to traffic that they can be
assumed to be served by common transport at this stage of the
analysis. This analysis yields a baseline cost against which to
compare alternatives as well as identifying those end offices and
LATAs where the firm could achieve economies of scale.

The next step in the analysis is to identify ways to exploit the
identified economies of scale and to shift marginal end offices onto
direct transport through increased traffic. The firm can increase
traffic in a particular end office in two ways.

1a. Increase the amount of traffic that its customer base generates at
the end office.

The firm can target through marketing efforts, customers who generate
substantial amounts of traffic at the end offices and can offer
discounts, that is share the economies of scale for those identified
end offices, with customers. Many firms may be unable to realize
economies of scale with this strategy.

1b. Make arrangements with other firms who cannot achieve economies of
scale at specific end offices to carry their traffic.

In many cases, part of the arrangement would be to offer to the other
firm traffic to their high volume end offices. For example, a
Northeastern based regional carrier or switch based reseller would
want to partner with a Southeastern based regional carrier or
reseller. The two firms would swap traffic so that the Northeastern
based firm would originate and terminate Atlanta traffic through the
Southeastern firm. The Southeastern firm would originate and terminate
New York City traffic through the Northeastern firm.  These
arrangements would increase the opportunities for both firms to
achieve economies of scale. The key is to identify good traffic
matches and to have available cost effective connectivity between the
two firms.

The second strategic approach is to use access aggregators. ICG, MFS,
and TCG, among others, offer alternative arrangements to the LECs for
access in selected areas. They may replace the access tandems or offer
an alternative to common and /or direct transport. In either case,
they offer a cost reduction compared to the LEC for selected LATAs
and/or end offices. This approach can be supplemented by the
traditional use of WATS type services for termination coverage of
areas with small amounts of traffic.

While I have concentrated on the US, similar arrangements should be
worked out where regulations permit for international traffic. US
firms may find that partnering with a Canadian counterpart would
enable both firms to lower overall access costs in their respective
countries. Two or more US firms could split the cost of a private line
group where regulations allow and the cost reduction would be
attractive.

While both strategies appear to be attractive, only the first,
building economies of scale in particular end offices and LATAs, will
generate sustainable cost differentiation. The second strategy of
using aggregators is open to all carriers and depends primarily on
access to cheap long haul bandwidth and negotiating skills. As the
firm increases the total traffic at a particular end office, it
becomes a more attractive partner to other firms. This form of
partnering may well create opportunities for additional business
relationships, particularly since an exchange of traffic would be
involved.


Jerry Harder     Renaissance Telecommunications Associates
Voice 615-231-6126       Fax [phone]

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

From: Jonathan D Loo <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 19:32:03 -0500
Subject: In support of anon.penet.fi


     Lately there has been an uproar over the anonymous e-mail and
Usenet posting service, anon.penet.fi.  Let me offer a few thoughts on
this subject.

     Consider a company that provides communications services to people.
It allows them to send and receive messages -- anonymously -- to each
other.  Some people use it to socialize.  Some people use it to conduct
business.  Some people use it to talk about profound subjects; others
use it to discuss things that are not profound.  Some use it to help
others; others use it to receive help for their problems.  And some
users abuse it and use it to harass people or to send child pornography.
Should we demand that the company go out of business?  Or rather,
should we complain to the company itself when abuse happens?

     Well, there already is such a company.  It is your local
telephone company.  Your post-office also does this.

     Yes, you can use the phone company anonymously -- just call from
a pay phone.  And you can use the post office anonymously, by not
using a return address.

     Anon.penet.fi is like both the phone company and the post office.
It is a common carrier which carries communications without examining
the content of each message -- indeed, we would be very unhappy if the
phone company listened to our phone calls, or the post office opened
our letters, to determine the morality of the content of our
communications.  It doesn't snoop on us -- neither do Bell Atlantic or
the United States Postal Service.  And some users use anon.penet.fi
for immoral purposes -- just as some people use Bell Atlantic for
immoral purposes, and some people use the United States Postal Service
for immoral purposes.  That doesn't mean that we should eliminate Bell
Atlantic or the postal service.  Most people would not even call for
the elimination of pay phones or delivery of mail without return
addresses.

     Anon.penet.fi is also like the phone company service, Per Call Number
Blocking.  In some areas the phone company offers a service called Caller-ID.
For readers unfamiliar with Caller-ID, let me just tell you that it tells
people who's calling them.  Caller-ID is similar to the return address on
an envelope, or the From: header of a mail message.  The phone company in
many areas also allows people to press *67 or dial 1167 to suppress the
caller-ID, so that their telephone number won't appear on the recipient's
caller-ID display; this is called Per Call Number Blocking.  It serves
the same purpose as anon.penet.fi.  Both of them suppress the identification
information in a message.  Yet, the government in some states *mandates*
that Per Call Number Blocking be available.  Apparently a lot of people
feel that there is a privacy issue, and so they want the service.
Anon.penet.fi also is like sending mail without a return address.  Now
there isn't, to the best of my knowledge, a large movement to prohibit
delivery of mail without return addresses, is there?

     There is a possible compromise.  The owner of anon.penet.fi
indicates that he does not allow posting to all newsgroups.  He could
further restrict posting so that people would only post to legitimate
newsgroups, much as the telephone company might cut of the phone
service of a company that repeatedly uses its phone service for
illegal purposes.  And if you ever receive harassing mail through
anon.penet.fi, just send mail to [e-mail], just as you would call
the telephone company if people made harassing phone calls.

     Anon.penet.fi is a useful service.  It is available to many
people with diverse needs.  Sometimes people need to communicate
anonymously, and anon.penet.fi allows people to do just that.  Would
you really want to eliminate the phone company or the postal service?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: There are some fundamental differences between
telco, postal and anonymous email services. Your analogies are not quite
correct. In the case of postal and telco, we do not supply them with our
identity then ask them to keep it secret. We simply present the traffic in
secret, using the letter with no return address or the call from the pay
phone. In other words, when telco or postal note the anonymous nature of
the traffic, the traffic is *already in their network*, and the transport
already paid for by virture of the stamp on the envelope or the coin which
was deposited in the collection box. They've no real choice but to handle
the traffic at that point. The difference where anonymous remailers is
concerned -- and I was one going back to the 'olden days' when people wrote
letters on actual paper with actual pens -- is the traffic is considered
delivered when it reaches the remail agent; he in turn then promises to
put the traffic back out again, and protect your identity in the process.
He has the option of doing that or not doing it; he can refuse your traffic
if he does not want to handle it anonymously. Unlike the corner postal box
where you drop things, or the payphone on the corner, the sole purpose of
a remailer is to provide anomynity. Therein are some differences.

Now, should we support a service whose purpose is merely to feed anonymous
traffic into a network?  *As long as he obeys the law and plays by the
rules, yes.*  The same thing could be said about 900-STOPPER, that attorney
(I think in California) who allows and even encourages anonymous telephone
calls through his switch. The rules where 'conventional' or 'traditional'
traffic are concerned have always said you are ultimatly responsible for
the uses made of your instruments. The rules have said if you deposit
something in the United States mails -- or cause someone else to deposit
something in the mail; i.e. you telephone a company fraudulently and they
send you a credit card in the mail, you *caused them* to use the mail --
for the purpose of committing fraud, then you are criminally liable. It
makes no difference if you simply have an agency relationship or not as
long as you knew or should have known the uses being made of your service.

Now, suppose I send you a pound of cocaine in the mail. I put it in the
mailbox, a half dozen postal workers handle the package and you accept it
when it arrives. I get caught and you get caught. We both get punished.
Why don't the six postal workers in the middle -- since they were also in
possession of an illegal substance -- get punished? The answer is quite
simply, they had no way of knowing what they were handling. People who have
no way of knowing what they are handling are called 'common carriers'.
The postal service is a common carrier, as is telco, Federal Express and
similar. They have to take all business which comes their way, and it
is obvious from the volume of business they receive they would have no
knowledge of the illegality or impropriety of any one segment of that
traffic. In exchange, the trade off is that common carriers have to keep
records of their traffic. The postal service is an exception to this, and
that could be a story in itself, but the general rule is, common carriers
have to retain, for a reasonable period of time records of their inbound
and outbound, to be produced on request as part of an investigation, etc.

The attorney who runs 900-STOPPER keeps those records; I don't care what
he claims to the contrary. You think for a minute he is about to go to the
penitentiary for your sins?  Now he may -- probably does -- as a matter of
course make those records very hard to obtain; you probably have to sue him
and go through lots of hassles. In effect, his service provides a buffer
of privacy for his clients, but bear in mind, there is recourse when it
gets to that point if it ever does.

When I operated my (old fashioned paper and pen, letter writing) remail
service back in the 1970's, I required everyone who wanted to receive mail
via my office to fill out postal form 1534 (authorization to deliver mail to
an agent). And I had all kinds of shysters and con artists willing to pay
me money each month to use my address as a mail drop. I used to get all
these guys who wanted to advertise in (or answer ads in) 'adult magazines'.
They never admitted as such to me; it was always this rap about how they
were traveling salesmen needing a reliable place to have their mail held.
What they meant was they did not want those 'swinger club' magazines going
to their house in the mail where their wife would see it. And of course
there were privacy considerations; they did not want to advertise in a
publication like that giving their own street address. They'd rather the
creeps and perverts showed up at my office door instead. That's cool, just
pay me $$, and fill out this form for the post office please. I also had
customers who only used me for outbound mail; they saw some benefit in
having a Chicago postal cancellation on their letter instead of one from
wherever they really were located. ("he must be in Chicago, I got a letter
he sent me from there just last week, but he did not give me an address
to write back to him ..."). I ran ads in {The National Enquirer}, {The
World Weekly News} and other papers. A simple two line ad which said
'Remails from Chicago, $1 each, PO Box xxxx, Chicago, IL 60690'.  People
who knew what it meant knew what it meant ... those who didn't went
on to read some other ads. Every day at the post office I would stand
at the counter and open the mail. The dollar bills would go in my pocket
and the sealed envelope addressed elsewhere which had been stuffed inside
a larger envelope and sent to me went in the nearby mailbox. That simple.
But for those who used my address as their drop, they had to sign a form
sent to the Post Office Department of Mailing Requirements.

When the Postal Inspectors would come to see me -- once a month or so
on average, I would pull out my copy of the 1534 form for the client in
particular, photocopy it for them and they'd be on their way after
thanking me. Then I would send my client a note saying there had been a
post office inquiry into his activities. I stayed out of it. The Postal
Inspectors love doing doing business with the remail agents because
there is none of the hassle of bothering with search warrants and all
that. Its like the Federal Bureau of Investigation and that STOPPER
attorney guy. They wish there were more of him and fewer telcos to
have to deal with. The telcos come up with all the foolishness of
requiring a subpoena and a warrant. He and the FBI guys probably go to
the coffee shop downstairs and they buy his lunch while he talks about
everything he knows.

Now here comes the connection to anon.penet.fi.  First of all, for me
personally, I would not trust them. That's just me. But then, I know
a little about sendmail and SMTP (sendmail transfer protocol) and how
to make up my own fraudulent 'From ' lines <grin> if I were so disposed,
so I may be prejudiced. They may be perfectly honest for all I know, and
let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say they are. I have no
reason to think otherwise, but I would still be very reluctant to originate
some of the stuff I have seen come from there. Its another way of saying
that anyone who thinks that the private one-on-one chat areas of America
OnLine and Compuserve are *really* private -- that the midnight shift
operator dudes in the machine room are not sitting there getting a few
thrills of their own from time to time from what they read on their tubes --
is a fool.  In any 'anonymous' networking, there are people who know what
is going on, what was said and who said it, etc. So use any of those
services at your own risk; anon.penet.fi might be perfectly fine, but you
need to know the agent involved and trust him to throw up a few barricades
as needed to make it harder -- its never impossible -- for you to be found
out.

Where the hangup comes is the agent can't have it both ways: either he is
(1) responsible for his traffic and bears the consequences of it or (2) he
is not responsible; is a common carrier and has records available for others
to examine. If (2) does not apply, then go back to (1).  <grin> ... Because
by definition .fi is not in the USA, it gets a little harder to track things
down, but they can be tracked down. If enough sites in the USA are pressured
by their university or corporate owners or whatever to reject traffic from
anon.penet.fi, then you will see some changes. I'd say let him and his
clients do their thing; if no one will *receive* their mail or news, it will
soon become pointless for them to *send* it. And sendmail can be hacked to
refuse mail from a given site or send it straight to /dev/null, the same as
telephone calls from blocked id's can be refused and mail in your box with
no return address can be tossed out unopened or handed back to the carrier
marked 'refused'.      PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)
Subject: Phones in Jail
Date: 15 Feb 1995 23:19:39 GMT
Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Wm. Randolph U Franklin)


Today's {Wall Street Journal} has a long page one story on phones in
jail.  It's a $1G business.  They say that there are 1M prisoners, so
that makes an average of $1K/yr/inmate!

Although they avoided it in the past, the big three are getting in
since the profits are so big.  The kickbacks, err commissions, to the
jailers can be in the $millions.  To pay for them, the phone companies
may surcharge the calls even above the usual operator-assisted collect
call rates.

To lessen fraud, there may be lists of allowable or disallable numbers
for calling.  To give every prisoner a chance to call, the phone may
disconnect after 15 minutes.  (So why don't they just install more
phones since the average phone in jail does $15K/yr?)

Everything is monitored, from the numbers called by each inmate to
recording the calls themselves.

To get around the list of allowed numbers, some inmates call friends
who forward the call to a disallowed number.  AT&T tries to detect and
block that.

A collect call is automatically announced with fact that it's from a
prison, the inmate's name and the prison name before the recipient has
to decide whether to accept it.

There was no mention of whether any inmates are running PPP or SLIP,
or whether any inmates have cellular phones. :-)

If these monopolies drive up the cost of calling much more, I foresee
a market for illegal phone lines or cellular phones, supplied by the
guards like they might supply any other contraband.  Of course, it's a
change from decades ago, when inmates were totally walled off from the
world.


Wm. Randolph Franklin,  [e-mail], [phone];  Fax: -6261
ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: AT&T was staying out of the corrections
industry business for quite a while because of the high rate of fraud.
According to the WSJ article quoted, they are now rethinking their position
on this. Corrections is a big market; lots of money to be made in all sorts
of angles there.

When I was in 6th grade at Lincoln Elementary School, a policeman known
as Officer Friendly came to our class. The purpose of his visit was to
tell us that he would like nothing better than to see the day come when
there was no need for police officers anywhere, because everyone obeyed
the law, as he was anticipating we would do. At the time, there were about
nine hundred inmates in Cook County Jail, and about four hundred employees
in the Cook County Sheriff's Department. (Now there are more than nine
*thousand* inmates and about seven *thousand* employees of the Sheriff and
the Circuit Court.) I held up my hand to ask a question, and was called
on. I said, "There are four hundred employees of the Sheriff! Are you gonna
stand there and say they all want to be put of out of work and on unemploy-
ment?"  He gave me the funniest look ... The sad fact is there are lots of
people in the corrections industry with a strong vested interest in keeping
the status quo. You don't *really* think they want the extremely high rate
of violent crime in the USA to drop anytime soon do you? You don't *really*
think they want to end the war on drugs do you?

Yes, things have changed since long ago when inmates were totally out of
society. Aside from no more James Cagney prison movies (inmates bang their
cups on the table and start a riot; Cagney lays dying and makes his final
confession to the Catholic priest (Father O'Something; what actor was that?)
 ... even the prisons don't look like prisons any more. Downtown with a
friend one day a few years ago, we have lunch on the corner of Van Buren
and Clark Street; she observes this nice building across the street -- a big
highrise which looks like a modern office building, or perhaps a very nice
apartment complex. After lunch, I had a couple quick phone calls to make
and walk across the street, into the lobby of the building and use the
payphone. She comes with me and stands there in the nicely furnished lobby.
A receptionist is there at a desk; potted plants and sofas are around. I
make my phone calls and we leave. On the way out she comments what a nice
place it is; is it the corporate headquarters for some large company?

No, I tell her ... its a federal prison. Haven't you ever been in one
before?  Her eyes grow big like saucers. Across the street is a Dunkin
Doughnuts place; a bunch of guys sitting in there drinking coffee and
passing time. They are prisoners who are let out during the day for whatever
reason waiting until the last possible minute before they are due to go
back up the street and into the prison and their dormitory for the night.
I'm not saying I would like to live in one, but they are much different
 -- at the federal level at least -- than the old days.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 14:51:02 EST
From: Eric C. Carlson <[e-mail]>
Reply-To: Eric C. Carlson <[e-mail]>
Subject: BA Files Waiver to Prevent Higher ISDN Costs


Forwarded to the Digest FYI.  (No, that's not 'For Your Insomnia'   PAT]

    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
  Date: Wed, 15 Feb 95 13:23:21 GMT
  From: Bell Atlantic <[e-mail]>
  To: Multiple recipients of list <[e-mail]>
  Subject: BA Files Waiver to Prevent Higher ISDN Costs


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                         CONTACT:
February 13, 1995                         Michel Daley, [phone]


      Bell Atlantic Files Waiver to Prevent ISDN Costs From
                         Skyrocketing


WASHINGTON, D.C.--In an effort to keep the Information Superhighway
growing,  Bell Atlantic late Friday asked the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) to set aside an order that would increase Integrated
Services Digital Network (ISDN) prices dramatically.

Bell Atlantic said it is ready to roll out ISDN service for residential
customers, but the recent FCC ruling will increase the cost of the
service 20 to 30 percent.  Without a waiver, the company said, 60% of
the potential ISDN consumer market will disappear.  ISDN uses a single
multi-channel, digital line to deliver voice, data and video services
simultaneously.

"We are shocked the FCC mandated a new price structure," said Edward D.
Young, III, vice president and associate general counsel for Bell
Atlantic.  "We predict that, unless the commission adopts new rules:

*     not only will consumer demand for ISDN services drop,  but also
*     new business demand will be reduced up to 35%, and
*     up to 25% of existing users--who have already made a substantial
      investment in ISDN equipment--will cancel their service.

"The Commission's existing rules are not designed for services like
ISDN," Young said.  "Its ruling will kill the stampede to a valuable
new service.  ISDN can provide consumers with a high-speed, digital
on-ramp to the Internet and to an array of information services."


On Jan. 11, the FCC refused to allow NYNEX to restructure ISDN
subscriber line charges (SLCs) to be more competitive with other
carriers.  The SLC is federally mandated and is set annually.  The SLC
is used to subsidize local telephone network costs, which helps to keep
basic residential telephone service affordable.  The Commission ruled
that separate SLCs should be billed for each ISDN channel; ISDN lines
have up to 24 channels.

Several other carriers are billing SLCs per ISDN line, not channel.
SLC amounts vary by jurisdiction, but are currently as high as $6.00
per line within Bell Atlantic's region.  Bell Atlantic is a world
leader in providing ISDN technology with over 91,400 ISDN lines in
service.  All common carriers must now comply with the FCC's rule
interpretation in the NYNEX case unless they obtain a waiver.

Bell Atlantic Corporation, based in Philadelphia, is the parent of
companies which provide a full array of local exchange telecommunications
services in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia,
West Virginia and Washington, D.C.  The corporation is at the
forefront of developing a variety of new products, including video,
entertainment and information services.

Bell Atlantic also 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.  In addition, Bell Atlantic is the parent of one
of the nation's largest cellular carriers and has an ownership
position in cellular properties internationally, including Grupo
Iusacell, S.A.  de C.V., Mexico's largest independent cellular
company.

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Morrow)
Subject: Call Accounting/Telemanagement Software
Date: 16 Feb 1995 01:22:48 GMT
Organization: University of South Florida


Greetings all,

I just wanted to solicit some opinions, comments, or words-of-wisdom
about any call accounting or telemanagement software that you may be
using or know of.

We are currently using Orbitel Call Accounting from Teltronics, as well
as "Telecommunications Information Management Systems" (TIMS) from LSU.
Both are Informix-based systems which we are running under AIX 3.2.5 and
Informix SE 5.0 on an RS/6000.

We are outgrowing both rapidly, and are interested in systems that
are more robust and current.  Ideally, we would like to see something
Informix (or even Oracle) based, where at a minimum, the front-end apps
and reports are written in the RDBMS's tools and can be customized for
our needs, and phone/extension/authcode data are stored in tables.  It
would be nice to see something which polls raw call data into tables
also.

Does this seem realistic?  We've been approached by Matsch Systems
(MicroFocus-based) and Sunbelt Business Computers (SunDial, Informix-
based).  Both _appear_ to offer nice packages, but these are only two
of a 160 companies that provide telemanagement software (according to
a vendor list I just got a hold of)!

Any information would be appreciated!


Thanks,

Steve Morrow, Sr. Programmer/Analyst
University of South Florida
Internet: [e-mail]
Voice   : [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (BOSWELL, RICHARD S)
Subject: GETS - The Government Emergency Telecommunications Service?
Date: 15 Feb 1995 15:25 CDT
Organization: Texas A&M University OpenVMScluster


Has anyone ever heard of "GETS"?  What kind of priority service do
they offer; who is offering it?


Thanks in advance,

sid


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Oh Sid, some people are going to accuse
me of making up your letter and using it here since I have talked about
this before and gotten so little in the way of a straight answer from
anyone.  Its that 'area code 710' thing again ... you know, the area
code that no one can dial from their phone except certain highly placed
management level government employees, mostly in the Defense Department.
If you or I dial 1-710 or 0-710 our call gets intercepted. Its highly
classified, I understand. When a reader here a few years ago with a
friend at Defense read about 710 in this Digest, he made an inquiry of
his friend who was astounded that anyone in the public knew about it
at all ... that's a top secret matter, he exclaimed.  Since then my
inquiries have gone unanswered. No one in the government wants to talk
about area code 710 it seems. I hope they don't come and take you away
during the night, Sid, as the Man Who Knew Too Much.  <g> PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 13:33:00 -0800
From: [e-mail] (Mark Fletcher)
Subject: Autodialing PIC Codes on NOrthern Telcom Option 71


Can any one tell me if the Nothern Telcom Meridian Option 71 with
Release 19 software is capable of autodialing PIC codes. I dont' want
to add a bunch of dialers to the PBX Room, but I want to utilize our
.11 cent per minute with 6 second billing for our INTRAlata calls.
this will get us away from the RBOC's monthly billing of about $5k,
and 75% of those calls were billed at 1 minute.

Thanks as usual for any help!


Mark Fletcher  -=+=-  The Great Gorge Resort
Vernon, New Jersey    [phone] Ext.404

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

From: [e-mail] (Randall C. Poe)
Subject: Fax Modems and Voice Lines
Date: 15 Feb 1995 22:46:34 GMT
Organization: JHU/APL


    I have been trying to get a fax modem (internal, in a Mac Powerbook)
to work at home, on a line shared with an answering machine and
several voice sets (3).  The feature that doesn't work is one the
manufacturer calls "Silent Answer", where it allows other devices to
pick up the phone, then listens in for fax ("CNG"?) tones.  When it
hears the fax tones, it is supposed to pick up the phone, causing the
answering machine (for instance) to go offline.

    I have wasted a lot of time and false leads from the manufacturers
trying to figure out what's wrong here.  As near as I can tell, the
modem simply can't hear the CNG tones when a handset or answering
machine picks up (there are clues in the software response).  One
small clue in the owners manual suggests that equipment that injects
noise in the line may cause CNG not to be recognized.

    So my question: Assuming this is the problem, is there a quick,
off-the-shelf (cheap) fix?  Do I put some sort of audio filter in line
with the modem?  I assume I need something specific to telecomm
applications, since there are certain voltage conventions to be
followed.


Randy Poe
Johns Hopkins University     E-mail: [e-mail]
Applied Physics Laboratory           [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (B_Phlat)
Subject: Laws For Cell Phone Sales in CA
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 18:22:16 GMT


Anybody know the particular code sections covering cellular phone
sales in California?


Jim

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

From: [e-mail] (Bill Vanvliet)
Subject: Wholesale Debit Card Providers
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 18:22:34 GMT


Universal Communications Network, Inc., is looking for a new and
larger platform.  Can anyone recomend a good system with at least a
2000 port capasity?  The system must have debit card, International
callback, and bank billing capabilities.  I need to get this additional
capacity with in the next 90 days.

Please send information direct to [e-mail]


Thank you,

Bill VanVliet    President, UCN, Inc.

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #98
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa00264;
          16 Feb 95 6:39 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18052; Thu, 16 Feb 95 01:31:06 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA18046; Thu, 16 Feb 95 01:31:04 CST
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 95 01:31:04 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #99

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Feb 95 01:31:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 99

Inside This Issue:                          Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    Motorola Envoy Commercial Availability (Burch Ben)
    Miffed at SWB (Jim Wenzel)
    More True 500 Frolics (Stan Schwartz)
    Apple Hails FCC Frequency Allocation for Data-PCS (Monty Solomon)
    ATT "True Voice" Patent to be Reexamined (Monty Solomon)
    Bellcore ISDN Spec Phone Number? (Bob Izenberg)
    FCC/PCS Market Numbers (Alan Petry)
    T1 and E1 Specs Wanted (Steve Rothkin)
    Looking For Chip Modem V22 (Cedric Perret)
    NEC NEAX 2400 IMG PBX For Sale (kchodrow)
    MCI California Postcard Goof (Gary D. Shapiro)

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] (Burch Ben)
Subject: Motorola Envoy Commercial Availability
Organization: Motorola, Inc.  Personal Communicator Divison.
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 23:23:49 GMT



                                     Press Contacts:
                                       Cheryl Beck-Ruff
                                       Motorola
                                       708/576-7150

                                       Karen Magill
                                       Cunningham Communication, Inc.
                                       617/494-8202


              Motorola Announces Commercial Availability of
                      Envoy(r) Wireless Communicator

               Envoy Device Available in Reseller Locations

      SCHAUMBURG, Illinois - February 14, 1995 - Motorola's Wireless
Data Group today announced that the Envoy(r) Wireless Communicator,
which began shipping in the U.S. to distributors in late December of
1994, is now available nationally in select reseller and distributor
locations.  The Envoy Wireless Communicator, which is based on General
Magic's Magic Cap(tm) platform and Telescript(tm) communications
language, is a portable communications tool for mobile professionals,
which is extremely powerful yet simple to use.

      "Since we began shipping in December, industry response to the
Envoy product has been tremendous and sales have been strong," said
Rick Lane, general manager of the Wireless Data Group's Personal
Communicator product organization.  "The Envoy Wireless Communicator
is changing the way mobile professionals communicate by allowing them
to manage business from remote locations and dramatically increase
their productivity."

The Envoy Wireless Communicator is currently available at the
following reseller and distributor locations (respective headquarters
noted below):

o  Totally Wireless (San Jose, CA)
o  DCC Inc. (Minneapolis, MN)
o  PanaPacific (Campbell, CA) Distributor
o  Rockwell Computer (New York City, NY)
o  Oak Brook Computer Center (Oak Brook, IL)
o  Fourth Dimension Industries (Holbrook, NY)
o  PageCom (Dallas, TX)
o  J & R Computer (NewYork City, NY)
o  Dynatek Communications (Warminster, PA) Distributor
o  Verns Electronics (Boca Raton, FL)
o  Wireless Telecomm(tm), Inc./WTI (Aurora, CO)

      Motorola's Wireless Data Group works closely with select
resellers, distributors, VARs, system integrators and specialty
retailers that are interested in providing users with the
highest-quality wireless solutions and support.  Initially, Motorola
will limit the number of organizations distributing the Envoy device
and focus its efforts on ensuring maximum product sell-through and
user satisfaction.

Wireless Communicator Increases Productivity, Flexibility

      The Envoy Wireless Communicator allows mobile professionals to
instantly access, communicate and organize information while
on-the-go.  Designed for both business and personal use, the Envoy
Wireless Communicator integrates two-way nationwide wireless, wireline
and infrared communications onto a single portable communications
device.

      The Envoy Wireless Communicator is an all-in-one tool for those
who need to stay in touch and organized while away from their desk.
The Envoy device:

o  can send and receive messages to any of over 20 million e-mail enabled
   users.
o  communicates with millions of existing products and services including
   pagers, fax machines, desktop computers and on-line services.
o  helps manage life's complexities - tracks appointments, files name cards and
   captures expenses.

Integrated Wireless Delivers Instant Access and Response

      The Envoy Wireless Communicator features a built-in two-way
wireless packet data modem that allows users to send and receive
messages and information at their convenience.

      The Envoy Wireless Communicator also includes a fax and data
modem, allowing information to be communicated through any telephone
network.  Through its combination of wireless and wireline modems, in
addition to infrared for local area communications, the Envoy product
offers the most versatile communications capabilities on the market
today.

      To augment its functionality, Motorola's Envoy Wireless
Communicator also features two PCMCIA Type II slots that allow users
to simultaneously operate third-party software applications and add
memory to store more data.  About the size of a paperback book and
easily stored in a briefcase or purse, the Envoy Wireless Communicator
weighs 1.7 lbs. and measures 7.6 x 5.8 x 1.2 inches.

Complete Suite of Built-in Software

      The Envoy Wireless Communicator comes bundled with software to
connect users to two communications services: AT&T PersonaLink(SM)
Services; and RadioMail(tm), connected via the ARDIS(r) nationwide
wireless data communications network.  ARDIS services more than 90
percent of the business areas in the U.S., including 400 metropolitan
areas, which encompass 10,700 cities and towns.  AT&T PersonaLink

      AT&T PersonaLink Services is an electronic community where
people can send and receive messages, gather news and information -
even shop.  PersonaLink is the first on-line service to incorporate
(Telescript) electronic "intelligent assistants," which empower
subscribers with unprecedented control over their communications.
Subscribers can program the intelligent assistants to do tasks such as
sort, prioritize and forward electronic mail to virtually any e-mail
service, including the Internet.

      PersonaLink offers subscribers cost and convenience options with
a robust on-line service that will fully integrate wireless and
wireline communications.  AT&T's PersonaLink wireless service,
scheduled for introduction this year, will be a nationwide radio
packet data service with automatic roaming, full end-to-end encryption
(for enhanced security) and wireless access to the user's electronic
mailbox.  Also available during the second quarter will be AT&T Market
Square(SM) plaza, an electronic shopping service offering products
such as clothing, flowers, computer equipment and collectibles.

RadioMail

      RadioMail allows wireless messages and information to reach
Envoy communicators in all locations where ARDIS service is available.
This service enables users to wirelessly communicate with a broad
population of electronic mail users via the Internet and commercial
public mail systems, delivering access to a global network of more
than 20 million people.

The Envoy Wireless Communicator also features built-in software which
allows access to available services from America Online(r) and
Official Airline Guides (OAG(r)) FlightLine(tm) Service.  America
Online allows users to receive stock quotes and communicate with
electronic mail users.  The OAG FlightLine Service offers air
travelers direct access to timely flight information.  The Envoy
Wireless Communicator also comes with Intuit's Pocket Quicken(tm), an
application that allows users to manage personal finances.

      Motorola is working with multiple independent software
developers that have created a variety of applications and services
for the Envoy communicator.  More than 15 applications, ranging from
spreadsheets to desktop connectivity kits, are available.  Motorola
and General Magic will continue to work with independent software
developers to create more applications and services for the Envoy
device.

Pricing, Distribution and Availability

Although pricing is ultimately the responsibility of the reseller, the
street price of the Envoy device is likely to range from $1,000 to
$1,500, depending upon the solution bundle users choose to purchase
from the distribution channel.  Accessories available for the Envoy
communicator include carrying cases, a travel and a rapid charger, and
replacement parts such as batteries, power adapter and stylus.
Motorola makes it convenient for customers to purchase additional
products and services through the Motorola Software and Accessories
Catalog, packaged with each communicator.

      For general information about Motorola's wireless solutions and
other Envoy communicator reseller locations, users can call the
information and dealer locator number, 1-800-8WIRELESS.  Motorola's
address on the Internet's World Wide Web (WWW) is http://www.mot.com/
The Envoy device will be supported by Envoy communicator retailers as
well as Motorola's HelpDesk.

Family of Wireless Communicators

      Earlier this year at MacWorld Expo, Motorola also announced and
shipped its Marco(r) Wireless Communicator in the U.S.  Motorola's
Marco device is based on Apple's Newton(r) operating platform.  Both
Envoy and Marco Wireless Communicators integrate computer and two-way
wireless technologies into a new category of product and represent the
industry's first family of wireless communicator solutions.

      Motorola's devices currently support the ARDIS wireless data
network.  Future versions of the communicators may run on other
networks, such as Motorola's DataTAC 5000(tm) and DataTAC 6000(tm)
systems (throughout Asia and Europe respectively), RAM Mobile Data,
Cellular Digital Packet Data (CDPD), Motorola's ReFLEX and InFLEXION
systems and the Motorola Integrated Radio System (MIRS) service
providers.  Motorola will base its plans for future network support on
customer feedback.

      The Wireless Data Group is part of Motorola's Messaging,
Information and Media Sector and incorporates the company's business
activities involved with the design, manufacturing and distribution of
wireless data products, infrastructure equipment and systems for
worldwide markets.  Motorola is one of the world's leading providers
of wireless communications, semiconductors and advanced electronic
systems and services.  Sales in 1994 were $22.2 billion.


Motorola, Envoy and Marco are registered trademarks of Motorola, Inc.
Magic Cap and Telescript are trademarks of General Magic, Inc.
PersonaLink and Market Square are service marks of AT&T.
All other trademarks and registered trademarks are the property of their
respective owners.


Ben Burch                 Motorola Wireless Data Group:
[e-mail]     Makers of the Envoy(R) Personal
Wireless Communicator     Envoy(R) Information Line;
1-800-8-WIRELESS

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

Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 00:04:00 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Jim Wenzel)
Subject: Miffed at SWB
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Jim Wenzel)
Organization: Ferret BBS *** N. Little Rock, AR *** [phone]


What should of been a simple installation of a second line has turned
into a an expensive nightmare.

In November, 1994 we asked to have a second line installed on Dec. 1 as
part of a promotion SWB was offering.

They came an installed the line adding DLC to the outside of the house
<even though the existing line had one already.>

Finally around the latter part of January we get them back out to put
both lines on one DLC so that the existing two pair wire could be used
for both phones.

Still no dialtone on our second line. I check the wiring and
everything 'appears' to look ok. All pairs are wired to the jacks.
Whomever installed the wiring originally was more than likely the
phone company judging from the workmanship.  (it 'LOOKED' great).

Rather than ohm the wires which I didn't have time or interest in
doing I called the phone company earlier this week to just have the
second line disconnected siting a month and a half to install and not
wishing to spend anymore time or money on a phone that I haven't been
able to use. They tell me that we have 'In-line' wiring on our lines
and that before turning the line out I should take advantage of this.
So I did.

The tech comes out the next day goes to my daughters room and leaves
in five minutes telling my wife that it will be a $56.00 charge. The
second line worked on her phone but, still no dialtone on the other
three jacks in the house for the second line.

I call today to complain a: about the $56 charge that we were not made
aware of upfront, and b: that I still did not have a dialtone on any
of my other jacks.

They said that I needed 'special' jacks for two line phones. I
explained that the jacks that were here all had the capability of
handling two pair, and look just like what I would buy at Radio Snack.
All they would say is I needed special jacks, and they would be glad to
come out for an additional charge of $44.00 for the first 15 mins and
$16.00 for every additional 15 mins and fix the phones.

I explained to them that I put my ohm meter on the yellow and black
wires coming out of the floor and I have no current at all on this
pair even while the other line is ringing. (I'm no phone guy but, have
been in computers/networking over 19 years professionally and know
that there ought to be enough current when it's ringing coming down
that line to knock loud enough to notice)<grin>.

Anyway, unwilling to pay an additional charge I told them to simply
disconnect the line, after 2 1/2 months I'm tired of messing with it
and to take all the 'extra' crap that they added to the house with it.
<note: house one of eleven built by the same person who designed the Old
Mill used in the opening scene of Gone With the Wind> ie ... old house
and unique. And I wasn't happy about having something else stuck on
the outside of it.

They called back this evening. The tech said all he had to do was
strip the wires and it worked. <Ok, I'm an idiot I say to myself>. I
told them that I would check all the other jacks. Sure enough whomever
had installed the jacks originally had put the wires on the post but
had not stripped them. Ah problem solve I thought. Stripped wires and
reconnect.

*&$%() Still no dial tone on the second line, back out with the ohm
meter. Still no reading across 'bare' yellow and 'bare' black wire with
line ringing. No current, nada. This holds true on all three jacks.

Now, the question is. I am an idiot and am missing something simple or
should I be able to get some kind of reading off the wires? or both?.
The tech assured me on the phone that I should get dialtone at all
the jacks for the second line.

What should I tell them when I talk to them Monday again?


[e-mail]
The Ferret Bulletin Board System  [phone]
North Little Rock, Arkansas


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I think you would be wise at this point to
go back to the very beginning where the demarc is and the wires come into
your house. Trace that second line from its starting point to the one
place where it does appear and works correctly. At some point it branches
off to serve the other three jacks and the wires are broken or disconnected
and this may be a very obscure place. Don't keep jumping around the house
with your ohm meter. Just go back to the very beginning and patiently
work your way forward through your entire premises. If you cannot locate
which wires are which at the point where they branch out, then put a
sounder or noisemaker on the line at one of the jacks which does not work
and go listen for that on all the pairs where they converge by the demarc.
If you don't have anything else to use, take a small portable battery
operated radio and hook the speaker connections to the dead pair in one
of the boxes. Go to the demarc with a phone receiver and alligator clips
and start prodding around until you hear your favorite radio station.
Use logic and a process of elimination to unsort the wires and get the
right ones in the right places.   Forget Bell and their $56 charge.   PAT]

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

Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 23:34:21 EST
From: Stan Schwartz <[e-mail]>
Subject: More True 500 Frolics


Other than the "Place A Call" feature, which we now know doesn't work,
I tried to program call sequencing.  When I couldn't find it in the
menu, I also bailed with a *0.  It seems that due to "Tariff
Restrictions", call sequencing has been disabled in my area.  The AT&T
rep DID, however, offer to program my "Final Stop" number (which it
seems is a manual effort by AT&T).  Isn't "Final Stop" service call
sequencing also??  When I gave her the number (which is my CellOne
NY/NJ number, forwarded to Voice Mail), she asked, "Is that a cell
phone, sir?".  Nice database those people at AT&T have.  ;-) She said
it's not a problem, it's just that they "like to know."

Also, it seems that once True 500 Voice Mail is enabled, the pager
notification option will only work if your pager is reachable from an
800 number.  I guess AT&T doesn't want to foot the bill for all those
out-dials to pager companies all over the country.  In this case, it
looks like I'm going to keep my CellOne NY/NJ Voice Mail, since
CellOne is only TOO happy to page me at my local 516 pager number.


Stan (that's 1-500-442-0000 to you!)


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I did not bother to subscribe to their
voicemail. I have voicemail in several places; more than enough to
meet my needs. I just have the Reach List and Override capabilities.
They never could explain why Call Sequencing is not available here;
I think the whole thing is still sort of messy but they will gradually
get it working. Sending out that postcard announcing the ability to
call anywhere was sure a dumb thing to do though.    PAT]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 00:53:17 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: Apple Hails FCC Frequency Allocation for Data-PCS
Reply-To: [e-mail]


FYI to the Digest.

Apple Hails FCC Frequency Allocation for Data-PCS

CUPERTINO, California -- February 15, 1995 -- The long-expected era of
wireless computing was given a solid boost last week when all five FCC
Commissioners unanimously voted to allocate 10 Megahertz of radio
spectrum for low-power, wireless data communications, "Data- PCS."

    Apple initiated the FCC process that led to the decision,
beginning with a Petition for Rulemaking in January, 1991.  Apple's
petition was endorsed throughout the computer industry and by numerous
educational, business, and medical institutions and associations.
Apple senior vice president David Nagel and vice president and general
counsel Ed Stead led Apple's effort before the FCC and Congress in
obtaining radio frequencies for Data-PCS.

    In light of last week's FCC decision, Nagel said that, "The FCC,
under the leadership of Chairman Reed Hundt, has recognized the
importance of wireless computing and, with this commitment of
frequencies, has made possible new ways to learn, provide medical
care, do research and conduct business."  Stead added that, "This
action gives U.S. computer companies a substantial edge in world
markets; it will enable millions of students to connect to the growing
online digital information world such as the Internet without costly
installation or airtime charges, and makes possible a rich diversity
of consumer, business, medical and institutional benefits."

    Before last week's action, the few radio bands available for
wireless computing were overloaded with industrial transmitters or
occupied by microwave stations; and, thus were unusable without
massive relocation costs (estimated to be as much as $500 million) and
ten to twelve years of band-clearing.  The new frequency allocation
for Data-PCS -- 2390 to 2400 MHz -- is shared only with ham radio
operations, which are compatible with Data-PCS devices.

    As a result of the FCC's allocating the new band without further
procedural or administrative delay, starting immediately,
manufacturers can produce radio modems so educators and other users
can set up their own wireless networks.  The cost and complexity of
wireless computing devices can be substantially reduced and their
bandwidth (or data rate) can be significantly greater, allowing for
such applications as multimedia.

    Apple Computer, Inc., a recognized pioneer and innovator in the
information industry, creates powerful solutions based on easy-to- use
personal computers, servers, peripherals, software, online services,
and personal digital assistants.  Headquartered in Cupertino,
California, Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) develops, manufactures, licenses and
markets products, technologies and services for the business,
education, consumer, scientific and engineering and government markets
in over 140 countries.

Apple and the Apple logo are registered trademarks of Apple Computer, Inc.

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

Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 00:50:27 -0500
From: Monty Solomon <[e-mail]>
Subject: ATT "True Voice" patent to be reexamined
Reply-To: [e-mail]


FYI to the Digest.

Begin forwarded message:

  Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 00:16:17 -0500
  From: [e-mail] (Gregory Aharonian)
  To: [e-mail]
  Subject: PATNEWS: ATT "True Voice" technology patent to be reexamined

9950216  ATT "True Voice" patent up for reexamination

    A while ago I reported that a request had been made to the Patent
Office to reexamine ATT's "True Voice" technology patent.  Here is a
message from Dr. Berryhill, a lawyer who filed the case, indicating
that the Patent Office has granted the request and will reexamine the
patent.

Greg Aharonian
Internet Patent News Service
(for subscription info, send 'help' to   [e-mail] )
(for prior art search services info, send 'prior' to [e-mail] )
(for WWW patent searching, try  http://sunsite.unc.edu/patents/intropat.html )

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

On February 9, the Patent Office issued an order granting the request
for reexamination of U.S. Patent No. 5,195,132.  According to the
order, "A substantial new question of patentability affecting claims
1-24 [all claims] of patent number 5,195,132 to Bowker et al. is
raised by the request".

It is expected that a notification of the reexamination, which has
been assigned re-exam control number 90/003674, will be published in
this week's Official Gazette.  Accordingly, there will be
approximately three more months during which any other citations of
prior art will be entered into the patent file for consideration
during reexamination.

The Patent Office has given AT&T two months during which they may file
a statement as to why reexamination should not be ordered.  Such a
statement would be unlikely, since it would then give the requester's
an opportunity to reply.  In the event that AT&T does not respond, it
is expected that reexamination will be ordered shortly after the two
month deadline, and that an Official Action rejecting all of the
claims of this member of the "True Voice" patent family will be
issued.

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

From: [e-mail] (Bob Izenberg)
Subject: Bellcore ISDN Spec Phone Number?
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 17:51:16 -0600 (CST)
Reply-To: [e-mail]


There used to be a number at Bellcore to request an ISDN spec
document.  If it's still in service, what's the number?


Thanks,

Bob Izenberg     [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Alan Petry)
Subject: FCC/PCS Market Numbers
Date: 16 Feb 1995 02:44:20 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Does anyone have a list of the FCC designated markets as listed in the
fcc.gov gopher for the PCS Auctions.  I think the numbers are M001-M045.
I would appreciate any help anyone could give.


Thank you,

alan

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

From: [e-mail] (S Rothkin)
Subject: T1 and E1 Specs Wanted
Date: 15 Feb 1995 14:44:04 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (S Rothkin)


I'm looking for technical specs on different countries (including
U.S.)  implementations of T1 and E1, including what is done with
A,B,C, and D signalling bits, and descriptions of call setup
information exchange.

If anyone has suggestions on how these facets of T1/E1 could be
parameterized (as opposed to hardcoding each different variation into
the program), those would be very helpful.


Thanks,

Steve Rothkin     Senior Systems Consultant
Granada Systems Design     [e-mail]

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

Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 06:55:56 +0100
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Looking For Chip Modem V22
Organization: E.I.G


I'm looking for a chip modem which supports V22 and is alimented by 3.3
[V].


Thanks in advance.

[e-mail]    Perret Cedric

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

From: [e-mail] (kchodrow)
Subject: NEC NEAX 2400 IMG PBX For Sale
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 95 12:46:56 PST
Organization: NeoSoft Internet Services   [phone]



I have a NEC NEAX 2400 IMS phone system for sale.  I will sell the
whole system or piece it out.  Make me an offer.  Here's what's in its
four stack PIM:

 (1) AL00
 (1) CS20
 (1) GT01
 (1) CK00
 (1) SW05
 (1) ME11
 (1) CP09
 (1) 8CFTA
 (1) CS07 -A
 (1) CK00
 (1) I002
 (1) PC00 -A
 (1) 8ELC A (Eight digital phone extensions)
 (5) 4RSTB -A (20 trunks can dial at once. Great for a call center.)
(12) 8C0TF E (96 trunks)
 (7) 16LCG -B (128 analog extensions)
 (2) 24DTA B (48 DS0 circuits/2 T1 spans)

NEAX phones:

 (1) ETT 16-1 w/ 24 button add-on module (used for receptionist)
 (2) ETT 8-1 (executive phones)


Email me at:  [e-mail]

Thanks.

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

From: [e-mail] (Gary D. Shapiro)
Subject: MCI California Postcard Goof
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 20:53:46 +0800


"Dear MCI customer:

" ... Here's how easy it is [to use MCI for local toll numbers]:

   "For any local toll call (any local call where you have to
   enter a '1' first), just dial '10 + 222" before you dial '1.'"

Somebody goofed.  We use 7D here for toll calls in the same area code.
How would they explain this properly and succinctly?  Not easy.


Gary D. Shapiro <[e-mail]>  http://rain.org/~gshapiro/


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You can dial 10xxx plus seven digits
here; the call will complete. I am not sure who (which carrier) it goes
to however, or if it just stays with the local telco Ameritech.   PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #99
*****************************


Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by MINTAKA.LCS.MIT.EDU id aa08105;
          16 Feb 95 15:57 EST
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23762; Thu, 16 Feb 95 09:30:22 CST
Return-Path: <telecom>
Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.0-proxy)
    id AA23756; Thu, 16 Feb 95 09:30:20 CST
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 95 09:30:20 CST
From: [e-mail] (TELECOM Digest (Patrick Townson))
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #100

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 16 Feb 95 09:30:00 CST    Volume 15 : Issue 100

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    CFP: IN Conference in Copenhagen (J|rgen N|rgaard)
    Hollings Bill Available (Jeff Richards)
    Place-a-Call Now Available From AT&T 500 Service (Gary Novosielski)
    Assistance Wanted With Microwave Communication Network (John Hong)
    Telecom Sales Rep Firms Wanted (Daniel A. Ash)
    Books on SNMP Wanted (Elin Sundin)
    How Can I Get Employment in Telecom Industry? (Mark A. Bentley)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Bob Goudreau)
    Re: Ten Digit Dialing (Fred R. Goldstein)
    Re: When Will PBXs Go Away? (Lars Poulsen)
    Re: When Will PBXs Go Away? (Jeff Box)

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] (J|rgen N|rgaard)
Subject: CFP: IN Conference in Copenhagen
Organization: Tele Danmark Research, Denmark
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 14:32:11 GMT


        Call for Papers, IFIP IN Conference
        ***********************************

International Working Conference on Intelligent Networks
========================================================

Center for Tele-Information at DTU (Technical University of Denmark)
and Tele Danmark Research are organising the International Working
Conference on Intelligent Networks sponsored by IFIP-TC6 in
Copenhagen, August 30-31 1995. The conference will be hosted by the
Center for Tele-Information at DTU located in Lyngby just north of
Copenhagen.

This CFP is also available on the WWW as http://www.tdr.dk/~jnp/ifipin.html.

Call For Papers
===============

At the moment there are two major trends in Intelligent Networks (IN)
development:

 o ITU and ETSI based IN
 o and long term development as undertaken by, for example, the TINA
   consortium and the European RACE and ACTS programmes.

The present IN development, based on capability set technologies, is
on the way to the network. The migration path from IN to, for example,
TINA architectures are still under study. But there is a distinct move
towards more open platforms for the functional entities, such as SSP,
SCP, SDF, etc. supported with, for example, the core INAP protocol.

At the same time a number of research projects are defining an IN
architecture to be used in broadband networks as well as in present
networks. The first demonstrations of these concepts are scheduled for
'95. The integration of intelligence in broadband and mobile networks,
and the way in which the service logic is distributed may shake
industries.

The aim of the the Working Conference is to collect state of the art
contributions in the area of IN technology. Topics of interest
include, but are not limited to:

 o Service Provider solutions on Service Creation and Management
 o Applications on Broadband and Mobile
 o Experimental systems and case studies
 o Performance issues
 o Long Term IN Architectures

Papers should not exceed 12 pages including text and illustrations.
Frontpage should contain authors' names, affiliations, address, phone,
fax and e-mail address and an abstract. All submitted papers will be
reviewed.

Contributions must be send to:

  Osa Bennett
  Center for Tele-Information
  Technical University of Denmark
  Elektrovej, Building 371
  DK-2800 Lyngby
  Denmark

at the latest June 9 1995.

Previous Conferences:

The growing importance of Intelligent Networks for Teleoperators and
Service Providers in a competitive market, stimulated IFIP TC-6
(Telecommunication Systems) to establish a task group on IN. The task
group organised IN Workshops in 1993 and 1994 at the Lappeenranta
University of Technology, Finland. Due to the success of these
workshops the event is now proceeding as a Working Conference in 1995
in Copenhagen, Denmark and Conference in 1996 in Dallas, USA.

Program Committee:

 o Andy Bihain, GTE, USA
 o Dominique Gaiti, Columbia University, USA
 o Villy Bfk Iversen, Center for Tele-Information, DTU, Denmark
 o Caroline Knight, Hewlett-Packard Lab, UK
 o Olli Martikainen, Telecom Finland, Finland
 o Jxrgen Nxrgaard, Tele Danmark Research, Denmark
 o Guy Pujolle, University of Versaille, France
 o Kimmo Raatikainen, University of Helsinki,
    Department of Computer Science, Finland
 o Raymond Schlachter, EURESCOM, Germany
 o James White, AG Communication Systems, USA

Organising Committee:


 o Villy Bfk Iversen, Center for Tele-Information, Denmark, [e-mail]
 o Osa Bennett, Center for Tele-Information, Denmark
 o Jxrgen Nxrgaard, Tele Danmark Research, Denmark, [e-mail]
 o Annegrete Frandsen, Tele Danmark Research, Denmark, [e-mail]

Addresses:

 o Center for Tele-Information, Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone],
   Technical University of Denmark, Elektrovej,
   Building 371, DK-2800 Lyngby

o Tele Danmark Research, Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone],
   Lyngsx Alli 2,
   DK-2970 Hxrsholm, Denmark, URL: http://www.tdr.dk/

Important dates:

June 9 1995
   Paper submission deadline
July 21 1995
   Notification of acceptance send to authors
August 18 1995
   Camera-ready copy of final papers due
August 30-31 1995
   Conference

Direct questions to [e-mail]

 jxrgen nxrgaard         |  e-mail: [e-mail]
Tele Danmark Research    |  Phone: [phone]
Lyngsx Alle 2            |  Fax:   [phone]
DK-2970 Hxrsholm, Denmark|URL: http://www.tdr.dk/~jnp/

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

From: Jeff Richards <[e-mail]>
Subject: Hollings Bill Available
Date: 16 Feb 1995 14:25:43 GMT
Organization: Capital Area Internet Service [e-mail] 703-448-4470


Senator Hollings' Staff Working Draft, the "Universal Service
Telecommunications Act of 1995," is now posted on <bell.com> along
with reaction by Gary McBee, Alliance chairman.

Also new today is the Alliance's review of the January 31 Senate
Discussion Draft from Senator Pressler.

You can subscribe to the listserver --> <[e-mail]>

Use four words in the body of the message:
  SUBSCRIBE  BELL  YOUR_FIRST_NAME  YOUR_LAST_NAME

As always, your comments are welcome.


Jeff Richards
The Alliance for Competitive Communications &
Pacific Telesis Group    Internet: [e-mail]
<bell.com> and <http://bell.com>
<[e-mail]>=SUBSCRIBE BELL YOUR_LAST YOUR_FIRSTNAME
[phone] voice     1133-21st NW #700
[phone] TDD       Washington DC 20036-3349
[phone] fax       +1 800 SKY-PAGE pin 8550304
[phone]nd office

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

From: [e-mail]
Organization: Small Business Administration
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 95 03:10:13 -0400
Subject: Place-A-Call Now Available From AT&T 500 Service


> With True Connections Place-A-Call, you can make calls from almost any
> touch-tone phone.  Just dial your 500 number, enter your master PIN
> and follow directions.  The rate for using this feature is $.95
> non-peak/$1.05 peak for the first minute and $.15/$.25 for each
> subsequent minute, only for state-to-state calls. (Calling prices
> within a state may vary.)  When making several calls at once, press
> "*R" between calls to return back to the menu.

Woah! $1.05 for the first minute? That's completely different from
what the AT&T rep told me last December when I was inquiring about 500
service. She was explaining all the different service levels, and
mentioned that with the top one or two, I could get this Place-a-Call
service.

"Oh, you mean like a calling card?", I said.

"No, much better than a calling card, because there will be no
surcharge on the first minute of the call. The whole thing will be
billed at the .25/.15 rate."

I said that did sound interesting indeed, but wondered out loud why
AT&T would seemingly undercut their own calling card rates so readily.

"Well," she said, "I guess they reasoned that it would only take a
smart user a moment or two to realize that they could achieve the same
thing by forwarding their 500 number to the place they wanted to call,
calling their own number, and then forwarding it back. They're just
making the process easier, since you can do it anyway."

As she was telling me this, a little voice in the back of my head was
saying, "No, that just makes too much sense. It can't be true. It
implies a level of sophistication on AT&T's part, combined with a
respect for the intelligence of the customer, which are unknown in the
industry." It seems the little voice was right.

But will her alternate scenario work? The only objection I can see is
that someone else may dial the 500 number while you're on the call,
and they would be forwarded to the same destination as your call. But
with a minimum cost of $1.05 per call, it could be worth getting a
separate unpublished 500 number, and using it solely for beating the
calling card surcharges. Come to think of it, an 800 number might be
better for this use, as long as it could be follow-me forwarded toll
free.


Gary Novosielski     GPN Consulting


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Some of their competition allows outcalls
via 800, such as MyLine and Arch with no additional first minute charges.
If you get a second 500 number exclusively for the purpose you describe,
you must remember there will be monthly service fees on that which will
offset some of the savings under your scheme. Their ill-fated postcard
which went out in error -- outcalls are not available yet, no date when
they will be, despite the postcard -- did mention the $1.05/95 rate for
the first minute. Who knows, maybe that was wrong also. Unless you expect
your 500 number to get a lot of traffic, I imagine you can get by with
just one. Its unlikely a second call will come in just at the same
moment. What you can do is set it up to forward your call as you describe
then immediatly when you place your call and the other end answers, if
there is a second phone line handy, you can use it to dial in 0-500 and
take down the forwarding. It won't disturb your call in progress.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Yanming Shi)
Subject: Assistance Wanted With Microwave Communication Network
Date: 15 Feb 1995 16:26:51 -0800
Organization: Portland State University, Portland, OR


I am looking for One point(HUB) to multiple points(remotes) microwave
telephony system. The system will be used in an area of islands.The
system topology is:

The Hub is in center of several islands with microwave links to the
remotes at the another islands around. The Hub has switching capacity
with 200 lines which provides interconnection for all users among the
islands (Hub to remote and remote to remote).

I am grateful to everyone who read this mail and more indebted to who
will give information on the above issue.

Name, telephone number and fax number of the vendors are appreciated.
Email is even better.

Please reply to me at [e-mail] which is in China.


Thanks and best regards,

John Hong

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

From: [e-mail] (Daniel A. Ash)
Subject: Telecom Sales Rep Firms Wanted
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 00:18:06 GMT


Does a list of US and/or International sales rep firms exist?  The
more detailed the better.  I am interested in telecom equipment sales
only.


Thanks,

Dan    AshCan Engineering - [e-mail], [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Elin Sundin)
Subject: Books on SNMP Wanted
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Telia Research AB
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 95 09:06:45 GMT


Hi,

Can someone please recommend a couple of books on SNMP (from beginner's
level up to a more advanced level)? I would appreciate ANY suggestions.

Please email me on [e-mail].


Thanks in advance,

Elin

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

From: [e-mail] (Mark A. Bentley )
Subject: How Can I Get Employment in Telecom Industry?
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 1995 11:47:18 CST


Greetings fellow telecom enthusiasts.  I'm writing to TELECOM Digest
seeking advice as to how I might best prepare myself to get into a
telecommunications related job.

Through my on-going education at the University of Minnesota, Morris and
my work experiences at U S WEST (summer intern) I have found that I am
most interested in LAN/WAN technology and connectivity.  I would enjoy
designing, setting up, and administering a LAN/WAN.  I'm an especially
intrigued by the nation-wide (and worldwide) telecommunications infra-
structure, and have put many hours into studying these areas.  I am
also a UNIX enthusiast and have been the SysAdmin for one of the UNIX
boxes on campus for over a year.

Currently I am in the third year at the U of M pursuing a degree in
Computer Science.  If any of you could suggest a course of action that I
might take (after receiving my CS degree) I would be most pleased.


Thank you.

Mark Bentley A.K.A. Seeklore       [e-mail] (DEC/Ultrix)
University of Minnesota, Morris    [e-mail] (NeXT)
For WWW, click <A HREF="http://sci173x.mrs.umn.edu/~bentlema/home.html">
here</a> for my Web Home Page.

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

Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 12:02:55 -0500
From: [e-mail] (Bob Goudreau)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing


> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Actually, it is eleven digit dialing, not
> ten digit if you count the '1' on the front. However, one would think that
> when this becomes universal all over the USA that we could in fact get by
> with ten digits since the '1' would no longer be needed; there would be
> no 'local' calls to distinquish from 'long distance'. Since everything that
> we dial would consist of area code plus seven digits, there would be no
> need for a '1' to indicate that 'what follows is an area code' -- everything
> that follows would be area codes!  It would be nice to see the '1' vanish
> under those cirucmstances. Or maybe they will insist on keeping it using
> as their rationale that '1' is also -- by coincidence -- the country code
> for the USA and Canada, and that what we are really dialing is country code,
> area code and seven digit number.

Of course, such a rationale would make sense only in the context of
changing the dialing plan to allow *any* country to be dialed as just
<country-code><area-code><local-number>.  But that idea won't fly
unless we're also prepared to change our existing N11 numbers into
something else (say, 1N11 or 0N11).  The problem is that some
international calls would have the same initial three digits as some
very important N11 numbers (namely 911 and 411), and therefore
timeouts would be required to disambiguate the two.  This might not be
such a big deal in the case of Directory Assistance (411) vs.  Zurich,
Switzerland (41-1-<local-number>).  But it certainly would be a
problem for Emergency (911) vs. Delhi, India (91-11-<local-number>).
I don't think that anyone wants to add delays to the 911 system, and I
also doubt that there will be much enthusiasm for changing the
emergency number and then educating everyone about the new one.


Bob Goudreau        Data General Corporation
[e-mail]    62 Alexander Drive
[phone]        Research Triangle Park, NC  27709, USA


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I have received messages from 911 employees
at one time or another saying there still remains confusion between the
police emergency line and the code for India. Police have received calls
on their emergency line and answered, only to hear additional buttons being
pressed as the person continues dialing a complete number in India. When
they can get the person's attention, the caller seems very confused about
why he got the police instead of whoever he was calling. Obviously he
forgot the '011' part, but police dispatchers on a busy night do not have
a lot of patience to sit and explain that to the confused caller.   PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Fred R. Goldstein)
Subject: Re: Ten Digit Dialing
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 1995 04:15:16 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek & Newman Inc.


In article <[e-mail]> Pat writes,

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Not that I am saying your comparison is
> quite correct, but I would not mind having Ma Bell again. The competitors
> are fine also, but Ma Bell should have been left intact. I think Greene
> should have opened the door to competition, absolutely required that AT&T
> work fairly, at arm's length with all competitors regards interconnection
> and let it go at that, with a short speech saying something like this:

That's essentially what they're trying to accomplish in Canada now ...

> Now that would have been true competition, and the American way. Instead,
> Greene nearly guts AT&T. What were they supposed to do, apologize for having
> been in business for a century, and deny all their accomplishments over
> that period of time just so MCI could make their money a little sooner?

 ... but you unfairly (again) attempt to blame Judge Greene for
something that wasn't even his doing!

Here's the historical reality.  AT&T wanted to be broken up.  The original
case was against Western Electric and AT&T's ownership thereof.  WECo
had an effective monopoly on public network manufacturing in the USA;
with about 84% of the lines (AT&T's). All other manufacturers (GTE, ITT,
Stromberg, etc.) had to fight for the remaining crumbs. The goverment
sued to have AT&T divest Western Electric.  AT&T countered by divesting
the local telcos.  The Reagan administration's Justice Department liked
the idea and handed it to the Judge.  He actually ameliorated some of
its harsher terms; as originally set up, it was (IMHO) to be an out-and-out
screw job on the to-be-divested local Bells.

AT&T wanted rid of the Bells because everyone knew that computers and long
distance were the profit items; local telcos received huge subsidies via the
splifs.  Of course not everything worked out as planned.  AT&T's initial
forays into the computer business were less than stellar, while the Bells
have not all done so badly!

I do however agere that the rules need reform nowadays; they're overly
rigid and seem more designed for market allocation than for consumer
protection.  Cellular is just the most obvious, egregious weakness.


Fred R. Goldstein   k1io    [e-mail]
Bolt Beranek & Newman Inc., Cambridge MA  USA   [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Lars Poulsen)
Subject: Re: When Will PBXs Go Away?
Date: 16 Feb 1995 12:42:56 GMT
Organization: Rockwell International - CMC Network Products


In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brent
Laminack) writes:

> What is the current thinking on when a PC (powerPC, whatever) replace
> the PBX? i.e. when can I run my T1 from the telco with my voice trunks
> on it into one card on a PC and have it route voice over the LAN to
> other desktop computers that double as phones? It will probably be a
> time curve: first available for small offices (ten users) on an ethernet,
> then a while later available for 200 lines on a faster LAN, etc. What
> says the net? My Mitel sx200 lite has a 68000 for a processor: it's a
> MacPlus! Surely the cpu horsepower is available to replace lots of
> dedicated TTL and switching hardware. I was just at a briefing from
> Apple and they're working with the PBX makers for a Geoport Mac to be
> a voice terminal behind a "big maker" PBX. But who are the startups
> that are out to kill the PBX makers?

A PBX consists of two parts: a switching fabric and a control
processor.  Most switches today have a switching fabric that is
hardwired; the control processor does not need much power; the 68000
that you mention is a good choice. An 8080 would be enough, but has
insufficient room for programs in its 64 KB address space.

It is possible to build a switching fabric entirely of almost-standard
computer hardware plus analog/digital conversion chips. The economics
are definitely headed in that direction. The problem is that the program
must ALWAYS be running, and the inexpensive personal computers do not
have that kind of stability.

I would expect that someone will soon put a small PBX on a PC plug-in
card in the same way that people are now putting network hubs and even
small routers on such cards. This will become especially attractive as
stable multitasking systems take over from Windows and Mac-OS.

Today, this is commonly done for keysystem-sized ISDN PBXs, which
benefit from being able to install software updates via the PC disk
drive.


Lars Poulsen            Internet E-mail: [e-mail]
Rockwell Network Systems    Phone:        [phone]
7402 Hollister Avenue         Telefax:      [phone]
Santa Barbara, CA 93105    Internets: designed and built while you wait

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

From: [e-mail] (JeffB65582)
Subject: Re: When Will PBXs Go Away?
Date: 15 Feb 1995 17:09:38 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (JeffB65582)


PC's as PBXs?

You've found one of my favorite subjects here.  I'm the VP of Systems
Development for a small switching system manufacturer that's been
around for eleven years.  In parallel with the development of our business,
I have watched the development of the PC industry and been on the constant
lookout for how we can benefit from PC technology in our product line.

It's truly a good news / bad news story.  PC's have attractiveness in
that they supply enormous computing power at low cost.  However, they
also have many architectural limitations as well.

If you want to use a PC for a PBX, you should consider some of the
architectural limitations I'm talking about.  Try these as examples:

1.  Not enough card slots.  A big PBX has hundreds of port card slots.
My smallest PBX has forty (to support 288 ports).  PBX port cards are
generally much larger in surface area than PC ISA cards to support the
many interfaces and high voltage spacing requirements.  Don't forget
that the port cards have to deal with the transient surges from multitudes
of phone lines that all serve as "antennas" during every thunderstorm.

2.  No ability for hot maintenance.  Try adding a new card or replacing a
card in your PC without turning it off and without interrupting its
operation.  Sure, you can pay technicians overtime to work after hours but
that eats up the savings that drive the PC idea in the first place.

3.  Inadequate power systems.  Remember, the PBX has to power the ports,
usually with -48VDC.  Its important to keep the phones running all the
time.  Existing PC power supplies, voltages, backplanes, and connectors
aren't up to it except in small cases.

4.  PC technology is in a constant state of flux.  Part of the PBX
vendor's task is configuration management.  Reliability partly stems from
doing a good design, testing it, and then replicating it with identical
copies.  PC's change so rapidly that its very difficult to put them into a
product that has a ten year plus service expectation.  You need to have a
continuous ongoing engineering process just to deal with PC design
evolution.

Try the desk top view point: How many PCs had your phone seen come and
go from your desk top?  What was the average PC cost?  Convert that to
dollars per year and see if you still think the PC will save money.

5.  No hardware aid for software reliability.  PBX systems do not have
perfect software.  They achieve high reliability through a combination of
excellent software, testing,  and certain hardware features designed to
make the total combination have better reliability characteristics.
Redundancy, load sharing,  watch dog timers, and distributed intelligence,
when properly applied, all contribute to this.  If PC software vendors
have a solution for this, they're keeping it well hidden.

These are but a few examples of the problems we have faced trying to use
PC technology in the switching business.  Dealing with the customer
requirements reflected above is a major ingredient to our survival in a
market where many other start-up companies have vanished.

Of course, it is said that PC's can evolve to meet any objections I raise
for use at telephone equipment.  You must decide, however, when you cross
over the line where the "PC" you started with has changed so much that it
can no longer be recognized as a "PC".

It may surprise some to hear that PBX vendors are not ignorant of PC
developments.  Over the last several years, PC technology has had a
significant impact on PBX design.  Processors, chip sets, PCMCIA memory,
and many other components that were pioneered by the PC industry have
found their way into modern PBX design where they save cost and do not
compromise reliability.  If you look "under the hood" of some PBX's, you
might identify what you see as an evolved PC.  Perhaps they only reason
they are not considered to be PCs is because they "don't do windows".

These comments would be incomplete if I didn't mention that there are some
products on the market that identify themselves as PC based PBX systems.
In each case, they have found a niche where they try to work around the
issues raised above with a combination of modified PC hardware and
external equipment.  Two systems I'm familiar with can not support ground
start, direct inward dial, and T1 trunk connections.  They use external
devices to convert the phone trunks to loop start lines they support.
Some also use external power supplies yielding a collection of boxes to
support the PBX function.   The PC technology disk storage gives them good
capabilities in voice messaging and the VGA display can yield a single
nice attendant display.  Some of the other points I made above are simply
not addressed in these products and time will tell what portion of the
small line size market can accept the compromises.

I applaud their pioneering approach while at the same time I know that
their products can not meet many of the customer bid specs that I see.
One of the neat things about the telecommunications marketplace is the
enormous room for different ideas and products.  If there is a significant
class of customers that accept these systems, it should become apparent in
the next year or two.

My own company uses PCs as data collectors and report processors for PBX
based automatic call distributors.  If these PCs go down, the phone switch
continues to process calls.

We also have a blended architecture ACD (automatic call distributor)
product which uses an industrial PC coupled with existing switching
equipment shelves (of our own design) to produce an advanced call center
system some of the best features of both.  This product provides ACD call
functionality, voice messaging, IVR, and fax server functions integrated
together.  These systems focus the PC into the areas where it is strong
and cost effective while allowing the benefits of the existing switch
equipment to be retained.  If necessary, the entire PC can be duplicated
in a redundant configuration.

We continue to look for and innovate with PC technology.  But the PC
technology needs to blend with many other elements to make a good
telecommunications system.

I tend to agree with "[e-mail]" that the PBX vendors of today
will still be the providers tomorrow no matter what the technology evolves
to.  Users still need the service & maintenance expertise of these.  When
something breaks, they NEED it fixed with on-site persons very quickly and
the PC industry has done little to address this.


Jeff Box, Shared Resource Exchange, Inc. (SRX)

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #100
******************************