Telecom/1996-04-telecom-walnutcreek.iso/back.issues/recent.single.issues/V15_#531

Internet Message Format | 1995-12-27 | 27KB

From [e-mail]  Wed Dec 27 21:55:24 1995
Return-Path: <[e-mail]>
Received: by massis.lcs.mit.edu (8.7.1/NSCS-1.0S)
    id VAA14518; Wed, 27 Dec 1995 21:55:24 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 21:55:24 -0500 (EST)
From: [e-mail] (Patrick A. Townson)
Message-Id: <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Bcc:
Subject: TELECOM Digest V15 #531

TELECOM Digest     Wed, 27 Dec 95 21:55:00 EST    Volume 15 : Issue 531

Inside This Issue:                           Editor: Patrick A. Townson

    CA 1+ Intralata Regulations (Bill Engel)
    NorTel Meridian Communications Adaptor Question (Derek Andrew)
    Employment Opportunity: Telecom Project Manager/LAN/WAN/ACD (Julie Love)
    Solid State Systems SR224 Information Needed ([e-mail])
    *66 Works on Ticketmaster Type Numbers? (Bill Rubin)
    How Can I Test Phone Line Quality? (Bill Hensley)
    D3 Channel Bank Question (Raymon A. Bobbitt)
    New Canadian Telco Websites (Mark J. Cuccia)
    CT Local Competition Docket/Decision (Gerry Belanger)
    Re: AT&T Card Fraud (Clayton R. Nash)
    Re: 10-732 ANI Number (Joseph E. Norton)
    Re: Digital Global Roaming (Paul Boudreaux)
    Re: MAJOR Change in AT&T Tariffs Hitting Casual (10-288) Users (D Tomrdle)
    Re: Caller ID Over AT&T (Steve Uhrig)
    Re: Caller ID Over AT&T (John Wilkerson)
    Re: Caller ID Over AT&T (Kevin R. Ray)
    Re: How Do You Reach A Local Operator From Out Of State? (Matthew D'Elia)

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:
                      Post Office Box 4621
                     Skokie, IL USA   60076
                       Phone: [phone]
                        Fax: [phone]
  ** Article submission address: [e-mail]

Our archives are located at ftp.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.                                                 *
*************************************************************************

     In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft
     to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in
     the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily
     represent the views of Microsoft.
     ------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, 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] (Engel Strategies Group, Inc. )
Subject: CA 1+ Intralata Regulations
Date: 27 Dec 1995 16:35:32 GMT
Organization: Netcom


Arizona has just implemented intralata competition.  Until April, 1996
 -- the "competition" requires dialing of carrier codes.  In April, we
will have true 1+ intralata competition that will no longer required
the codes.

Question:  While CA has intralata competition that requires carrier
codes (which means no "true" competition) - has the CA PUC mandated any
specific date by which competition must be 1+ (no codes required)?

Thanks for any help.


Bill Engel
Engel Strategies Group, Inc. * 11414 N. 69th Street * Scottsdale, AZ 85254
E-mail:  [e-mail]    Phone:  [phone]  Fax:  [phone]

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

Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 19:36:52 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Derek Andrew)
Subject: NorTel Meridian Communications Adaptor Question
Organization: University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskatchewan, Canada


There is a rather neat attachment for the M2616 type telephone
attached to a NorTel Meridian SL/1. The Meridian Communications
Adapter (MCA) attaches an rs232 port to the back of the phone and
allows simultaneous voice and data calls.

The neat part is that the MCA can also control your telephone, for
example, entering ATDP1234 will dial 1234 on your voice line. Also,
there is a transparent mode that you can enter whereby you can display
the raw signaling messages sent between the PBX and the MCA by
entering the ATTSP! command.

My problem is I cannot figure out how to interpret these raw signaling
messages. Is there anyone out there that has any information? NorTel
is totally unhelpful.

Any ideas?


Thanks,

[e-mail]

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

From: Julie Love <[e-mail]>
Subject: Employment Opportunity: Telecom Project Manager/LAN/WAN/ACD
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 01:24:41 GMT


Position:  IT / TELECOM PROJECT MANAGER NEEDED
Organization:  Pacific Bell Mobile Services
Department:  Customer Operations
Type: Permanent/Contract
Location: Pleasanton, CA
Salary: commensurate with experience

Pacific Bell Mobile Services Customer Operations Implementation
Project seeking a highly skilled and experience contract individual to
support the IT/Telecom Manager by coordinating the work and tasks of
the subgroups within the IT/Telecom team, take management
responsibility during the absence of manager, maintain the project
plan, implement changes to the plan and report on the impact of these
changes on deliverables.

DESCRIPTION:

Produce IT/Telecom project and task plans within Customer Operations.
Maintain IT/Telecom element of the Project Plan, report project
progress and manage budget and expenditures.  Coordinate team
workflow. Produce impact assessments of changes to project
tasks,timetables and resource allocations. Manage vendor and technical
support contracts. Establish and maintain interfaces with other
project teams and departments. Perform resource planning and
management. Serve as Deputy Manager of IT/Telecom Team and represent
team at planning meetings as directed by Manager.

TECHNICAL SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE:

Project management methodologies and computer-based project management
applications (Microsoft Project preferred). IT and information
management strategies and architectures, information flow management
techniques and system design.  Structure of commercial contracts and
supplier management.  Database management systems and interfacing
(Oracle-based).  Design of data communications architectrues and
systems (Ethernet and structured cabling systems). Telecommunications
(WAN and LAN) network management. Telecommunications issues in support
of call centers and customer service operations (ACD, CTI, IVR). ACD
systems management and report structuring. PTO operations, procurement
of PTO services and definition of call streaming requirements. Mobile
communications architectures (GSM) and mobile networks management. PC
systems and applications.

EXPERIENCE PROFILE:

IT/IS project management and implementation. Implementation of mobile
services billing systems and integration with other business support
applications such as general ledger, banking communications and GSM
network management and call charging systems. ACD systems (CTI and IVR
preferred). Management of large project teams (20+ people). IT/IS
supplier contract management. Customer Service operations. Project
expenditure management. Operating with senior management.

If interested, EMAIL RESUME TO:


Julie Love
Pacific Bell Mobile Services Staffing Contractor
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (PhoneRoom)
Subject: Solid State Systems SR224 Info Needed
Date: 27 Dec 1995 02:39:18 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (PhoneRoom)


Does anyone know the current value of an SR224? I have two. One of
them seems to be configured for T1 the other looks like it is set up
for switched service. I would like to offer them to a dealer or
reseller but first need input on their approximate value.

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

Date: Tue, 26 Dec 95 00:02:36 EST
From: Bill Rubin <[e-mail]>
Subject: *66 Works on Ticketmaster Type Numbers?


NYNEX is currently running a TV ad showing "dad" calling to order
tickets for a "big show" at 9am when tickets go on sale, "but everyone
else called, too", so dad used the "busy signal fix, *66" and got a
call back when "they" were able to get thru for him and he was able to
get tickets.  End shot is everyone at the show, they're understandably
happy.

Now, when NYNEX came out with the *66 capability, I have to admit that
using it to get thru to Ticketmaster when popular concerts went on
sale was the main thing I thought of using it for, but I recall seeing
some fine print that it won't work with stuff like that, or maybe I
tried it and was told it couldn't be used for that since it was going
to a PBX-type system.  Has this changed, or is NYNEX taking
"technology license" to sell their service?  Now, of course, even if
you were able to get thru, the odds are still pretty good that
Ticketmaster's phone system will drop your call after you've been on
hold for a few minutes and before you actually speak to someone, as
they did to me three times last week, but that's another story.  But
if it will actually work in these situations, I might actually
consider using it!


Bill Rubin

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

From: Bill Hensley <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 11:57:26 -0800
Subject: How Can I Test Phone Line Quality?


I live in northwest Oklahoma City, and have two phone lines, one
for data and one for voice.  I use a USR Sportster 28.8 for connections
to an ISP, my office, and other online services here in the area.
I cannot seem to make a connection better than 19.2Kbps, and
frequently I'll lose carrier altogether.  An identical setup works
well from my office, except back to my house.  There is no audible
noise on the data line.  I have the most current modem firmware,
drivers, etc., and calls to Southwestern Bell have brought the
determination that the line is "fine".  I suspect that my phone line,
switch, or trunk is somewhere electrically dirty.

Is there some way to measure the quality of the phone line connected
to my house, preferably without having to spend several hundred
dollars?  It's not like this is killing me or anything, but I spent a
heck of a lot of bread to go 28.8 for better remote access and it
would be nice to be able to use it.  FWIW, I have *no* problems when
connecting to any 14.4 or less service.

Any and all suggestions will be greatly appreciated.


Cheers,

Bill Hensley
TRW Oklahoma City Engineering Office
[e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Raymon A. Bobbitt)
Subject: D3 Channel Bank Question
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 04:52:40 GMT
Organization: RAMLink Internet Access Service


Does anyone know the difference between D3 and D4 framing in a channel
bank??

I have six D# units and was wondering what I can use them for.

Any suggestions?? (no boat anchor's please)  ;-)


Thanks,

Raymon A. Bobbitt      One Call Systems
Po Box 1091     Ashland, KY  41105-1091
V/F 606-329-9919   [e-mail]

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

Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 17:19:08 CST
From: Mark J Cuccia <[e-mail]>
Subject: New Canadian Telco Websites


When websurfing recently, I came across websites for NewTel (Newfoundland)
and Telebec & Northern Telephone.

NewTel (Newfoundland) is at http://www.newcomm.net/ntc.  This hasn't
(yet) been `added' to Stentor's map and list as a link from their
webpages.

Telebec (PQ) webpages have some detail to a couple of their operating
telephone regions and other info. Please note, it is *all* in French.
http://www.telebec.qc.ca.  Much of this website is still under construction.

Northern Telephone (ON) has some good history from their webpage as
well as other general info.  http://www.nt.net/nortel/nortel.htm


MARK J. CUCCIA   PHONE/WRITE/WIRE:     HOME:  (USA)    Tel: CHestnut 1-2497
WORK: [e-mail] |4710 Wright Road| ([phone])
Tel:UNiversity 5-5954([phone])|New Orleans 28  |fwds on no-answr to
Fax:UNiversity 5-5917([phone])|Louisiana(70128)|cellular/voicemail

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

From: [e-mail] (Gerry Belanger)
Subject: CT Local Competition Docket/Decision
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 13:31:42 EST


For those interested, the CT DPUC has put the local competition
docket and decision on the state webserver.

The documents appear to be in MS word for windows 6.0 form.

URL is http://www.state.ct.us/EXECU/DPUC/telcom.htm

zip and self-extracting zip is also there.


Gerry Belanger, Sr Microsystems Engineer <[e-mail],[e-mail]>
Cognitronics Corporation, 3 Corporate Dr, Danbury CT 06810
Main:[phone], Direct:[phone], Fax: [phone]

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

From: [e-mail] (Clayton R. Nash)
Subject: Re: AT&T Card Fraud
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 95 23:26:21 GMT
Organization: personal internet service


I haven't been able to confirm it, but the last fraud I encountered
appeared to have originated from someone obtaining PIN numbers from
the PBX or call accounting system (or printouts from the same).  Two
calls, made from a hotel room using a non-AT&T calling card resulted
in many calls about a week later in that same part of the country (San
Jose, CA).  Makes you wonder, since it was quite impossible for
someone to have looked over my shoulder.


[e-mail]


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Your suggestion that it might have
happened via the PBX reminds me of the first time I heard of this
happening, somewhere around 30-35 years ago in the early 1960's.
According to the account in the {Chicago Tribune} at the time,
a switchboard operator at a rather elegant apartment hotel on the
north side of Chicago overheard a guest in the hotel as he passed
his telephone calling card number to the Illinois Bell long distance
operator. The hotel operator then used the card for numerous personal
calls over a two or three month period before being 'caught in the
act' by telephone company security guys at a payphone near the
hotel late one evening, in the process of making an international
call. The card had found its way onto the 'hot list' and the overseas
operator at White Plains, NY spotted it in taking a call. She stalled
the user at the payphone while claiming she was 'trying to get a
circuit available to London for the call ...'. In the meantime, telco
security was notified and the fraud user was greeted by a knock on
the door of the payphone booth. A quaint little story, with probably
no one at the time aware of how pervasive toll fraud would become in
the next couple generations.  PAT]

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

From: [e-mail] (Joseph E. Norton)
Subject: Re: 10-732 ANI Number
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
Date: Tue, 26 Dec 1995 01:07:57 GMT


> One now dials 10-732-1-770-988-9664.

Interestingly, I also tried this same 770 number with AT&T TeleTravel
Service.  The reply I got was: Boop 51362950018 Boop 8880001565

Also, the TeleTravel Platform informed me that I could leave a message
for this party by pressing 93.  This message only gets spoken when
there is no answer-supervision on the line, so guess you are not being
charged from home either.  Have to try it from work where we have
direct AT&T service.

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

From: Paul Boudreaux <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: Digital Global Roaming
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 06:36:20 -0600
Organization: Texas Metronet, Inc  (login info (214/705-2901 - 817/571-0400))
Reply-To: [e-mail]


Ian Nicholls wrote:

> [e-mail] (James Brister) writes:

>> Do I have any hope of use that phone is the USA?

> No.  I don't think GSM is used at all over there.  Some companies use a
> digital variant of the Analogue system, which doesn't help you.

Well, you might be able to use your SIM in the Washington DC area.  A
Sprint (and someone else) venture just launched PCS1900 service.
PCS1900 is basically GSM at 1900Mhz (there are some "americanization"
aspects such as equal access for long distance).  But, you will NOT be
able to use your phone from Australia.

>> Could anyone enlighten me as to potential problems?

> When you get back, you might have to pay an arm and a leg through the nose
> for approval to use a foreign phone in Australia.

That's kind of protectionist, isn't it?  I mean, all you should have
to do is pay any import duties and you should be done.  As far as
getting service with Telstra or OPTUS, you should be able to plug your
SIM (that is registered in a local network) into your phone ... and you
should be done.  However, I've heard that the voice encryption (A5
algorythm (sp?)) used in Europe was blocked in Australia.  And, that
a "substitute" encryption method was employed instead.  Anybody know
the details?

The GSM networks in Australia generally wouldn't know where the phone
was purchased (or manufactured).  Really, all they care about is
whether or not your IMSI (International Mobile Subscriber Identity)
and IMEI (International Mobile Equipment Identity) numbers are valid
in it's network.

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

From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MAJOR Change in AT&T Tariffs Hitting Casual (10-288) Users
Date: 27 Dec 1995 05:20:43 GMT
Reply-To: [e-mail]


In <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Robert A.
Rosenberg) writes:

> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail].
> edu (John R. Grout) wrote:

> 900 numbers, the back-office cost involved i.e., generating a monthly
>> bill for them and sending it to the LEC is _far_ greater than that for
>> subsequent calls.

> What back office cost? The only cost that I can see is if the person is

I think the issue is how the LEC charges ATT for billing.  Using USW
as an example, to have a separate billing page in the USW bill costs
ATT about $0.380 each month.  Each call placed on that page costs
about $0.025.  So for ATT to bill one call via the LEC costs $0.405
($0.380 + $0.0025), or $0.405 per call.  To bill ten calls costs ATT
$0.63 ($0.380 + (10 * $0.0025)) or $0.063 per call.  So if you are
already an ATT customer, the incremental cost to add one call record
to the LEC bill is small; if you are not, well, you can see why ATT
isn't very interested in (in most cases) losing money on single call
casual billing.


Hope this was useful,

Dale Tomrdle    [e-mail]

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

From: [e-mail] (Steve Uhrig)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Over AT&T
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 1995 00:49:11 GMT
Organization: BrightNet


Scott Plichta <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I live in PA, and my parents live in Maryland.  They have AT&T
> selected as a long distance carrier.  Whenever they call me, my caller
> ID box is still showing "NO CID NBR". Of course, we all know that
> after Dec.1 this isn't supposed to happen, so I made it a point to try
> to find an answer.

There seems to be a misconception that because the FCC required
interlata LD carriers to pass through CID that you should always get
it.

The FCC's ruling only applies to interlata LD carriers. Local exchange
carriers do not come under the jurisdiction of the FCC.

(Snip)

> I then explain the FCC ruling and that I would like a satisfactory
> reason that AT&T won't pass the CID (maybe the switch isn't SS7 I
> suggest [knowing full well that it is]).  He then determines that he

SS7 stands for Signal System Seven. It is required to provide CID
outside of the local call processor. Many Digital offices are not
equipped with SS7. These offices are not capable of providing CID
outside of their operating area. The FCC ruling does not require that
SS7 be installed in every Class 5 office. If the office you received
the call from is a mechanical office, or a digital office that doesn't
have SS7 you will not get CID and the owner of the originating Class 5
office is not required to provide it. Local exchange carriers come
under the jurisdiction of the state PUCs.


Steve Uhrig    Chillicothe, Ohio  USA

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

From: [e-mail] (John Wilkerson)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Over AT&T
Date: 27 Dec 1995 09:37:18 -0500
Organization: The Greater Columbus FreeNet


Scott Plichta ([e-mail]) wrote:

> I live in PA, and my parents live in Maryland.  They have AT&T
> selected as a long distance carrier.  Whenever they call me, my caller
> ID box is still showing "NO CID NBR". Of course, we all know that
> after Dec.1 this isn't supposed to happen, so I made it a point to try
> to find an answer.

     I live in Ohio. Calls from an adjacent area code came thru with
both name and number.

     My brother in Texas called recently. His number came over with the
name "Texas Call" showing up on the name display.  AT&T seems to be
working okay, as well as I can tell.


John L. Wilkerson Jr...    [e-mail]
                           [e-mail]
                           71140,[e-mail]
                           http://www.right.net/~johnw

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

From: [e-mail] (Kevin R. Ray)
Subject: Re: Caller ID Over AT&T
Date: 26 Dec 1995 02:25:11 -0600
Organization: MCSNet Services


I have used AT&T to make local calls to some people that I didn't want
to know who was calling in the past couple of days. I didn't want to
show up as "ANONYMOUS" (*67), so AT&T was my choice. :-)

Using 10288 does pass along the CID info.
Using 1-800-CALL-ATT does *NOT* pass along the CID info.
Using 0-NUMBER also does *NOT* pass along the CID info (which I would
               think would be an Ameritech problem.)

Almost a month later and they still don't have it right ... and trying
to talk to any of the big companies on this is almost useless.  I'm
still fighting Cellular One (Chicago) on all cell phones coming up
"ANONYMOUS" by default too.

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

From: Matthew S. D'Elia <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: How Do You Reach A Local Operator From Out Of State?
Date: 27 Dec 1995 23:03:25 GMT
Organization: jaguNET Access Services


[e-mail] wrote:

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

>> Can anyone tell me how to reach the local operator if I'm not in the
>> same state? I'm not trying to dial the AT&T operator ("00"). I've been
>> trying to dial the local operator in NV (specifically Contel, the LEC
>> for the Lake Tahoe area) from NJ, and so far the only way I've been
>> able to get connected is by calling Contel's business office, who put
>> me through.

> The reason I was trying to reach the local operator was to get rate
> information to find out if calling a certain exchange from a certain
> other exchange was a toll call.  Except for looking at a Nevada phone
> book, which I didn't have access to, I couldn't think of any other way
> to find that out.

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: You are welcome, and this is just what
> Steve discussed in his message in this issue isn't it ... perhaps the
> thinking is you don't need that information since the only way you
> could possibly make such a call -- and thus be subject to the rates --
> would be if you were in the area in question. And of course in that
> case, you would be within easy reach of an operator who would be glad
> to stir the confusion up even further for you.   <g>     PAT]

   If a long distance company operator cannot reach a local operator,
then how do you have a long distance busy signal checked?


[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well, as a matter of fact, many times
you don't. In all the years AT&T and the Bells were one organization
or system, things like this were not a problem. If you could not get
through on a call, you just dialed the operator who would 'verify' the
busy signal or other impediment on the line. She would do so by
calling the 'inward operator' in the community in question and say
something like this, "This is <name of city>, please assist in dialing
<number>, we get no ring/no answer". Or she would say "we have tried
it and only get a busy signal." The other end would generally try it
again at that point and get the same result, at which point she would
go off the line for a couple minutes and come back to report the
phone had been left off the hook or whatever else was wrong if she
could detirmine it. She would also put in a trouble report. Sometimes
the telephone man would come to your house and ask if you knew that
your phone was off-hook, or was it otherwise broken, etc. If it was
broken, they would fix it then and there.

Then came MCI and Sprint. Skimming the cream did not then (nor does it
now, but things are different now) include customer assistance in
getting a connection. If you asked the MCI/Sprint 'operator' to help
you get through on a call, their response was always, "to place that
call, you need to hang up, dial one oh two eight eight zero and the
number."   They would never say 'call AT&T's operator'; always 'dial
10288' as if AT&T was a bad word to say, and that the customer would
just go ahead and dial as instructed still assuming that MCI/Sprint
was 'saving him a lot of money' on his phone bill, just as they had
always advertised they would do. For a long time after divestiture,
AT&T continued to use the local Bell operators in many communities,
and they continued to assist in getting through on numbers which were
otherwise unreachable for whatever reason. I've not placed calls
like that in so long I really don't know what they do now.    PAT]

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

End of TELECOM Digest V15 #531
******************************