Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15990; 30 Mar 91 4:15 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 00:59 EST Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 23:59:58 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #251 BCC: Message-ID: <9103292359.ab25636@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 29 Mar 91 20:35:40 CST Volume 11 : Issue 251 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Robert J. Woodhead] Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Brian Crawford] Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Wolfgang R. Schulz] Re: The Early Days of Telephony [Kent Borg] Re: The Great US Telephone Conspiracy [Carl Moore] Re: MCI Around-Town Disappearing [Jonathan White] Re: Questions About New Service Being Installed [Raymond C. Jender] Re: New Hotel Ripoff [John Higdon] Re: New Hotel Ripoff [Barton F. Bruce] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Robert J. Woodhead] Re: Questions About AT&T Credit Card Calls [Kath Mullholand] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Robert J Woodhead Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Date: 28 Mar 91 02:32:51 GMT Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Tokyo Japan steff@cernvax.cern.ch (morten steffensen) writes: > My question: Does there exist a commercial "plug-in-and-play" > converter box between these different signals. What would be the best > for her to do? Re-export the TV and the video? There are international VCR's that do what you want. The Akihabara in Tokyo is lousy with them, as they are a big hit with tourists. These VCRs can play PAL, SECAM and NTSC VHS tapes, and also have tuners that can pick up all the formats. They have an internal converter and, I THINK, can drive a PAL, SECAM or NTSC tv or monitor. One I saw recently has a front panel bevel with a map of the world on it, with lots of little flags. You just press the flag of the country you are in to reconfigure the VCR. Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp ------------------------------ From: Brian Crawford Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Date: 27 Mar 91 13:58:39 GMT Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ In article , steff@cernvax.cern.ch (morten steffensen) writes: > My question: Does there exists a commercial "plug-in-and-play" > converter box between these different signals. What would be the best > for her to do? Re-export the TV and the video? Simple answer: No, unless you have a BIG FAT checkbook to purchase this device. This subject has been beaten to death over on rec.video. Brian Crawford INTERNET (current): crawford@enuxha.eas.asu.edu PO Box 804 (permanent): crawford@stjhmc.fidonet.org Tempe, Arizona 85280 FidoNet: 1:114/15.12 USA Amateur: KL7JDQ ------------------------------ From: "Wolfgang R. Schulz" Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Date: 28 Mar 91 14:42:27 GMT steff@cernvax.cern.ch (morten steffensen) writes: > My friend has brought a television and a video with her from England > into Geneva, Switzerland. These are only capable of receiving the > British transmission standard: GB-I (PAL). Now in Geneva she would > like to be able to receive the Swiss and the French television (or at > least one of them). In Switzerland the standard is CCIR (PAL-SECAM) > and in France it is FR-L (SECAM). > My question: Does there exists a commercial "plug-in-and-play" > converter box between these different signals. What would be the best > for her to do? Re-export the TV and the video? Although I think that this matter is permanently discussed in rec.video, I wish to point out, that really the British gear is rather useless in the Swiss/French continental corner. Two major handicaps are the reason: a. The PAL standard and the FRENCH version of SECAM will only work in one set (VCR or TV) when they are specially designed for it, mostly because SECAM video is beeing broadcast NEGATIVE, while PAL is POSITIVE (compare with a slide, you get almost the same negative results when looking at them). b. The audio/ video separation in a TV channel is different. So a tuner made for the UK can only "listen" to British audio. CCIR has a different separation and French TV another even. c. UK equipment usually only has a tuner for UHF frequencies, while on the continent you get the most channels on VHF. Really, re-export it, and get something locally that is designed for reception in that area. All dealers there will have sets which do well on both systems. Happy holidays! Wolfgang R. Schulz, Hamburg, Germany ***BTX (and phone): 0405521878 Bang: ...unido!mcshh!wrs *** UUCP: wrs@mcshh.UUCP Internet: wrs@mcshh.hanse.de *** MCI: 241-2526 ------------------------------ From: Kent Borg Subject: Re: The Early Days of Telephony Date: 27 Mar 91 22:25:19 GMT Organization: Camex Inc., Boston MA In article varney@ihlpf.att.com (Al L Varney) writes: > at least parts were). ANI was added around 1973, before that you > dialed a toll call as 1+ ..., but the operator had to ask "Number, > please?"; you KNEW she meant the number you were calling from! I never knew. I always had to ask what she meant. I had assumed that they knew where I was calling from (you mean I could have lied and gotten away with it? -- never occured to me), yet I had just dialed the number I wanted, so why would she ask that? Kent Borg internet: kent@camex.com AOL: kent borg H: (617) 776-6899 W: (617) 426-3577 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 15:46:32 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: The Great US Telephone Conspiracy A case where law enforcement agencies used long distance phone records was a few years ago in Delaware when a couple was killed and their baby kidnapped. Detectives looked over phone records, expanded their search to include the slain couple's relatives, and found a long distance call from the Houston area (using Harrington 302-398 prefix) to a parent of one of the slain couple (this was on the Hartly 302-492 exchange). Even though the prefixes are in the same county, this was a toll call (probably became local recently when Diamond State was ordered to set up "county-wide" local calling); had such call been local, the phone company probably would not have been able to help (according to newspaper article at the time). As it was, however, this discovery put detectives on the road to recovering the baby and making arrests in the case. And in a different matter: Yes, I have also read that overheard credit card numbers are a common source of phone fraud. Touchtone pay phones make it possible to punch in the credit card number instead of having to recite it to a human operator. (Here I do not intend to discuss such things as: COCOT disabling keypad; putting rotary dial back in place of touchtone in drug-infested areas; etc.) John Higdon writes: > Except for collect calls, which are becoming increasingly rare, all > long distance calls are ticketed to an account that can be used to > identify a caller -- even if that caller uses a coin phone. "Cash" calls also? A call billed to a third number does not necessarily point to you; but notice that it leaves a lot of clues: the phones called from and to, and the number the call is charged to. Several years ago, I believe at least in the Wilmington (Del.) newspaper, phone company security pointed out that third-party fraud could be eliminated by getting rid of third-party billing, but that a lot of people want such billing; therefore, there are strict verification rules in use of such billing. ------------------------------ From: jonathan white Subject: Re: MCI Around-Town Disappearing Date: 28 Mar 91 00:30:24 GMT Organization: New York University wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) writes: > As of 1 April, MCI's Around-Town is no more. > This was a GREAT feature, IMHO. Basically, if you used 950-xxxx access > from your local calling area, you did NOT pay the ripoff $0.75/0.80 > charge. You might want to try ITT/Metromedia. They have no surcharge on calling card calls no matter where you call from. I've been using mine for about six months now and have no complaints. Jonathan whitejon@acf5.nyu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 00:23:09 EST From: Raymond C Jender Subject: Re: Questions About New Service Being Installed Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article , drears@pica.army.mil (Dennis G. Rears (FSAC)) writes: > What I'd like to know is what are 2 and 3ESS? What's the difference > between a 1 and a 1A (is it just the processor? Does 1A run Unix?) > And what kind of hardware does a 4ESS have (I've never seen one)? The 2 and 3ESS are smaller rural type switches. Sorry, I don't know much more then that without researching. The 1 and 1A differ in the processor used. The 1E uses an analog processor. The 1A Processor is digital. Both 1E and 1A use the same network, thus when a 1E is being retrofitted to 1A, only the processor is swapped out. That the reason that the calls sound exactly the same on both switches, they only complete quicker. No, the 1A does not run Unix, or any other popular brand of OS. It uses it's own proprietary and unique assembly language. The 4E uses the 1A processor. It's network is digital. It can be used as either a Toll or Tandem switch. I guess you can say there was a completely digital switch being used back in, oh, when did the first 4E cut over, 1975-78 time frame? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 02:12 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: New Hotel Ripoff "David G. Cantor" writes: > I objected and the clerk replied that it wasn't a local > call. After it became clear that I was familiar with the area, etc., > she stated that "Yes, it is a local call from the [PacTel] payphone in > the lobby, but not from our system"! When you step over the threshold of a motel or hotel, you are subject to its tender mercies. It controls the horizontal and the vertical. It can make the image a soft blur or sharpen it ... oops, sorry. Wrong program. But you get the idea. It can charge whatever it likes. A visitor from out of the area stayed at a Day's Inn in Santa Clara. For those not familiar with the area, Santa Clara is completely encompassed by the "San Jose 2" calling area. It includes all of Santa Clara, San Jose, Sunnyvale, Campbell, Los Gatos, Mountain View and Los Altos (in 415), Milpitas, and Cupertino as local. But the sign on the telephone indicated that anything outside of Santa Clara was "long distance". So a perfectly local call to my house from the lobby pay phone ended up being a rather costly "long distance" call from the room. Remember, you pay dearly for that convenient telephone in your room. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: Re: New Hotel Ripoff Date: 28 Mar 91 22:15:12 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , dgc@math.ucla.edu (David G. Cantor) writes: > I was just a guest at the Del Mar Hilton Hotel (in Del Mar, > clearly, "Local calls 50 cents" and I placed a call to a number in La > My bill contained a $4.86 charge for this call. I objected and the clerk If enough folks on the net were interested to see if the Hilton Hotels have some chain policy, they could EACH call Hilton's 1.800.445.8667 number and ask. It might be reasonable to also ask if the Del Mar property is Hilton owned or privately owned, and if privately owned, 'Are they supposed to be conforming to chain policies that prevent one property from giving the rest of the chain a bad reputation?'. It is always wise to do as much travel planning ahead of time as possible, and this little call may simplify future decisions. ------------------------------ From: Robert J Woodhead Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: 29 Mar 91 08:23:25 GMT Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Tokyo Japan bill@gauss.eedsp.gatech.edu (Bill Berbenich) writes: > Court Rules Phone Books Unprotected; Justices: Copyright Law Doesn't > Apply [Moderator's Note: I think we are witnessing the end of an era > of accurate, reliable telephone directories from the Bell telcos. > Obviously from this point forward instead of maintaining a detailed > and highly technical directory bureau, all telco needs to do is copy > some other directory and put their name on the cover each year. PAT] I think you are wrong. How do you think a local directory is assembled by the phone company? They have their subscriber's names and addresses on their billing computers; dump the names, addresses and phone numbers into a file, sort them, massage them a little, and send the results to a postscript typsetter; voila, instant white-pages. I'd be shocked if the phone companies did it any other way! Since the telcos have the customers, and assign the numbers, and need to have the details in order to run their businesses, there is no reason for their directories to be innacurate. I do have some qualms about the court decision, however. The phone company does spend money to create the entries in the white pages, and it seems to me that rival directory companies are getting a free ride on the back of Ma Bell. Also, who is going to define what an "original work" is? There are a lot of complicated privacy issues here. It would be nice if it were the case that each subscriber "owned" his telephone number, and had the right to decide how it was distributed. That would force the whole industry to get real when it comes to a wide variety of privacy issues; alas, it will never happen. Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp [Moderator's Note: Well, the court decision was just another in the series of 'dump on Ma Bell' decisions for which the federal judiciary is well-known. Of course telco spends a great deal of time and money to verify their directories and insure accuracy. Most of the other fly-by-night one shot directory publishers make no attempt to verify anything. They just copy from telco. This can be easily proven as Illinois Bell has done a couple times: IBT puts 'ringers' in their directories; that is, here and there a totally made-up entry which does not exist. This disproves any claims of 'carefully researched and compiled' directories by other publishers. When a competitor's directory comes out (or a new Haines Criss-Cross book) IBT checks it out looking for their 'ringers'. If they find any (ringers), the competitor gets sued for copyright violation. At least they did in the past. I guess now telco gets to do the work for the other publishers for free. If *I* had anything to do with telco directory compilation and distribution, my response to the Supreme Court would be to abolish phone directories entirely. That would wipe out the leeches in the directory-publishing industry overnight and prevent any futher theft of my work, whether the Supreme Court liked it or not. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1991 13:58:52 EST From: KATH MULLHOLAND Subject: Re: Questions About AT&T Credit Card Calls We have tested the new AT&T "scrambled" number cards (that do not mimic an area code/phone number combination) and have found that our Baby Bell (NYNEX) will not accept the card. If this is so, it is only right, since NYNEX also does not accept MCI Sprint, or other common carrier credit cards (not ot mention Visa, etc.) We are recommending to our faculty that they only get an AT&T card if they are travelling overseas and need to call back here. We encourage Baby Bell cards because they are going to be much more flexible as time goes on. Kath Mullholand UNH, Durham, NH ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #251 ******************************  ISSUES 252 AND 253 GOT REVERSED IN TRANSMISSION. ISSUE 252 ARRIVED AFTER 253 IN THIS ARCHIVES. ALSO NOTE DUE TO PROBLEMS WITH MAILER AT EECS.NWU.EDU ISSUES BEGINNING AT 248 AND FORWARD WERE SENT FROM THE BACKUP SITE DSINC.DSI.COM FOR SEVERAL ISSUES.  Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16213; 30 Mar 91 4:33 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 03:04 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA09876; Fri, 29 Mar 91 23:45:13 CST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 1:54:37 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #253 Message-Id: <9103300154.ab08105@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 30 Mar 91 01:52:59 CST Volume 11 : Issue 253 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: MCI Telephone Records Produced in NY Trial [Eduardo Krell] Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works [Scott Hinckley] Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works [Wm Randolph Franklin] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [W. H. Sohl] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Daniel Guilderson] Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information [Steve Pershing] Re: MCI Card for Germans Includes $15 Gift [Wolfgang R. Schulz] Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing [Jim Rees] Re: More on Frequnecy-Selective Ringing [Donald E. Kimberlin] Re: MCI Around Town Followup [Joe Konstan] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ekrell@ulysses.att.com Subject: Re: MCI Telephone Records Produced in NY Trial Organization: AT&T Bell Labs Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 23:05:04 EST The latest twist in that case is that an MCI executive called by the prosecution testified he didn't believe the MCI statement the defense presented was genuine since at that time all MCI statements had a special legend printed (something like "Communications for the next 100 years") and the statement shown by the defense didn't have it. Eduardo Krell AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ UUCP: {att,decvax,ucbvax}!ulysses!ekrell Internet: ekrell@ulysses.att.com ------------------------------ From: Scott Hinckley Subject: Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works Date: 29 Mar 91 15:20:19 GMT Organization: Boeing AI Center, Huntsville, AL newsham@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Timothy Newsham) writes: > decision since I wanted to complete my collection (through talking to > the MCI rep I discovered that only 1+ MCI customers could get an MCI > Calling Card). Not true. I have an MCI card and NO phone (the phone in my apartment is under someone else's name and is not MCI.) > So about a year passes by after I switched from MCI back to AT&T. I > pull out the ole' MCI Calling Card that was supposed to be cancelled > nine months previous when I switched subscribers. I try it. It still > works. > So what happens to the bill I could possibly accumulate on this card? MCI simply reports you to a credit collection agency if you don't answer their mail after a reasonable few months. Then the collection agency comes after you. Scott Hinckley Internet:scott@hsvaic.boeing.com UUCP:...!uunet!uw-beaver!bcsaic!hsvaic!scott DISCLAIMER: All contained herein are my opinions, they do not|+1 205 461 2073 represent the opinions or feelings of Boeing or its management| BTN:461-2073 ------------------------------ From: Wm Randolph Franklin Subject: Re: I've Moved and Old MCI Calling Card Still Works Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY Date: 29 Mar 91 22:16:49 GMT In article newsham@wiliki.eng.hawaii. edu (Timothy Newsham) mentions that MCI kept his card valid after he cancelled it and moved. This is also true of credit cards. I've had MC/Visa card reps absolutely refuse to cancel card numbers that I didn't want to renew. They call it a convenience in case I change my mind six months later. I call it their forlorn hope that I will accidently use it and then they can hit me for the annual fee. The only solution is probably to report the number stolen. Wm. Randolph Franklin Internet: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (or @cs.rpi.edu) Bitnet: Wrfrankl@Rpitsmts Telephone: (518) 276-6077; Telex: 6716050 RPI TROU; Fax: (518) 276-6261 Paper: ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 ------------------------------ From: W. H. Sohl Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 05:26:02 GMT Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Reply-To: W. H. Sohl Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ In article RAF@cu.nih.gov (Roger Fajman) writes: > Well, our cable system here charges by the TV too. Trouble with this > argument is that, while we have more than two TVs, there are only two > of us living in the house (not counting the cats, who don't watch much > TV at all :-). Since the TVs are in different rooms, it is quite > impossible for us to watch more than two at a time, but we are billed > for all. > We have only one converter box, as all the TVs but one are cable ready > and we have no premium channels (so no unscrambling is necessary). > Under those conditions, the converter boxes just get in the way (and > they charge for remote controls for them too -- even if you supply > your own programmable unit). > The cable company just announced that the basic service is being > divided into three tiers. Initially, the total for all three tiers is > the same as before, but I'm sure the price increases won't be long in > coming (there have already been two in one year). Of course, many of > the channels we like (old movies, CNN) are in the upper tiers. The > lowest tier gets you primarily the local broadcast stations and the > community service stations. While pricing for all three tiers is NOW the same as the basic package was before, IF they break out the pricing and you then need to subscribe to each tier separately, you can bet that that will lead to the scambling of the channels in tiers two and three. Once that is done, you are then forced to use a cable company converter box for each separate TV to descramble tiers two and three. If that happens, the remote control functionality of your existing cable ready TV sets becomes useless for those channels that are scrambled, thus forcing you to opt for the cable company's remote control features at additional cost. > I've never understood the logic of granting an exclusive franchise and > deregulating prices at the same time. Of course, we don't have to > have cable TV, but that's no reason for allowing a monopoly without > price controls. It seems to me that competition should have been the > quid pro quo for deregulating prices. Here in NJ, the cable company is granted a franchise, but that is not an exclusive monopoly franchise. The economic reality, however, is that no other cable company is likely to want to expend the capital costs associated with cableing an already cabled area on a competitive basis. The deregulation of cable as I recall was done by federal action, so I don't know what, if any, local concerns were addressed during the discussion of the legislation before it became law. These are my personnel viewpoints, and not my employer's. Bill Sohl || email Bellcore, Morristown, NJ || UUCP bcr!taichi!whs70 (Bell Communications Research) || or 201-829-2879 Weekdays || Internet whs70@taichi.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 23:34:05 -0500 From: Daniel Guilderson Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws > The ideal solution is to have everyone pay based on the number of > hours they "consume" and the relative cost to the supplier (home > shopping network is much cheaper than HBO for the cable company to > provide). I doubt the cable companies would ever submit to this "solution" because they are operating on fixed costs. It doesn't matter if you aren't watching TV during the month of March, they still have to maintain a working connection to your residence. By the same token, it doesn't cost them anything more if you have 100 TV sets hooked up as opposed to one. For a broadcast type service such as cable television, the amount charged to customers should be based on the cost to make and maintain the physical connection. It's different for phone companies because some calls take up more resources than others. Which makes me wonder about how a computer network could be billed. I figure a TCP/IP (or some kind of ISO based protocol) network would be a highly desirable thing for a lot of people. I don't think it's good enough to limit it to SLIP because then the only time your connected to the network is when you call it up. I would want something that's always connected. I figure the fairest way to bill this kind of network would be to only charge for packets that originate from your node. What do you think? Daniel Guilderson ryan@cs.umb.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information From: Steve Pershing Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 11:59:54 PST Organization: Questor - Free Internet/Usenet*Vancouver*BC::+1 604 681 0670 konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > I remember reading about some of the Demon Dialers of yesteryear and I > was wondering what is still available today. Specifically, I'd like: Zoom Telephonics in the Boston, Ma. area are still in business. They made probably the best "Demon dialler". I don't have the telephone number, but you should be able to find them through area 617 information. Steve Pershing, System Administrator The QUESTOR Project: FREE Usenet News/Internet Mail; Sci, Med, AIDS, more Internet: sp@questor.wimsey.bc.ca : POST: 1027 Davie Street, Box 486 Phones: Voice/FAX: +1 604 682 6659 : Vancouver, British Columbia Data/BBS: +1 604 681 0670 : Canada V6E 4L2 ------------------------------ From: Wolfgang R. Schulz Subject: Re: MCI Card for Germans Includes $15 Gift Date: 30 Mar 91 00:27:48 GMT Since MCI offers "Call USA" from Germany too now (by toll-free number 0130-0012), unlike AT&T's Calling Card, everybody can get the MCI Card, as long as he has a MasterCard or VISA Card. With Signup's until March 31st 1991 you will receive $15 off calls to the U.S. The address is: MCI International Langstrasse 50 6450 Hanau phone 06181/252021-22-23-24 fax: 06181/252086 ***Wolfgang R. Schulz, Hamburg, Germany ***BTX (and phone): 0405521878*** ***Bang: ...unido!mcshh!wrs *** UUCP: wrs@mcshh.UUCP *** ***Internet: wrs@mcshh.hanse.de *** MCI: 241-2526 *** ------------------------------ From: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing Reply-To: rees@citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 17:40:43 GMT In article , kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > The [late, great] Bell System philosophy was dead set against > frequency-selective ringing. Using polarity-dependent superimposed > ringing, four unique parties could be signaled. Eight-party lines > used coded ringing, and could be dialed directly since there were SxS > connectors arranged for automatic coded ringing selection. I don't know what our old (Bell System) switch was before it was replaced with a 1A some time in the late '70s, but it had ringback on 491x. Different values of 'x' would give eight different coded rings plus continuous ring. I miss this feature. Our current switch doesn't even have a ringback number that I can find (I've tried all the test prefixes, and located all kinds of tones, battery, terminated-no-battery, and so on, but no ringback). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 05:06 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing Larry Lippman, as always, brings us those bits of telephone lore that help put pieces together. In his reply he explains that Bell's way to ring more than four parties was to add coded ringing to divided ringing. (I probably misled the group by not adding to remarks about using "ground" as one side of the ringing circuit -- that the "ground" was through a cold-cathode diode vacuum tube in the protector outside the house.) As to frequency-selective ringers, I came along late in the territory of an Independent that seemed to have bought its equipment from wherever there was some that week. You could go into one house and find and Automatic Electric phone; a WECo in the next, and a Stromberg in the third ... plus assorted cats and dogs from time to time. Reminiscent of that time, when WECo built a pink Princess telephone, AT&T was so proud, they ran an double-page color ad about how modern they were in magazine. One of my neighbors remarked to their chum who worked for "the phone company" how classy that looked. A few weeks later, up rolled the chum in his yellow (remember those from the non-Bell telcos, folks?) truck with ... you guessed it ... in a box and proceeded to ask where they wanted it installed (the bedroom, of course, where else?). I don't recall it ever showed up on the bill. But then, it was a different time and a different society, wasn't it? Oh, ending the story about the pink Princess phone: The nice chum from the telco said he was sorry, but he couldn't make the ringer work. This is appropos of the pretty constant remarks about mechanical tuning of riningers. The "book" probably never told people to do it, but in that place at that time, it was done a fair amount. It was probably a result of running a dial network with all that hodgepodge of hardware. As what happens with so many of our narrow views of "the business," this kid thought it was just normal. and, yes, bells hummed and tinkled a lot in that place at that time. We all just thought it was normal. And, thanks Larry, for telling me what a "pole-changer" was for. I saw old references to them, but never in a context that explained what their function was. They must have been very archiac, for by the time this kid came along, all the offices I saw had motor generators for ringing current. I guess they were more maintenance free. I can only guess pole-changers went out before WW II. Larry mentioned "AC power line operated ringing plants" in the context of U.S. PBXs. Most of the Bell and overseas telcos I ever got into used a low frequency AC ringing current (16-2/3Hz in most, which is curiously the same .83333.... of 20 Hertz as 50 Hertz is of 60 Hertz. This always made me suspect I could guess where they got their first ringing generators from. What I found uniquely different was that in my Paris apartment, it seemed the PTT rang phones with 50 Hertz. This could easily have been a current-limited sample of the AC power line. I often thought that probably saved French-technology PTTS a few million in ringing generators over the years. Makes me wonder why the rest of us even bothered to get into 20 Hertz in the first place. But when Larry said: > Sounds like an end-cell charger to me..... and then: > remember liquid countercells? He brought up a whole tale I'll put into another nostalgia post, because this one is getting too long and wandering off its title. Anyhow, thanks and congratulations, Larry! I hope people like Al Varney have more to add to the "mysteries of ringing" and putting the two major ways into context. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 18:43:10 PST From: Joe Konstan Subject: Re: MCI Around Town Followup Episode four in my wonderful experiences with MCI Calling Cards: You may recall at the end of Episode 3 I had (after a 5 month delay) been credited with the 25 cent Around Town surcharges for several months since MCI's 800 number still touted Around Town as a no-surcharge service. I called back today and Around Town is now touted as a reduced charge service. I then speak with a rep. 1. She didn't think Around Town was being discontinued but checked and found out that indeed it was (for crying out loud, it's 3/28 and I'm sure she was telling people to sign up left and right for MCI with the Around Town benefit). 2. She will report that the 800 number (our 800 number sir?) still has the advertisement. 3. She didn't know about any notices but will "make a note to ask about it." Oh joy! Since Around Town is gone April 1, does anyone have the right 800 number for ITT (Metromedia, whatever) to get their calling card. I tried once and got someone who was entirely clueless, but I think it was the wrong 800 number. Joe Konstan ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #253 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16353; 30 Mar 91 4:47 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 01:01 EST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 0:02:04 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #252 BCC: Message-ID: <9103300002.ab25054@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 29 Mar 91 21:11:09 CST Volume 11 : Issue 252 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Rich Zellich] Re: Ground Start vs Loop Start: How to Convert? [John Higdon] Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones [Jeff Carroll] Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones [John R. Levine] Re: Query on 8-Party Ringing [Rich Zellich] Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing [Terry Kennedy] More Even More on Selective Ringing [David Lesher] Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? [Tom Gray] Re: Telecom Equipment Wanted [John Higdon] Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service [Phydeaux] Re: PacBell Blocks 950-xxxx [Peter da Silva] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 10:11:37 CST From: Rich Zellich Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Here in the St. Louis and St. Louis County areas, I have no idea what the various local laws or franchise agreements allow the cable companies to do, but they only charge for the basic entry F-connector (or for the box, if one is connected); they charge for each _box_, not for each internally-connected TV or VCR, and also for each remote control unit (and they're optional, but at least the old city company would give it to you free for the balance of the first year, to get you used to having/using it). I'm not positive, but I think they will also install a second input jack for no extra installation or monthly charge; the only charge is for the converters (city anyway, have no idea about the various StL County cable companies). I've recently had a new house built in the county, and had it prewired for both video and phone. I had a separate jack installed for the future cable input, and it terminates on the other end in a four-foot piece of cable without an F-connector on it; according to the Communications Prewires, Inc. installer, the cable company will drill a hole into my basement and connect to my pre-wired cable on request. They've finally laid the feeder cables up and down our street over the last week, and we're now waiting for them to recontact us to see if we want our house connected to the two-house jack sticking out of a cylinder in my front yard. When they do connect, I will have to buy a few more short video cables and three more Y-adapters to hook up both the raw cable and the output of their converter box to a pair of amplified Radio Schlock switch boxes. These boxes each take four TV and one computer/game inputs, and feed two TV's and a VCR; since I have two of them, and have (or will have) the attic antenna, one of the VCR's, and both cable outputs Y-ed into both of them, I can feed four TV jacks and two VCRs (I currently have two TV sets and two VCRs connected to the switches, with two pre-installed jacks unused in the living room and spare bedroom). The back of my TV/stereo cabinet is an unholy mess of wires and cables, of course, since not only is all the video cable connected every way imaginable, but the TV stereo output (a separate box, more cabling) also feeds into the stereo system, which itself is fed every which way it can possibly be. If I had a cable company that insisted on making me pay for each TV connected, I'd just let them put in their one jack and converter box, and then just cheat and after-wire everything the same way, anyway. The RS boxes are about $40 for the un-amplified one with only one TV and one VCR output, and about $70 or $80 for the amplified version with two TV and one VCR output capability. If you want both raw cable input and premium-channel converter-box input, then all you need do is add a couple of extra short cables and a $3 Y-splitter. Cheers, Rich ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 10:01 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Ground Start vs Loop Start: How to Convert? Zarko Draganic writes: > Does anyone know of a simple circuit or a device you can buy that will > convert between loop start and ground start? I'm using an answering > device that doesn't realize when the caller hung up on one type of > line, and on the other, senses disconnect immediately. Is the problem > even related to loop/ground start? Ground or loop start should not be an issue here. Different types of CO switching behave differently upon disconnect. The 1/1AESS will provide loop interruption immediately when the caller hangs up. A DMS100 takes a while (and sometimes won't do it at all depending on the hardware/software packs). The same is true for the 5ESS. In Cupertino, you have service from both a 1AESS and a DMS100, depending on the prefix. The old "ALpine" (252, 253, etc.) exchanges are handled by the DMS, and the newer "weird" prefixes (996, 446, etc.) are served out of the 1AESS. If you find that the DMS is not returning a loop signal upon disconnect, you may be able to convince Pac*Bell to correct it. Good luck. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Jeff Carroll Subject: Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones Date: 29 Mar 91 00:08:22 GMT Reply-To: Jeff Carroll Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics In article contact!ndallen@eecs.nwu.edu (Nigel Allen) writes: > Northern Telecom's Harmony telephone set, which Bell Canada and some > other companies rent but do not sell, is a modern electronic telephone > set. The working parts and plastic shell do not weigh very much, and > apparently Northern Telecom's market research with prototypes of the > phone showed that consumers equated low weight with low quality. > And *that's* why there are lead weights in a Harmony telephone. > People who want a heavy telephone will find that manufacturers will > address that demand, but perhaps in an unexpected way. Several of the desk phones of more recent vintage around the office here are AT&T Touchtone desk phones with a carefully engineered (not lead, I don't think; there are health concerns) metallic weight bolted to the inside of the genuine used-to-be-Western-Electric base plate. The phone itself consists merely of a PC card the same size as the keypad and attached to the back of it. Although Boeing is gradually being ISDN-ized, the only ISDN circuits I have seen are at the desks of employees who used to have old-fashioned keysets. These have been replaced by Merlin-style ISDN terminals. The more fortunate of the rest of us (around this particular office, anyway) are using AT&T 610s, which are designed to look like the Japanese programmable speakerphones, down to the simulated speaker baffle in the middle of the handset cradle. Though the 610 *is* programmable, the "speaker baffle" has no slots in it, and no speaker. Don't tell me AT&T is totally without marketing savvy. Jeff Carroll carroll@ssc-vax.boeing.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 28 Mar 91 12:41:59 EST (Thu) From: "John R. Levine" In article you write: > Several posters have referred to some modern residential telephones, > manufactured by AT&T and other companies, as "lightweight". > [Some vendors weight phones with heavy pieces of metal.] I like heavy telephones because they don't fall off the table when you stretch out the cord. It doesn't really matter whether the weight is in active or inactive parts of the phone. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 15:04:13 CST From: Rich Zellich Subject: Re: Query on 8-Party Ringing Donald E. Kimberlin asks: > *how* did Bell accomplish 8- party ringing if they used only one > frequency? In my area, at least, it was simple. They used coded rings, and rang _every_ phone on the party line, instead of trying to ring only the _right_ one. If I remember right, when our number was "IMPerial 5201", we were three short rings (this may have only been a four-party line, too, so they could have used frequency-selective ringing if they had wanted to). To tie the above reference to a previous thread, the IMPerial 5201 number was later changed to HObart 7-5201 and then, much later, to 467-5201 - in other words, in the 45 years my father has lived there, his number has _never_ changed! (IMP = HO7 = 467) Cheers, Rich ------------------------------ From: "Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr" Subject: Re: More on Frequency-Selective Ringing Date: 28 Mar 91 16:30:51 GMT Organization: St. Peter's College, US In article , 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > So far, I never met anyone who could tell me just *how* Bell > did eight-party with WECo-built appratus. (No weasel stories now, > about apparatus WECo bought, resold and installed in some places. I > know they'd do that if they had to!) Well, BSP 501-250-300, Issue 2, January 1963 describes a system where up to four parties can be signalled using Ring Party on tip, Ring Party on ring, with + or - bias, and gives the codes for the ring-back systems to select the right party. No direct mention of eight-party ringing service is made, but there are two items of interest: "Eight party line stations in step-by-step dial areas" as well as a mention of "one-ring party" and "two-ring party", which might mean that both subscriber's instruments rang, but with distinctive ringing. Terry Kennedy Operations Manager, Academic Computing terry@spcvxa.bitnet St. Peter's College, US terry@spcvxa.spc.edu (201) 915-9381 ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: More Even More on Selective Ringing Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 18:39:28 EST Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers {How did *I* get started on this? - I've NEVER had a party line.} Both Donald and Larry have brought up good points. First, my BSP 500-114-100 titled "Ringing Limitations" answers Donald's query. Paragraph 3.04 says {talking about eight party} Coded ringing is used to differentiate between stations.... In other words, it is only "semi-selective" ringing. While I have not dug too deeply into this aspect, one advantage of at least the two party Bell method was ANI. While the trick with the tapped ringer coil added some noise, it DID allow the CO to figure if Mr. Tip or Ms. Ring was calling Fargo without a "numberpleeze." The isolators, such as a 28A or a 425A, are gas tubes. They don't conduct until a LARGE (~90v) dc voltage is impressed on the line. Ringing is on top of that. Thus, during talking, no unbalance thru the ringer coil, and less noise. But, if you have a 28A or other of the myriad items Ma mentions (11A's, 687B's, 425&6A tubes, 426N diodes and D180036 isolators, to name a few) can you ALSO have ANI, and if so, HOW? Here's a mix of old and new: Can you have party line selective ringing on ESS's? wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (305) 255-RTFM ------------------------------ From: Tom Gray Subject: Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? Date: 28 Mar 91 21:18:14 GMT Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. >In article forrette@cory.berkeley.edu >(Steve Forrette) writes: >> John Higdon writes: >>> Hence, 2600 Hz would serve as both supervisory and signaling carrier. >>> It was called "SF" (single frequency). >> You seem to know an awful lot about what 2600Hz can be used for! :-) For those of you who want to know how the 2600hz system works, you can obtain the CCITT international standard on R1 signalling. This includes a complete description of how the system works. You may also obtain the AT&T publication "Notes on the Network" which has a more practical description of this system. All of this information is totally public. It is an industry standard. As a matter of fact, I know about it beacuse I designed an SF trunk. Probably USENET is distributed to some places over this trunk type of my design. I obtained all the inforamtion I needed from "Notes on the Network" which AT&T was quite pleased to sell to anybody with the required amount of money. Tom Gray - have SF trunk for hire - will travel ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 14:00 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Telecom Equipment Wanted DBILLINGSLEY writes: > I have been messing around with telecom equipment (you > know, taking apart phones, building DTMF decoders, ad infinitum) and > was wondering if anyone has any old equipment not in use anymore that > you would like to sell ... > I guess I'm an undergrad with a wierd hobby. Not at all. You might be amazed at how many responses you will get from readers of this forum. Unfortunately, I have divested myself of most surplus gear due to space considerations. As I was growing up (and fooling around with things telephonic) it seemed as though all manner of doodads simply fell into my lap. Cable, blocks, telephone parts, switchboard parts, CO parts, even payphone parts came from everywhere. Sometimes it was friends of the family that would be cleaning out a garage, sometimes it would be a Pacific Telephone installer that would come back and drop off his collection of surplus stuff. In checking with associates, this seems to be a common experience. Visit any telephone "junkie" and you will find gobs of phone droppings. Even though I have cleaned most of it out, just a casual glance will tell you that a telephone nut lives here! Now where did I put that number for "Phoners Anonymous"? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 15:49:59 PST From: Phydeaux Subject: Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service The sad thing about this is that most people are afraid to do any of this themselves. Even if they *did* call the phone company and have them fix it at $60/hr, they'd be better off paying for the service call. I've never had inside wiring problems. I tried to convince one friend of this recently. She lives in an apartment building and is spending $2 each month for "wire maintenance." What a rip-off. reb *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* reb@ingres.com or reb%ingres.com@lll-winken.llnl.GOV ICBM: 41.55N 87.40W h:558 West Wellington #3R Chicago, IL 60657 312-549-8365 w:reb ASK/Ingres 10255 West Higgins Suite 500 Rosemont, IL 60018 708-803-9500 [Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell calls their plan 'Linebacker', and like the others it is a total waste of money. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Peter da Silva Subject: Re: PacBell Blocks 950-xxxx Organization: A corner of our bedroom Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1991 03:41:35 GMT > [Moderator's Note: The difference is, we don't usually expect this > sort of response from Bell payphones ... with COCOTS it is old hat: > refused connections and outrageous prices, etc. We know complaining > about COCOTS does very little good. No so with Bell payphones. PAT] I don't know about you, but I've always found payphone prices outrageous. Even worse was being charged "operator assisted" rates for using my AT&T phone card -- no operator involved. No, COCOTs are at worst just a bigger dose of the same medicine. Plus, just because it's a Bell phone doesn't mean it's not a COCOT. (peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #252 ******************************  ISSUE 253 APPEARS BEFORE 252 DUE TO ERROR IN TRANSISSION.  Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03457; 30 Mar 91 21:35 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 21:01 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA14814; Sat, 30 Mar 91 12:42:45 CST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 19:48:41 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #254 Message-Id: <9103301948.ab27349@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 30 Mar 91 17:55:38 CST Volume 11 : Issue 254 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Problems in Telecom City [TELECOM Moderator] Educational "Field Trip" to United Telephone of PA [Sean Williams] United Telephone -- 25 Years Ago [Sean Williams] AOS Payphone Experience [Jeff E. Nelson] Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land [Ron Schnell] New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Chris Petrilli] MCI Bill Key Evidence in Murder Trial [Wm Randolph Franklin] Re: Into the Telecosm [Peter Marshall] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 17:11:21 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Problems in Telecom City Since Thursday night, I have been dealing with a strange problem here at eecs involving the delivery of the Digest (the mailing list version) to the several hundred names and exploder addresses on the matrix. The problem: they stalled in the queue and wouldn't mail! We had a power outage early Thursday morning which dumped me (and everyone else at eecs) offline in the early morning hours. I was in the middle of editing issue 248. Once I got back on line, the system was sluggish but I got issue 248 into the mailqueue list channel, where it sat, and sat, and sat, all day Thursday and Friday. Or did it? Or was it a 'ghost'? From what I could tell, 'deliver' was not working correctly. Ditto, issues 249, 250, 251, and 252 just sat there in the queue. And with a three day holiday weekend in the offing to boot! Except we Moderators don't take that many three day holiday weekends. Friday night I was able to get issues 248-253 rerouted through a backup site and now most of you have these issues. Some of you have gotten them twice, and some of you still haven't gotten them once. The next several issues may come to you through the backup site or they may come from eecs ... depending. Things should get back to normal soon. If you get duplicates, toss them out and don't bother writing me about it until/unless several issues have arrived and the duplicates / out of numerical order delivery continues. None of the mailing problems here caused any grief with the comp.dcom.telecom feed: it now goes out using my very own nntpxmit to several strategic and well-connected sites around the world where it is deposited directly in the stream of news; the better to reach you in minutes (or seconds!) after it leaves here. PAT ------------------------------ From: seanwilliams@attmail.com Date: Fri Mar 29 10:09:12 EST 1991 Subject: Educational "Field Trip" to United Telephone of PA I'd just like to tell you all that I took the day off school yesterday to experience an "educational trip" to the United Telephone of PA headquarters in Carlisle yesterday. The Carlisle CO uses a Northern Telecom DMS 100. A technician showed me around the building, explaining the operation of various sections of the DMS. He told me that there wasn't really too much to see, since it was all self contained circuit boards. He was right. He then took me to another room, where the fiber optics are. He told me that the fibers led to long distance carriers and other area exchanges. I asked the man about United Telephone's MessageLine service (voicemail), and he directed me to a little box sitting on the floor. I looked at it, and noticed that it was faintly reminiscent of an IBM PC CPU sitting on its side, and it had a 5-1/4" disk drive, too. There were no labels on the machine indicating the manufacturer, however, and the technician wasn't sure. On the top of the machine was a 1200 BPS modem, which is used to program mailboxes (etc) from the business office. Beside the voicemail system was the DMS' report printer, spewing forth large amounts of seemingly useless information. I pointed at a particular listing and asked the man what it meant. He looked at it, then told me that it meant someone in () made a call to a number which was not in service. "What a waste of paper!" I thought, thinking of all the calls I have made to numbers which were not in service. Some days I just sit and randomly dial numbers to see where United allocates most of their customer numbers (I found that to be in the 3000s and 4000s after much experimentation. The 9000s are used mostly for payphones and distinctive ringing, and the 8000s in Marysville and Carlisle are used for voicemail.) I read in the DIGEST that the DMS 100 was capable of supporting CLASS features, so I asked the technician if United was going to offer it anytime soon. The technician told me that that was a sore spot among the employees, and he recommended that I not talk about it while at United. It seems that a heated debate has been going on for some time about CLASS, since it has been called an "invasion of privacy". Bell offers CLASS though, in most of its area exchanges. After I was done at Carlisle, I visited the Marysville CO. Since Marysville is a much smaller town, the CO was too. They have a DMS 10 (?). [I couldn't hear the man over the high-pitched sound of the fiber optics generator when he was telling me.] Marysville has the same small voicemail system, with the same type of modem. [You can call it if you want, my number's listed below. Maybe you can identify what type of system it is...] I thought it was interesting to note that ALL calls from one exchange to another via United are carried on fiber optics, even though the COs are located less than 10-15 miles from each other. I always thought that fiber was used primarily for long distance, but now know that United uses it for virtually all calls that are not made to a destination within the same exchange. I also thought that it was odd that calls from my Duncannon home to my Marysville job and voicemail are routed to Newport and then across to Carlisle Springs before returning to Marysville. [Making a big loop by going out around the mountains instead of following the highway to Marysville] This explains the short delay I've noticed when calling Marysville from my home. Calls to Newport and New Bloomfield always go through instantly. [See a map for more of an explanation.] After I got home, I wrote a thank you letter to the people who guided me on my tour, and I then wrote another note to the man who coordinated the whole thing, mentioning an interest in a summer job at United before I'm off to college. *** PS Rochester people: The United telephone crews who were helping Rochester Telephone repair their systems returned yesterday afternoon while I was in Carlisle. It has been three weeks since that storm, almost four, hasn't it? Rochester Telephone must have been hit hard! Sean E. Williams | attmail.com!seanwilliams 333 Prospect Avenue / PO Box 227 | seanwilliams@attmail.com Duncannon, PA 17020-0227 USA | voicemail: +1 717 957 8139 ------------------------------ From: seanwilliams@attmail.com Date: Sat Mar 30 15:10:12 EST 1991 Subject: United Telephone -- 25 Years Ago I found a bit of nostalgia in the March 28, 1991 edition of {The Duncannon Record}: *** Twenty-five years ago, March 31, 1966... The United Telephone Company's 1966 directory is off the presses in time for April 1st delivery. For the first time the Perry County Directory will combine all telephone listings for the Blain, Duncannon, Ickesburg, Liverpool, Loysville, Marysville, Millerstown, New Bloomfield, and Newport exchanges into a single alphabetical list. [I have excerpted this from a weekly article in {The Duncannon Record} entitled "Them Was the Days".] *** The directory mentioned in this article is a far cry from today's United "Red Book", which includes listings for an additional two United Telephone-served counties, plus the metro-Harrisburg listings (provided by Bell of Pennsylvania). Of course, the book also includes the modern community pages, with maps/bus routes, etc. And a "Talking Fingers" (voice information) section. (It's like the Donnelley "Talking Yellow Pages" if anyone is familiar with the system. Sean E. Williams | attmail.com!seanwilliams 333 Prospect Avenue / PO Box 227 | seanwilliams@attmail.com Duncannon, PA 17020-0227 USA | voicemail: +1 717 957 8139 ------------------------------ From: "Jeff E. Nelson" Subject: AOS Payphone Experience Date: 29 Mar 91 15:17:39 GMT Reply-To: "Jeff E. Nelson" Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Last night I went to use a payphone next to a Dunkin Donuts shop in Nashua, NH, USA. Rather than finding a phone operated by New England Telephone (NET, a subsidiary of NYNEX), I found an AOS phone. This phone was different. For one thing, it requires 25 cents to place a phone call. NET phones only charge 10 cents. I decided to experiment. To get local directory assistance, one dials 1-555-1212. At NET phones, this is a free call. At this phone, an electronic voice (probably generated internally) said, "please deposit 25 cents for the first three minutes." I then tried 10288-1-555-1212, but as soon as I completed dialing the first 8, the same voice said, "You have dialed an invalid number ... you have dialed an invalid number." I looked around for anything that would identify the owner/operator of the phone. I found nothing, but did notice that the instructions for this phone said that to get directory assistance, the appropriate dialing sequence is "411." Upon dialing, I got the double "invalid number" message. Now I was getting upset. I dialed "0" to speak to an operator. The electronic voice came on instead, and told me that to place a long distance call (credit card, pay-as-you-go, or collect), just dial 1 plus the number. There were more instructions which I forget, but the last was, "press 3 to speak to an operator." Aha! I dialed 3, and a NET operator came on. I asked if she could tell me anything about the phone, and she said that her display didn't even show the number of the phone I was calling from. After exchanging some words about how much we both hated AOS phones, I hung up. I then turned my attention to the phone next to the one I was using. It was one of those blue phones with no coin recepticle; the kind you use when placing a toll-free or credit card or collect call. This phone had a sticker on it identifying it as being owned by "ITC Communications" (I think; those initials may be slightly off). Underneath the name was a toll-free 800 number. I dialed the number, ready to complain about the lousy phone service and lack of 10XXX dialing. A NET recording announced, "that number is not valid from your calling area." Some days you just can't win. Jeff E. Nelson Digital Equipment Corporation Internet: jnelson@tle.enet.dec.com Affiliation given for identification purposes only ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 23:07:11 -0800 From: Ron Schnell Subject: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land Recently GTE converted our C.O. to a "much more advanced and improved digital switch", according to a letter sent to all customers (I assume it was 5ESS or similar). However, since this "improvement", I have noticed several degradations. What I would really like is some advice on the best way to take these complaints to GTE. Especially since they are highly technical compared to what most business office reps could understand. Perhaps someone reading this Digest knows of these problems and some reference number I could quote to the right person. Anyway, here they are: 1. Three-way calling - When I flash and dial the third party, I can't flash back right away. I have to wait almost until the line starts ringing. With the old switch, I could flash back immediately after dialing the last digit. If I try that now, I have to do it all over again. 2. Three-way calling - THIS IS THE WORST PART OF THE WHOLE THING - During three-way calls, the line suddenly becomes one-way. Two people can't talk at the same time anymore. I can't even talk with the second party while the third party's phone is ringing. THIS PROBLEM EXISTS AT ALL TIMES, INCLUDING WHEN ALL PARTIES ARE LOCAL! 3. Flashing in general - It seems like flashing the switchook is much less dependable since the change. I don't think it is just the timing either ... sometimes it seems to work, and sometimes it doesn't. 4. Infinite Dialtone - Sometimes I get a dialtone that won't go away. Touchtoning won't stop it, and I have to hang up for at least five seconds to get one that will work. This is pretty rare, though. I appreciate any help anyone can give. I dread trying to bring these things to GTE's attention. I can hear it now: "We can send a repairman to your apartment sir, but if the problem turns out to be in your phone instrument ..." I'm tempted to move three blocks west so that I can be in PacBell land, but who knows, the problem might be there too. Ron (ronnie@sos.com) ------------------------------ i]From: Chris Petrilli Subject: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 30 Mar 91 01:52:23 GMT Organization: Free Software Foundation I was recently in an AT&T Phone Center and saw a new answering machine that they have brought out. It was a completely digital answering machine, and shaped in a '50s art-deco style (more vertical than horizontal), with a LED display on the front. The person who worked there knew nothing about it, and even a friend who works for Ma Bell didn't know much about it. It costs about $129, and would really solve the sleep disturbances caused by my current answering machines clunky sounds. Chris Petrilli Internet: petrilli@gnu.ai.mit.edu Insert silly disclaimer drivel here. ------------------------------ From: Wm Randolph Franklin Subject: MCI Bill Key Evidence in Murder Trial Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY Date: 29 Mar 91 22:31:17 GMT An MCI bill is the key evidence in a murder trial now underway in downstate New York. A woman is on trial for killing her husband's lover, and the question is where she was at a certain time. For an alibi, she has produced an MCI bill showing a long distance call made from another place to her mother at the critical time. MCI says that the bill is not theirs, for two reasons. 1) It omits a logo that was on all MCI bills at the time but which was removed shortly after. So, if the bill is a forgery, it was copied from a later bill. 2) MCI's copy of the bill, and their master tapes, which were first thought to have been destroyed, show no such call. In contrast, at that time they show a call from the defendant's home to a gun shop. The judge disallowed as evidence a printout from the master tape since the MCI person in court had not personally printed it out himself, but had been mailed the printout. Using that reasoning I'm surprised the judge didn't rule out all evidence from a magtape in general, since how can you prove provenance of a tape? Presumably the DA will now get the original person who printed the record to testify. Anyway, this appears to be the first use of laserprinter fraud in a murder case. I wonder who actually did it, since they haven't said that the defendant is a techie. After they convict her, they should convict her mother for perjury, and disbar the lawyer if they can show he knew the bill was forged. Wm. Randolph Franklin Internet: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (or @cs.rpi.edu) Bitnet: Wrfrankl@Rpitsmts Telephone: (518) 276-6077; Telex: 6716050 RPI TROU; Fax: (518) 276-6261 Paper: ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 08:51:44 -0800 From: Peter Marshall Subject: Re: Into the Telecosm This George Gilder article is interesting and useful; for example, as it points to the upcoming NTIA report on their infrastructure study. On the other hand, it is an all-too-typical example of this sort of writing on technology topics, and of a very common perspective on same. As such, its not-so underlying assumptions are those of a garden variety technological determinism. There is a myopia here that is also typical of the approach to such topics regularly evidenced by the telecom industry and NTIA itself. For example, we have here the positing of a "communications crisis," identification of *the* problem as "regulation," and a rhetoric suggestive of telco press releases. In context, the Gilder article really isn't anything to write home about. Peter Marshall ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #254 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03884; 30 Mar 91 22:06 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 21:30 EST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 20:31:21 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #255 BCC: Message-ID: <9103302031.ab13753@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 30 Mar 91 19:42:43 CST Volume 11 : Issue 255 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Phone Power Plant Nostalgia Story [Donald E. Kimberlin] More on History of Telephone Power Plants [Larry Lippman] Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless [Mike Johnston] Voice Mail Standard Keystrokes [John Boteler] Local Calling Cards vs. LD Company Cards [Sean Williams] Information Needed on WE 2500 DM Set [David Barts] What Happened with Sprint's Outage? [Thomas Lapp] Telephone Number > Address Service Needed in Houston [Raymond C. Jender] IBM PC PBX Card: Does it Exist? [Steve Kreisel] An HONEST PacBell Survey About CLID [root@surya.uucp] Selective Ring and Business Customers [Matthew McGehrin] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 05:20 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Phone Power Plant Nostalgia Story In article , Larry Lippman twanged a nostalgia nerve with the remarks about end celss and liquid countercells. Here's my tale of just one encounter with them. In the picturesque town of Live Oak, Florida, AT&T had built a toll testroom in Lord-Knows-When along what had been an open-wire line route across north Florida leading to New Orleans. Over the years, AT&T had transferred the building to Southern Bell, and then taken it back when TD-2 microwave exploded along that route. Much of what had been in that building had been removed, and it was crammed with TD-2 microwave bays ... the reason I was there. However, its old telegraph testboard was still there, and still connected in a bunch of telegraph channels that interconnected to Southeastern Telephone, the local Independent (totally unmanned, but it was there). That old testboard still worked, including its Model TWELVE teletype, which we knew enough to plug into the press wires just for some fun. But, the power plant was a true museum piece, as I recall, called a WECo 702C. I remember the number because we couldn't find anybody who knew where to get documents for it. Now, Live Oak had one more antique that added to its story. That was a living antique of the Old South named Harvey. Harvey was, to all common knowldge, the retired "building service man" from Live Oak. An aged Negro in the truest character of the Old Deep South, Harvey took care of that building, in retirement just as he must have done a good deal of his life. The floors gleamed; the lawn was all trimmed and tidy, wastebaskets emptied, toilet cleaned and the whole works. The building had been unmanned for many years, and it had the standard building alarm system that rang in Jacksonville any time someone opened the door. If you didn't know where and how to ring into Jacksonville shortly after entering, a voice would stab out of the top of a rack, and say, "Who's there in Live Oak?" If there was no answer, it was Standard Operating Procedure to call the local sheriff for a visit to the building. Except at Live Oak. On one of my first visits finding Harvey there, I asked the local supervisor at Lake city about Harvey and security, and he told me that everybody back at Jacksonville just knew that an unanswered Open Door alarm at Live Oak meant Harvey was is the building. They knew the Live Oak building was right in the center of town, so nobody with malicious intent would get in there. (Remember, this was a different time and a different America!) Anyhow, the event involving the 702C and Harvey was the day I got told to go to Live Oak and clean the "counter-cell." It was one full of potassium hydroxide as Larry described, and after doping out a suitable way to tie some jumpers around it so we wouldn't inadvertently wind up with an open battery string if the old motor-driven switches of the 702C called for it, I proceeded to start trying to move it. Miraculously, Harvey had shown up. (I kind of think he watched out for us to arrive, for he often came in to bustle around while we were there, exchanging pleasantries and asking us about names we didn't know; people who must have worked there decades before.) My move at the countercell got Harvey very interested, and he started gathering all the needed tools to clean the tank and plates. He joined right in with me, knowing all the right moves to get the thing outside, dump it down the sewer. (Remember, this was really pre-EPA!), scrub the plates and tank and get it back inside for refilling. Now we had a box of some powdered electrolyte to mix with water. Harvey was ready, taking up a position he seemed to know well with a bleached-out broomstick like one sees people use on laundry in a machine. I poured water and powder, and Harvey dutifully stirred with his stick. He was really enjoying it. When I had enough electrolyte mix in the tank, Harvey started stirring at a ferocious rate, saying, "Throw in de blue pill, Boss!" I didn't have any blue pill. After many repeats about this, I could deduce that the old mix must have had some sort of depolarizer to dissolve in the mix, and Harvey just knew it was necessary. The incident must have gone on for fifteen minutes with Harvey stirring so hard I was afraid his old heart would give out. When I finally insisted a number of times that the contents of the "blue pill" must be in the powder nowadays, Harvey finally stopped. But, I never did find the instructions for a 702C Power Plant, much less those for its countercell. When I went on to other assignments, Harvey was last seen still caring for his private AT&T building. I suspect others who followed me there just one day noticed that Harvey didn't show up any more. I sure do hope and pray Harvey had just gone off to his Maker a happy soul. Thanks, Larry, for bringing up the memory! ------------------------------ Subject: More on History of Telephone Power Plants Date: 29 Mar 91 01:14:14 EST (Fri) From: Larry Lippman In article: uccxmgm@unx2.ucc.okstate. edu writes: > I wonder if they used electrolytic rectifiers back then to handle > that kind of current? A liquid electrolytic rectifier was indeed used for small PBX applications during the 1920's. It used one electrode of tantalum and one electrode of lead in an electrolyte solution of sulfuric acid. A floating layer of mineral oil prevented evaporation. The maximum current per device was limited to several amperes, though. One manufacturer of this device was Fansteel Products. Such electrolytic rectifiers were rapidly superceded by copper oxide rectifiers, which were available in capacities up to 20 or so amperes. By the 1940's copper oxide rectifiers were largely superceded by selenium rectifiers. However, even selenium rectifiers, which were used in new product designs until the advent of silicon rectifier diodes during the 1950's, were limited to about 100 amperes in capacity. From the *very* early days when telephone company central offices produced their own electric power from steam boilers, generators were used to create the DC necessary for charging batteries. By 1900 most telephone company central offices used commercial AC power, but to run motor-generator combinations. In fact, one of the benefits from using batteries was the filtering of AC noise created by the commutators of DC generators. AC motor-driven generators used to create DC for battery charging were still in service in a few Bell System central offices as of the early 1980's! The last ones I saw were for +130 and -130 volts used to power vacuum tube carrier and microwave apparatus. Chances are they were not replaced because the associated apparatus had very little remaining service life, and 130 volt battery installations were primarily associated with such old vacuum tube apparatus. Newer apparatus which required 130 volts generally relied upon solid-state DC/DC converters powered by the -48 volt DC battery. Starting around World War I, mercury arc rectifiers came into vogue, but only for smaller central offices. Mercury arc rectifiers were limited to about 50 amperes per device, although multiple devices could be paralleled for larger loads. Many mercury arc rectifiers for smaller central offices were updated during the 1960's through the use of solid-state devices which were plug-in replacements for the rectifier tubes. I feel certain that a few of these updated rectifiers (like the WECo 110A) are still in service today in small SxS CO's. For larger multi-thousand ampere battery plants, AC motor-driven generators were still the only way to go until the 1950's when large silicon rectifier diodes became available. No other rectifier method prior to this time could compete with motor-driven generators for ampere capacity. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: Mike Johnston Subject: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless Organization: Lehman Brothers Date: 30 Mar 91 08:15:45 I just put one of those sleek looking, floor standing hologen lamps in my living room. Imagine my chagrin when after turning the lamp on I tried to use my cordless phone and discovered a loud hum. Incidentally, this hum varies with the brightness of the lamp. I.E the lower I dim the lamp, the louder the hum in my phone. Help! What's a guy to do? Is there any way I can shield my lamp from this or am I just stuck? Michael R. Johnston mjohnsto@shearson.com || mjohnstonn@mcimail.com System Administrator UUCP: uunet!slcpi!mjohnsto Lehman Brothers Inc. Phone: (212) 640-9116 ------------------------------ Subject: Voice Mail Standard Keystrokes Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 18:16:15 EST From: John Boteler Every system I configure which purports to have anything to do with living, breathing humans has '0' reserved for the "Operater". That's my contribution to a low noise environment. For the time being, my super-tricked-out voice server I am working on here uses Cindi's commands for the part that sounds like voice mail. Does this win me a free round-trip ticket to Voice 91?? John Boteler bote@csense {uunet | ka3ovk}!media!csense!bote SkinnyDipper's Hotline: 703 241 BARE | VOICE only, Touch-Tone(TM) signalling ------------------------------ From: seanwilliams@attmail.com Date: Sat Mar 30 14:12:43 EST 1991 Subject: Local Calling Cards vs. LD Company Cards Jonathan White writes: >> if you used 950-xxxx access from your local calling area, you did >> NOT pay the ripoff $0.75/0.80 charge. > You might want to try ITT/Metromedia. They have no surcharge on > calling card calls no matter where you call from. Before checking out another Long Distance company's card, maybe you should check with your own local telephone company. Most local telcos offer their own cards, and many are cheaper to use than a long distance company's. I recently called United Telephone of PA to order a card. It was explained to me that the charge for a call was $.30, as opposed to the higher charge that MCI bills me for local calls. I'm not sure if the United Telephone card can be used for long distance calls, however. I'll probably end up using both cards depending on what type of call I'm making. (I'll post a note after I get my new card.) Bell of Pennsylvania also offers its own "IQ (sm) Card". I'm not sure of the details on that one, however. Sean E. Williams | attmail.com!seanwilliams 333 Prospect Avenue / PO Box 227 | seanwilliams@attmail.com Duncannon, PA 17020-0227 USA | voicemail: +1 717 957 8139 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 00:55:25 pst From: David Barts Subject: Information Needed on WE 2500 DM Set Recently, someone posted that a 500 D set was just like a 500 set, except it was designed for use on a party line with divided ringing. I own two Western Electric 2500 DM sets that were formerly used on a LARGE centrex system (two NNX prefixes!). What is the difference between a 2500 DM and a "normal" 2500 set? One of these sets is on the desk beside my computer as I type this. It works just fine, and rings properly even though I don't have party line service. Both sets were manufactured in the late 70's and appear to have been reconditioned at some time in the mid 80's. David Barts N5JRN Pacer Corporation, Bothell, WA davidb@pacer.uucp ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 20:53:01 EST From: Thomas Lapp Subject: What Happened With Sprint's Outage? My question for those in the know: What was the cause of the fiber break which caused the Sprint outage last week? Details please. If it was along a RR right-of-way (and buried) how was it cut? Not by a train wreck I assume? Right? tom internet : mvac23!thomas@udel.edu or thomas%mvac23@udel.edu (home) : 4398613@mcimail.com (work) uucp : {ucbvax,mcvax,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas Location : Newark, DE, USA ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 15:56:00 EST From: Raymond C Jender Subject: Telephone Number > Address Service Needed in Houston Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Here in Illinois there is a service that if you supply them with a telephone number, they will respond with a name and address. The only catch is the phone number must be a listed number. I need to do the same thing, only for a suburb of Houston, TX. Anyone know if a similar service is available there? In case you need to know, the number is 713-486-xxxx. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: stevek@cup.portal.com Subject: IBM PC PBX Card: Does it Exist? Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 23:50:43 PST A friend of mine mentioned that he saw an ad for a IBM PC card that mimics a PBX. It was only a one or two line version, but supposedly support a couple of stations and calls could be transferred with hook-flashes. Has anyone heard of this? Any information would be appreciated. Thanks, Steve Kreisel stevek@cup.portal.com ------------------------------ Subject: An HONEST PacBell Survey About CLID From: The unknown Florentine Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 12:07:13 PST Organization: Sunshine in a box A few days ago I received a call from a survey firm asking me if I would be willing to fill out a survey if they sent it to me with a check for $5 (sound somewhat familiar?) They said PacBell had hired them (a marketing firm) to do this survey. I actually agreed to do this, figuring I would actually be getting a check that authorized me to be slammed, and a hokey survey extolling a LD carrier. Well I was wrong. They sent a survey mostly about CLID and a few other potential services and a crisp clean $5 bill. Now the survey asks a lot of questions about where I buy telecom products and, in various fashions about what I would think about buying a CLID phone from Pacbell, leasing it from PACBELL, or buying a "Pacbell CERTIFIED or APPROVED phone" elsewhere. {I thought that the Bells could no longer do that type of business.} The phones were all in the $100 - 180 price range, the separate CLID boxes were $40 - 60. They also ask some questions that I thought were none of their damned business, and told them so. It was also interesting to note that the poll (and the "informative brochure") did not mention CLID blocking or BLocked Call blocking. Sounds like PACBELL has no intent to provide these. ------------------------------ From: matthew@pro-nka.cts.com (Matthew McGehrin) Subject: Selective Ring and Business Customers Date: 30 Mar 91 01:16:15 GMT Its interesting to see this new CLASS service called 'Selective Ring'. I wonder if its available to business customers with those bulky boxes we have now? We always had 'selective ring', but it was a centrex feature. If the call was inter-office it would ring once, if it was an outside line, it would ring twice, like ring-ring (quick ring). Inet: matthew@pro-nka.cts.com UUCP: crash!pro-nka!matthew BNET: MATTHEW%PRO-NKA.CTS.COM@NOSC.MIL ARPA: crash!pro-nka!matthew@nosc.mil GENIE: M.MCGEHRIN --- 1+201/944-3102 : PCP via NJNEW 944-3102 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #255 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07005; 31 Mar 91 1:24 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sat, 30 Mar 91 23:46 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA23986; Sat, 30 Mar 91 14:31:03 CST Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 22:16:11 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #256 Message-Id: <9103302216.ab27151@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 30 Mar 91 22:15:55 CST Volume 11 : Issue 256 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Need ComKey 416 and Multiline Phone Information [Andy Jacobson] Re: "How Many Walkmans?" [Donald E. Kimberlin] Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information [Steve Pershing] Re: Higdon an Expert on 2600 Hz? [Floyd Davidson] Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone [John Higdon] Re: More Even More on Selective Ringing [John Higdon] Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 [Carl Moore] Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 [Dave Levenson] Re: Front Door to Apartment Phone Service [Dave Levenson] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Ken Abrams] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 01:21 PST From: Andy Jacobson Subject: Re: Need ComKey 416 and Multiline Phone Information In TELECOM Digest V11 #239 Douglas Scott Reuben writes: > while the other base/power unit powers lines three and four. I have > looked extensively at all the markings inside and outside of the power > units, and see no indication which would easily tell me which one is > which. There are movable blocks inside the unit (under the > DSS/intercom page buttons), but I dunno if they have anything to do > with selecting whether the unit runs L1/2 or L3/4. I found this out > via experimentation with the equipment I have, and there is perhaps a > much simpler way to connect all four lines. (Perhaps something like a > "91A" block, etc?). Yes those movable blocks will select for lines 1/2 or 3/4. One of these Molex-like connectors can be moved from one set of pins to another, making the switch. > I've never tried to connect a ComKey power unit to a 1A2 > system! (The 1A2s, of course, don't have any cards to blow out, at > least not in the phones themselves.) These things are possible. In basic operation, without the various added features, the ComKey is really a 1A2 compatible beast. But don't try to connect them directly as the A/A1 control does not match. 1A2 type phones can certainly be used as stations if you match the proper wiring, and make sure the 1A2 unit has no conflicting option wiring in the spare pairs of its 25 pair cord. The one basic incompatibility is the lack of ringdown. Best to break out the wiring on a jiffy box or other 66-type block and jumper only the leads in use. I have two AT&T Touchamatics, and several 2565 type phones run off of my 416 base unit, and everything works fine save for intercom signaling, which is unfortunately incompatible to the best of my fiddling. Also, I have found the power supply on the thing amazingly resilient as I have inadvertently shorted out the DC on it several ways with no damage. Andy Jacobson or ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 05:12 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: "How Many Walkmans?" In article, (Digest v11,iss247), Martin McCormick asks: > I wonder if they used electrolitic rectifiers back then to handle > that kind of current? I can only surmise that the earliest ones had to use such methods, Martin. However, my point is to pop in here and say that one of Bell Labs' major functions was continuous efforts at developing what were first called "dry disk rectifiers." They needed to have so much good, reliable DC power that it was obvious they'd be looking for the best materials and methods. That lead to even (successfully) developing solid-state higher-frequency diodes of such quality that the famous balanced "ring modulators" were used with speech signals at frequencies of the order of 100 kHz and up to perform the frequency conversions in carrier channel banks. That was the sort of work Brattain, Shockley and Bardeen were assigned to at Bell Labs -- researching improved diode materials -- when they made a "mistake," hooking up two diodes in an erronoeous fashion, and inadvertently producing a current gain. After they called in colleagues to see check their "error," they discovered they had the transistor! How different a story than today's planned, controlled, deliver-the- accountants-a-known-result "research!" Which raises the question: Could the discovery of the transistor have been the last piece of research serendipity? ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information From: Steve Pershing Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 11:59:54 PST Organization: Questor - Free Internet/Usenet*Vancouver*BC::+1 604 681 0670 konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > I remember reading about some of the Demon Dialers of yesteryear and I > was wondering what is still available today. Specifically, I'd like: Zoom Telephonics in the Boston, Ma. area are still in business. They made probably the best "Demon Dialer". I don't have the telephone number, but you should be able to find them through area 617 information. Steve Pershing, System Administrator The QUESTOR Project: FREE Usenet News/Internet Mail; Sci, Med, AIDS, more Internet: sp@questor.wimsey.bc.ca : POST: 1027 Davie Street, Box 486 Phones: Voice/FAX: +1 604 682 6659 : Vancouver, British Columbia Data/BBS: +1 604 681 0670 : Canada V6E 4L2 ------------------------------ From: Floyd Davidson Subject: Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? Organization: University of Alaska, Institute of Marine Science Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1991 04:50:48 GMT In article mitel!Software!grayt@ uunet.uu.net (Tom Gray) writes: > For those of you who want to know how the 2600hz system works, you can > obtain the CCITT international standard on R1 signalling. This > includes a complete description of how the system works. You may also > obtain the AT&T publication "Notes on the Network" which has a more > practical description of this system. > All of this information is totally public. It is an industry standard. > As a matter of fact, I know about it beacuse I designed an SF trunk. > Probably USENET is distributed to some places over this trunk type of > my design. I obtained all the inforamtion I needed from "Notes on the > Network" which AT&T was quite pleased to sell to anybody with the > required amount of money. "Notes on the Network" was replaced with "Notes on the BOC Intra-LATA Networks - 19nn" where "nn" indicates the year released. The latest edition I have is 1986. There could well be a more recent release. The '86 edition does not give information on ordering "Notes" itself. The following address was listed for "Technical Advisories": Bell Communications Research Information Exchange Management 435 South Street, MRE 2J-155 Morristown, NJ 07960-1961 The '86 edition is Technical Reference TR-NPL-000275. The price is not stated, and I don't remember what it was ... but expect well over $100. The book is indispensable if you live in the telecom industry. Floyd L. Davidson | floyd@ims.alaska.edu | Alascom, Inc. pays me Salcha, AK 99714 | Univ. of Alaska | but not for opinions. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 22:06 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone John Alsop writes: > I just spent a week's vacation in Florida. The house we rented had a > "Charge-a-Phone" instead of an ordinary telephone. It looked pretty > much like a normal phone set, but had various labels with instructions > for use, etc. There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). A group of us had dinner there a number of months ago and it was great entertainment playing with the phone while waiting for our meals to arrive! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: On I-55 from here to St. Louis all the food/gasoline stops along the way have a similar arrangement. At each booth in the restaurant, a wall-phone is hooked to a one-way outgoing line. All calls from the phone must be zero-plussed or 10xxx zero-plussed with billing on a collect, third number or telco credit card basis. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 01:55 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: More Even More on Selective Ringing David Lesher writes: > While I have not dug too deeply into this aspect, one advantage of at > least the two party Bell method was ANI. While the trick with the > tapped ringer coil added some noise, it DID allow the CO to figure if > Mr. Tip or Ms. Ring was calling Fargo without a "numberpleeze." So how in the hell did that actually work? I remember that before party lines were abolished in metro areas in the state, the sure-fire way to tell that a friend had a party line when using his phone was by the "tick-kunk" that came immediately after dialing and just before the originating register dropped. Those of us with private lines had no such noise. We all knew that sound had something to do with identifying the tip or ring party, but to this day no one has ever explained what was going on. But going back a little further we find four-party lines. The instant giveaway there was the dialing of any toll call. An operator would come on the line and ask, "Your number please?" Also, participants on a four-party line would find that the phone would ring when the call wasn't for them. It was only to be answered if it was "ring-ring" or "ring" -- depending on the phone number. That little scheme worked like this: The key was the third digit from the end. A 0-4 would be a single ring while 5-9 would indicate double ring. An example was that one friend had the number 296-8122 (single ring) and another 296-4894 (double ring). This pattern even carried over after four-party and even two-party lines were history. Well into the sixties, customers served out of the #1 crossbar offices had double rings if the phone number was of the right type. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: IBT has long since grandfathered party line service. If you had it thirty years ago and kept it, you can still have it, but they quit offering it sometime around 1960. If you move, or ask to change your number, that's it! Off the party line you go! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 9:31:12 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 The code Woody had written about as a possibility for the splitoff from 416 was 210, not 410. (This was before 905 was announced.) 410 has already been announced as new area code for eastern Maryland. 903 came into use as an area code last year by splitting 214 in Texas. And yes, when N0X/N1X area codes are used up, area codes will have to generalize to NXX form. As I explain in my area code history file, this causes dialing changes so that timeouts can be avoided; if your area has had to program for N0X/N1X PREFIXES, you already have allowed for NNX area codes. ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 Date: 30 Mar 91 22:36:17 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , TONY@mcgill1.bitnet (Tony Harminc) writes: > Finally, what is the current plan when the N10 codes are gone ? The > old plan called for CO (NNX) codes to be used for area codes, starting > with 260. Is that still in the works? That would require ten digit > dialing everywhere in North America (or timeout nonsense). The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls intra-NPA. Any NXX number can then be used as an area code, and as an exchange prefix within any area code. In the interest of user- friendliness, Bellcore recommends not assigning the same NXX as an area code and as a prefix within the area code. (So we won't have a 201-201 central office in Northern NJ.) Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Front Door to Apartment Phone Service Date: 30 Mar 91 17:12:24 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , jimmy@tokyo07.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) writes: > telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: [ regarding entry-door controls for apartment buildings controlled from the central office... ] > Patrick intimates that this was (another) flawed decision by His > Wisdom. On the contrary, I agree that telephone companies should not > be involved in this type of service. There is no reason to involve > your telco in the unlocking of the front door to your apartment > And then there was the cost: >> [Moderator's Note: I must agree with you I think the sytem works much >> better as CPE than it did under the old arrangement, although the old >> arrangement was better for a small landlord who could not afford the >> initial cash outlay. IBT allowed the installation costs for Enterphone >> to be spread over twelve months if desired. PAT] If the landlord could get a mortgage on the building, he/she could certainly find financing for the CPE, and spread the initial investment over as many years as the bank would allow. I must agree with Jim, here, that this looks like an intra-premises problem, and is best solved with a CPE solution. I prefer to own my own room-to-room intercom, paging, and LAN devices, and buy the external networking from the utility. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: Ken Abrams Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Date: 30 Mar 91 19:38:56 GMT Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois In article barefoot@garfield.catt. ncsu.edu (Heath Roberts) writes: >> My view is that the cable "service" should be provided to a single >> point within any home at a standard signal level and then any further >> distribution within the home should be left to the homeowner. [If the owner so desires.] > The ideal solution is to have everyone pay based on the number of > hours they "consume" and the relative cost to the supplier (home ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ These are the right words, now if we can just put them into the proper perspective ... I supplied ALL the hardware to extend my cable service throughout my house. The cost to the cable company to provide my service is not one cent higher if I watch a thousand hours a month than it is if I watch one hour. It is not one cent higher if five members on my family watch five different sets than it is if nobody watches anything. I expect to pay the cable company a fair price for the service that they provide, including a reasonable rate of profit. I do NOT expect to pay extra for things that do not cost the supplier any extra. This is predatory pricing based on their monopoly position. The price I pay for electricity is not related to the number of outlets that I have, the price I pay for water is not related to the number of faucets and the sewer fees I pay is not related to the number of drains and toilets that I have connected. Cable rates should not be based on the number of outlets either unless the building owner has ASKED the cable company to install and maintain the wiring. Ken Abrams uunet!pallas!kabra437 Illinois Bell kabra437@athenanet.com Springfield (voice) 217-753-7965 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #256 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09982; 31 Mar 91 3:23 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sun, 31 Mar 91 02:48 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27112; Sat, 30 Mar 91 16:19:58 CST Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 0:38:40 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #257 Message-Id: <9103310038.ab00024@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 31 Mar 91 00:31:28 CST Volume 11 : Issue 257 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Eight and Ten Party Ringing in the Bell System [Larry Lippman] Lorain Products Co. and More on Telephone Power Plants [Larry Lippman] The Culture of Technology [Technology Review, via Peter Marshall] Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service [John R Hall] Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed [Dave Levenson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Eight and Ten Party Ringing in the Bell System Date: 30 Mar 91 00:30:13 EST (Sat) From: Larry Lippman In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > Needless, to say, you could often > hear your ringer click or buzz when another party's frequency sailed > down the line, anyway! I was told by a WECo engineer some years ago that the above was the reason why the [late, great] Bell System felt that frequency-selective ringing was "inelegant". Since the WECo method of polarity-controlled superimposed ringing to ground provided four selective ringing codes, and the frequency-selective methods provided only one more code, Bell felt that their method - which required no tuned ringers and had little propensity for bell tapping when used with the 425A and 426A cold cathode electron tubes - was the optimum choice. > Unanswered to my satisfaction is that Bell employees many > times over the years told me that "Bell companies had 8-party service, > too," but they were always evasive about *how* 8 parties could be rung > with only 20 Hertz. And, I personally did some work replacing WECo > 350/355 CDO's in rural Mississippi last year, to hear these stories > proliferated. Yet, the old CDO's there had no evidence of ever having > had anything but 20 Hertz ringing generators. You must bear in mind that the WECo eight party method is a semi-selective method involving four "electrical" codes and two ringing "cadence" codes, for a total of eight codes. The ringing supply was solely 20 Hz. There was really no "secret" nor any reason for anyone to have been "evasive". > So, my question to this forum, where someone certainly knows, > is *how* did Bell accomplish eight party ringing if they used only one > frequency? Or, is it one of those bits of lore that had some truth > someplace where perhaps Bell had acquired an Independent using > frequency-selective ringing ... and then got the story embellished > with retelling and retelling? It's not at all a bit of lore. While it is indeed true that the Bell System maintained a wide diversity of non-WECo CO apparatus in telephone companies which they had acquired, this has little bearing upon the present discussion. > So far, I never met anyone who could tell me just *how* Bell > did eight-party with WECo-built apparatus. (No weasel stories now, > about apparatus WECo bought, resold and installed in some places. I > know they'd do that if they had to!) You have now met (electronically, at least) such a person. :-) My WECo experience in multi-party lines was limited to SxS, so that's what I will tell you about. There were *many* WECo SxS connectors that supported multi-party ringing. An example is the connector per SD-30862-01. I quote from the CD-30862-01 circuit description: "This circuit is used for extending a call from a toll or local selector to a subscriber line of either an eight party semi-selective ringing rural line group or a ten party three code ringing line group". This connector was used in No. 1, No. 350A and No. 355A SxS CO's. As previously discussed, WECo provided four party full selective ringing using either positive or negative battery superimposed upon ringing from tip-to-ground or ring-to-ground, summarized as: PARTY 1 negative superimposed battery ring lead to ground PARTY 2 negative superimposed battery tip lead to ground PARTY 3 positive superimposed battery ring lead to ground PARTY 4 positive superimposed battery tip lead to ground The party code number is an *absolute* number which corresponds to the precise condition above. The party code number was used in plant records and apparatus drawings. There is actually some rhyme and reason to the numbering, which I'm certain astute readers will notice. Eight parties could be achieved by using coded ringing; i.e., the parties one to four used the above scheme with a "one-long" ringing cadence, and parties five to eight used the above scheme with a "two-short" cadence. This meant that a given telephone set rang for two of eight possible parties. By adding a third ringing cadence, ten parties could be signaled (note reference to ten party ringing in above quoted CD section). The differences between multi-party connectors and regular connectors were comparatively minor, and included: (1) provision for a ringing synchronization lead "PKU" which assured that ringing was started at a precise time so that a false, partial cadence would not be sent; and (2) greater flexibility in ringing control and ring-trip relay wiring options to accommodate the variations in polarity. Multi-party ringing in a WECo SxS CO was set up so that two connector shelves of 100 numbers each were required, resulting in a commitment of 200 directory numbers. One shelf had the connectors wired for tip-party ringing, and the other shelf had the connectors wired for ring-party ringing. The SxS connector wiper had four contacts: the standard tip, ring, sleeve, plus a fourth "A-lead" for ringing selection. On the connector bank multiple wiring block, the A-terminal corresponding to each directory number was strapped to one of five terminals: (1) resistance ground interrupted with a "one-long" cadence to provide negative superimposed battery; (2) resistance ground interrupted with a "two-short" cadence to provide negative superimposed battery; (3) resistance ground interrupted with a "three-short" cadence to provide negative superimposed battery; (4) solid ground interrupted with a "one-long" cadence to provide positive superimposed battery; and (5) solid ground interrupted with a "two-short" cadence to provide positive superimposed battery. While the above scheme was the most common for implementation of 8-party and 10-party lines in a WECo SxS office, it was not the only method. The WECo 35-E-97 (actually modified Automatic Electric Company apparatus) SxS CO used a connector per SD-30909-01 which accepted and decoded an *additional* digit to select one of ten possible ringing codes. These ten codes corresponded to the same ten possibilities outlined above. So, now you know how the [late, great] Bell System did eight and ten-party semi-selective ringing. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Subject: Lorain Products Co. & More on Telephone Power Plants Date: 31 Mar 91 00:37:11 EST (Sun) From: Larry Lippman In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > > By the way, there is another Ohio name to add to the saga. C. P. > > Stocker designed the first magnetic 60-20 hz converter, called it the > > Sub-Cycle, and founded Lorain Products Inc. just west of Cleveland. > > They also made no end of telco power equipment. > Lorain Electric is, of course, still in business, providing many a > Sub-Cycle to this very day. Lorain Products has unquestionably been the largest outside supplier of power plants to WECo and the Bell System. It is interesting to note that while WECo designed and manufactured many power plants, in many instances they simply chose to use a Lorain product - which says a great deal about the engineering and manufacturing quality of Lorain Products. One thing I could never figure out was what motivated WECo to design and manufacture a power plant internally as opposed to obtaining one from Lorain Products under a KS-spec. No one I knew at WECo had the answer either, and the best we could figure was that with every new power plant requirement, someone in upper management at WECo would flip a coin having two sides: WECo on one, and Lorain on the other! :-) > Voltages of 24, 48 or 52 Volts at 2,000 or > 5,000 or even 10,000 Amps weren't (and still aren't unusual to provide > talk battery for a whole telephone exchange. They consist simply of > an AC-powered set of rectifiers charging ("floating") a large string > of lead-acid batteries, just like the one in your car, to power the > phones and for that matter the switching and transmission equipment as > well. What's fun is to happen to be near the cells when the AC fails. > The current draw is such you can see the plates in the glass cell > tanks bend and flake under the stress. One can also *hear* the plates in the cells creak, along with hearing an immediate evolution of hydrogen gas bubbles which are thus displaced when the plates are stressed. > It consisted of *forty-two* 6 Volt automobile batteries > connected in series, floated across a rectifier. THAT not only could > shock you; it could do a nice burn at the same time. Needless to say, > one works *very* carefully in such plant! While I did not see it happen, I once saw the aftermath of a 500 MCM 130-volt power feeder cable which shorted to a cable rack when its aged rubber insulation disintegrated during cable "mining" work. The resultant arc burned through a 1/4" by 1-1/2" piece of steel like a knife through butter. The craftsperson doing the work suffered only minor injuries - not from the arc or spewed molten metal, but from falling off a ladder in surprise! :-) A truly scary experience is to move a piece of old RH or RHW rubber-insulated power feeder cable, watch both the outer insulation and the rubber flake into dust, and see exposed conductor within a fraction of an inch of grounded metal! I could never understand why WECo continued to use potentially unstable rubber-insulated power cable for almost forty years after far superior plastic insulation was available following World War II. A cardinal rule in working around batteries is to always use tools that are wrapped with insulating tape - in order to prevent accidental short circuits. I must confess that I did not always follow this rule, and that I have suffered the consequences - which fortunately were minor. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 13:30:55 -0800 From: Peter Marshall Subject: The Culture of Technology From Langdon Winner, "A Postmodern World's Fair," TECHNOLOGY REVIEW, Feb./Mar., 1991 An interesting counterpoint to the George Gilder article posted here recently, this column is by a member of the Dept. of Science and Technology Studies at Rensselaer Polytechnic Insititute: ------------- As I begin making plans to attend the World's Fair in Seville, Spain, in 1992, I'm also girding for the ideological onslaught these events always bring ... the underlying message is always the same: celebration of limitless progress through technological change. The Spanish fair seems ready to echo this weary theme with uncritical devotion ... but shouldn't the experience of the past two centuries lead us to reexamine the contexts and consequences of "progress"? I've tried to imagine what an alternative World's Fair might offer. How about "Humanity in a Postmodern World" as a colorful, overarching theme? Here are a few of the fair's possible attractions: The Pavilion for the Social Construction of Science ... the social dynamics of science in intricate detail ... places where knowledge products, sometimes mistakenly called discoveries, are crafted as within a complex, mulit-centered social process. The pavilion would ask spectators to ponder the question, Science in whose interest? ... Palace to the Ironies of Progress. As they enter the great hall, spectators would compare predictions of past World's Fairs to today's realities. The palace would also contrast the conventional signs of technological and ecomeconomic advance ... with the uncounted costs of these developments ... Theater of Futures Foreclosed. A series of entertainments would show how decisions we make today close off paths that future generations might take. In short, a Postmodern World's Fair would playfully debunk old myths while encouraging people to try some new ideas on for size. It is unlikely, of course, that such an event could be financed. By removing the need for people to think critically or to demand a share in making decisions, old-fashioned rituals of progress serve the reigning power structure. Thus World's Fairs will go on projecting glossy utopias said to be just around the corner and assuring us that the future is in good hands. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 11:35:28 EST From: John R Hall Subject: Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Well, I agree in general that "inside wire maintenance" plans are not worth much especially for someone who is minimally handy with tools. However, I lived in a high rise for several years, and I did choose the inside wire maintenance plan, and I'm glad I did. When I got my initial service, I asked from what point in the loop I would be responsible for repairs. The best I can tell, the answer was a telephone panel located in a stairwell a couple of floors down (I was on 17), but I was never quite sure of this. The wire went internally through the walls and floors from that point where it popped up in the kitchen jack. Inside were many pairs of wires. We also had an entry door system which operated off a special code on a lobby telephone that rang on our regular phone line. I was not convinced that if something went wrong I would be able to fix it, so I opted for Illinois Bell's inside wire maintenance plan. Well, two years later my phone went dead - no dial tone. I called repair, and the repair person had to check in a couple of places in the building where I didn't have access, and he was in my apartment for about six hours. He got it working, and his diagnosis was one corroded jack (probably due to moisture from an adjoining cooling duct) and a "wiring error" (curious, though because it worked OK before). It was very confusing because I couldn't follow the wiring easily from jack to jack, and the cable in the boxes was a rat's nest. So I was glad I paid the wire maintenance surcharge. In my current place, the wiring runs clearly along a conduit straight down to the basement, and I would have no problem in diagnosing a problem with it (my tip and ring ARE reversed, but I don't have access do the basement - guess they want to protect that old coal bin which is still full of coal even though the antique boiler was converted to gas who-knows-how-long ago). John ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed Date: 30 Mar 91 17:48:49 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , gsipe@pyrite.nj.pyramid.com (George Sipe) writes: > (This may have been discussed before but...) > I'm interested in Caller ID for my home, but would want an RS-232 > interface to it. A really stupid (and cheap) interface would be great > -- something that has no memory and simply sends the information out > the serial port (or into the bit bucket if nothing is connected or > paying it attention). Try ClassMate from MHE Systems. It is available from Bell Atlantic Business Supplies (they have an 800 number). For about $50 they give you a box the size of a cigarrette pack. It has a modular jack on one end, and a DB-25 on the other. You connect the modular jack to your phone line, and the other end to an RS-232 DTE device. The box is powered from the Carrier-Detect and Transmit Data leads of your RS-232 device, and it presents the Caller-ID information to you over its Received Data lead. (It looks like a simplex modem, receive-only.) Data output is fixed at 1200 bps, seven data bits, with the parity bit forced to zero. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #257 ******************************  ISSUE 258 WAS DELAYED IN TRANSMISSION AND ARRIVED FOLLOWING 259 BELOW.  Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24149; 31 Mar 91 18:17 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sun, 31 Mar 91 17:43 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA27268; Sun, 31 Mar 91 03:55:11 CST Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:02:43 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #259 Message-Id: <9103311602.ab07352@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:02:22 CST Volume 11 : Issue 259 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson A Response to Len Rose Story in the Washington Post [Jim Thomas, CuD] Internet <-> Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions [Phil Trubey via Nigel Allen] Conference on Inter-Hospital / Physician Computer Consultation [D Parsons] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 00:38 CST From: TK0JUT1@mvs.cso.niu.edu Subject: A Response to Len Rose Story in the Wasington Post Although Len Rose accepted a Federal plea bargain which resolved Federal charges against him in Illinois and Maryland, and state charges in Illinois, he will not be sentenced until May. Therefore, many of the details of the plea or of his situation cannot yet be made public. Len pleaded guilty to two counts of violating Title 18 s. 1343: 18 USC 1343: Sec. 1343. Fraud by wire, radio, or television Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, transmits or causes to be transmitted by means of wire, radio, or television communication in interstate or foreign commerce, any writings, signs, signals, pictures, or sounds for the purpose of executing such scheme or artifice, shall be fined not more than $1000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both. In our view, Len's case was, is, and continues to be, a political case, one in which prosecutors have done their best to create an irresponsible, inaccurate, and self-serving imagery to justify their actions in last year's abuses in their various investigations. Len's guilty plea was the result of pressures of family, future, and the burden of trying to get from under what seemed to be the unbearable pressure of prosecutors' use of law to back him into corners in which his options seemed limited. The emotional strain and disruption of family life became too much to bear. Len's plea was his attempt to make the best of a situation that seemed to have no satisfactory end. He saw it as a way to obtain the return of much of his equipment and to close this phase of his life and move on. Many of us feel that Len's prosecution and the attempt to make him out to be a dangerous hacker who posed a threat to the country's computer security was (and remains) reprehensible. The government wanted Len's case to be about something it wasn't. To the end, they kept fomenting the notion that the case involved computer security -- despite the fact that the indictment, the statute under which he was charged, or the evidence DID NOT RELATE TO security. The case was about possession of proprietary software, pure and simple. The 23 March article in the {Washington Post} typifies how creative manipulation of meanings by law enforcement agents becomes translated into media accounts that perpetuate the the type of witch hunting for which some prosecutors have become known. The front page story published on March 23 is so outrageously distorted that it cannot pass without comment. It illustrates how prosecutors' images are translated into media narratives that portray an image of hackers in general and Len in particular as a public threat. The story is so ludicrously inaccurate that it cannot pass without comment. Mark Potts, the author of the story, seems to convict Len of charges of which even the prosecutors did not accuse him in the new indictment. According to the opening paragraph of the story, Len pleaded guilty to conspiring to steal computer account passwords. This is false. Len's case was about possessing and possessing transporting unlicensed software, *NOT* hacking! Yet, Potts claims that Rose inserted a Trojan horse in AT&S software that would allow other "hackers" to break into systems. Potts defers to prosecutors for the source of his information, but it is curious that he did not bother either to read the indictments or to verify the nature of the plea. For a major story on the front page, this seems a callous disregard of journalistic responsibility. In the original indictment, Len was accused of possessing login.c, a program that allows capturing passwords of persons who log onto a computer. The program is described as exceptionally primitive by computer experts, and it requires the user to possess root access, and if one has root privileges, there is little point in hacking into the system to begin with. Login.c, according to some computer programmers, can be used by systems administrators as a security device to help identify passwords used in attempts to hack into a system, and at least one programmer indicated he used it to test security on various systems. But, there was no claim Len used this improperly, it was not an issue in the plea, and we wonder where Mark Potts obtained his prosecutorial power that allows him to find Len guilty of an offense for which he was not charged nor was at issue. Mark Potts also links Len directly to the Legion of Doom and a variety of hacking activity. Although a disclaimer appeared in a subsequent issue of WP (a few lines on page A3), the damage was done. As have prosecutors, Potts emphasizes the LoD connection without facts, and the story borders on fiction. Potts also claims that Len was "swept up" in Operation Sun Devil, which he describes as resulting "in the arrest and prosecution of several hackers and led to the confiscation of dozens of computers, thousands of computer disks and related items." This is simply false. At least one prosecutor involved with Sun Devil has maintained that pre-Sun Devil busts were not related. Whether that claim is accurate or not, Len was not a part of Sun Devil. Agents raided his house when investigating the infamous E911 files connected to the Phrack/Craig Neidorf case last January (1990). Although Len had no connection with those files, the possession of unlicensed AT&T source code did not please investigators, so they pursued this new line of attack. Further, whatever happens in the future, to our knowledge *no* indictments have occured as the result of Sun Devil, and in at least one raid (Ripco BBS), files and equipment were seized as the result of an informant's involvement that we have questioned in a previous issue of CuD ( #3.02). Yet, Potts credits Sun Devil as a major success. Potts also equates Rose's activities with those of Robert Morris, and in so-doing, grossly distorts the nature of the accusations against Len. Equating the actions to which Len pleaded guilty to Morris grossly distorts both the nature and magnitude of the offense. By first claiming that Len modified a program, and then linking it to Morris's infectious worm, it appears that Len was a threat to computer security. This kind of hyperbole, based on inaccurate and irresponsible reporting, inflames the public, contributes to the continued inability to distinguish between serious computer crime and far less serious acts, and would appear to erroneously justify AT&T's position as the protector of the nets when, in fact, their actions are far more abusive to the public trust. After focusing for the entire article on computer security, Potts seems to appear "responsible" by citing the views of computer experts on computer security and law. But, because these seem irrelevant to the reality of Len's case, it is a classic example of the pointed non sequitor. Finally, despite continuous press releases, media announcements, and other notices by EFF, Potts concludes by claiming that EFF was established as "a defense fund for computer hackers." Where has Potts been? EFF, as even a rookie reporter covering computer issues should know, was established to address the challenges to existing law by rapidly changing computer technology. Although EFF provided some indirect support to Len's attorneys in the form of legal research, the EFF DID NOT FUND ANY OF LEN'S defense. Len's defense was funded privately by a concerned citizen intensely interested in the issues involved. The EFF does not support computer intrusion, and has made this clear from its inception. And a final point, trivial in context, Potts credits Mitch Kapor as the sole author of Lotus 1-2-3, failing to mention that Jon Sachs was the co-author. The {Washington Post} issued a retraction of the LoD connection a few days later. But, it failed to retract the false claims of Len's plea. In our view, even the partial LoD retraction destroys the basis, and the credibility, of the story. In our judgement, the Post should publicly apologize and retract the story. It should also send Potts back to school for remedial courses in journalism and ethics. Some observers feel that Len should have continued to fight the charges. To other observers, Len's plea is "proof" of his guilt. We caution both sides: Len did what he felt he had to do for his family and himself. In our view, the plea reflects a sad ending to a sad situation. Neither Len nor the prosecution "won." Len's potential punishment of a year and a day (which should conclude with ten months of actual time served) in prison and a subsequent two or three year period of supervised release (to be determined by the judge) do not reflect the the toll the case took on him in the past year. He lost everything he had previously worked for, and he is now, thanks to publications like the {Washington Post}, labelled as a dangerous computer security threat, which may hamper is ability to reconstruct his life on release from prison. We respect Len's decision to accept a plea bargain and urge all those who might disagree with that decision to ask themselves what they would do that would best serve the interests both of justice and of a wife and two small children. Sadly, the prosecutors and AT&T should have also asked this question from the beginning. Sometimes, it seems, the wrong people are on trial. [Moderator's Note: Jim Thomas, the author of this article, is the Moderator of Computer Underground Digest, a publication which began about a year ago as an offshoot from TELECOM Digest. For subscription information, write: tk0jut1@niu.bitnet. And my thanks to Jim for an excellent presentation here today. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 03:00 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Internet <-> Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue Phil Trubey (phil@shl.com) of SHL Systemhouse Inc. in Ottawa was kind enough to post the following instructions about exchanging e-mail between the Internet and Telecom Canada's Envoy 100 service. (Telecom Canada is an association of Canada's major telephone companies, the largest of which is Bell Canada.) * forwarding a message originally from phil@shl.com (Phil Trubey) Due to the fairly large number of requests for this info, I've decided to post the following info. I've used it a couple of times and it seems to work. To reach someone with an Envoy account, send your message with the following address in the "To:" field: /ID=envoy_id/S=last_name/G=first_name/I=F/SITE=TELECOM.CANADA/ @GEMINI.ARC.NASA.GOV For example, if you want to send a message to Peter Jones, whose Envoy ID is "p.jones", send to the following address: /ID=P.JONES/S=JONES/G=PETER/I=F/SITE=TELECOM.CANADA/ @GEMINI.ARC.NASA.GOV NOTE! 1) The address line must be all capital letters. 2) This is actually one long line. It is broken into two lines in these examples so it will fit within 80 characters. 3) The person receiving the message pays for BOTH the cost of sending the message and receiving the message. As you can see, Envoy addresses tend to be very long. You may want to use some of the advanced features of your mail program to save the addresses of people you frequently send to. For example, the Popmail mailer provided with NSTN has a "Group" menu that lets you save the addresses of one or more people, and mail to them by picking a selection off a menu. How can people mail to me from Envoy? To mail to you, they must do two things: 1) Send their Envoy message to the following address: [INTERNETMAIL@NASA]NASAMAIL/TELEMAIL/US 2) The first line of text in their message must be: To: your_user_id@your_address For example, if your user ID is "jsmith" and you address is "fox.nstn.ns.ca", the first line of the message would be: To: jsmith@fox.nstn.ns.ca Phil Trubey | Internet: phil@shl.com SHL Systemhouse Inc. | UUCP: ...!uunet!shl!phil 50 O'Connor St., Suite 501 | Phone: 613-236-6604 x667 Ottawa, Ontario, Canada | Fax: 613-236-2043 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 29 Mar 91 15:14:39 EST From: "Donald F. Parsons MD" Subject: Conference on Inter-hospital and Physician Computer Consultation Preliminary Announcement from The New York Academy of Sciences: A CONFERENCE ON EXTENDED CLINICAL CONSULTING BY HOSPITAL COMPUTER NETWORKS Spring, 1992. Cambridge, MA Moderator: Donald F. Parsons MD In recent years there has been a serious and continuing decline in the number of operating rural health facilities and in the availability of acute care in rural hospitals. This situation has contributed significantly to rural economic decline and the rising cost of health care in USA. Increasingly, patients have the extra expense of travelling to distant large medical centers for treatment. A partial reparation of the situation can be achieved by computer networking between consultants at large medical centers and rural hospitals and physicians. Xrays or other medical images necessary for the consultation can be transmitted over ordinary phone lines in a few minutes, using new data compression algorithms and error-correcting modems. A diagnosis, or patient-stabilization information can be phoned, faxed or e-mailed back to the rural center in a short time. Chronic treatments that require repeated consultant control (such as chemotherapy) can be handled in the same way. The patient is able to stay at the home site for such treatment. Phone/fax consultant-access systems using dedicated switchboards, are already working well in several states (e.g., Alabama, Tennessee and Georgia). These states are attempting enhancement by addition of digital text and image transmission capability. The identification of preferred technical approaches to such computerized networking is a main objective of this Conference. We will review medical computer networks already operating, both in USA and elsewhere, and discuss new possibilities. This Conference is the first comprehensive discussion of this question. It is badly needed since communication between experimenting groups has been at a minimum, and the need for such systems has received little attention by granting agencies and legislators. Only recently, has a BITNET discussion group (HSPNET-L@albnydh2) on this subject become available. Apart from the technology and design of such hospital computer networks (including the place of local bulletin boards, landlines, satellite and packet-radio links), we will address many related issues: medical staff attitudes and training in use of computers, types of patient data packages, confidentiality of data, legal issues, etc. We will also address a variety of applications: high-definition TV, teleradiology, telepathology, fetal monitoring, accreditation/ education programs, access to literature searches in rural areas, improvement of disease notification, exchange of state and federal medical advisories, and disaster and trauma management. Hopefully, this Conference will serve to focus and catalyze the use of modern medical informatics principles for the improvement of the quality of health-care delivery. For further information contact: The New York Academy of Sciences, 2 East 63rd Street, New York, NY 10021. (212) 838-0230. Fax: (212) 888-2894, or: The INTER-HOSPITAL & PHYSICIAN CONSULTATION NETWORKS DISCUSSION GROUP (HSPNET-L@ALBNYDH2.BITNET). Owner and Moderator: Donald F. Parsons MD, PhD, DSc. Wadsworth Center, Room C200, New York State Department of Health, Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12201-0509. Tel: (518)474-7047; Fax: (518)474-8590. E-mail to moderator: BITNET dfp10@albnydh2; Internet dfp10@uacsc2.albany.edu; UseNet dfp10@leah.albany.edu; Compuserve 71777,212 Address for Discussion Contributions, Subscription and Listserv Fileserver: HSPNET-L@ALBNYDH2.BITNET or mail to moderator. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #259 ******************************   Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03680; 1 Apr 91 3:07 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:38 EST Apparently-To: Received: from spool.mu.edu by spool.mu.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA25181; Sun, 31 Mar 91 03:17:21 CST Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 15:08:33 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #258 Message-Id: <9103311508.ab29758@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 31 Mar 91 15:07:45 CST Volume 11 : Issue 258 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Roger Fajman] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Barton F. Bruce] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Dave Levenson] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Barton F. Bruce] Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information [Jeff Sicherman] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [David Farber] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Dave Levenson] Re: Sprint Says NO to Increased Account Security [Jonathan White] Re: Calling Card With no Surcharge (was: MCI Around Town) [Jonathan White] Re: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land [John Higdon] Re: Information Needed on WE 2500 DM Set [Dave Levenson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Roger Fajman Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 21:15:20 EST Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws > While pricing for all three tiers is NOW the same as the basic package > was before, IF they break out the pricing and you then need to > subscribe to each tier separately, you can bet that that will lead to > the scambling of the channels in tiers two and three. Once that is > done, you are then forced to use a cable company converter box for > each separate TV to descramble tiers two and three. That sounds logical, but does not appear to be what is happening. For the month of March, subscribers to the first two tiers have to use a converter box, but not subscribers to the highest tier. As of April 1, they are renumbering the channels and converter boxes will not be required for those not subscribing to the premium channels (HBO, etc.). The strange thing is that there is no obvious relationship between the new channel numbers and the tiers. Changing tiers requires a visit from the cable company, which suggests that they are doing something in their boxes on the poles. ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Date: 31 Mar 91 02:25:02 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , zellich@stl-07sima.army.mil (Rich Zellich) writes: > If I had a cable company that insisted on making me pay for each TV > connected, I'd just let them put in their one jack and converter box, > and then just cheat and after-wire everything the same way, anyway. Around here EVERYTHING is scrambled. Cheat all you want, but they have BIG $ class clout and have it all set up that you WILL be prosecuted for theft of service (just like any old phone phreak) if caught. What we all really need to do is find which politicians now have Florida condos financed by out of state banks under terms the politician could hardly refuse, and that were not available to him before cable came to town. If enough citizens fought hard enough, they would not be able to get their license renewed without more reasonable terms. ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Date: 31 Mar 91 15:26:56 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , ryan@cs.umb.edu (Daniel Guilderson) writes: > The ideal solution is to have everyone pay based on the number of > hours they "consume" and the relative cost to the supplier (home > shopping network is much cheaper than HBO for the cable company to > provide). I agree. This is why I like the concept of pay-per-view cable. The local cable company here is offering one or two pay-per-view channels. These are usually filled with boxing, and other sports events I don't care to watch. I much prefer to have them offered on that basis, where I don't pay for them unless I want to watch them. Different events carry different prices, but the idea is exactly what Danial seems to want. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: 31 Mar 91 02:10:50 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , Robert J Woodhead writes: > I do have some qualms about the court decision, however. The phone > company does spend money to create the entries in the white pages, and > it seems to me that rival directory companies are getting a free ride This really misses the basic idea that the phone company ought NOT own YOUR number. Now with alternate phone companies being able to provide you dialtone this is more significant. They are paid well to manage the dwindling phone number resourse. I am in no way suggesting they should be paid any less than they are now for providing local white pages. I get really POd when I have to battle to get ALL the Metro Boston books I am entitled to, and when 411 is so badly configured that you MUST tell them what phone book (Central, North, South, West) to look in or they won't even look for you. 411 was bearable because it was free, but now they 'traded' charging for 411 for providing 911. AOS companies currently deserve every foul name they are called. But I bet an alternate 411 service here in MA that found what you were looking for without your knowing which book to use would be a big hit, and I bet they could charge less and make money. But even without an alternate 411, consider the trees saved, and $s saved by optionally providing white pages on CDROM. Each disc labeled and boxed is well under $2 to make. The 'free' Boston four white books pile can't be that cheap. I would instantly opt for a disc rather than paper, and would even consider $10 'ok' until their volume got high enough that their mastering costs became irrelevant. What does NYNEX want for that CD? Try $10,000 per year, or MORE if networked beyond 1 PC! Phone numbers are a crude temporary necessity they have imposed on us. Wouldn't it be nice to simply speak into the phone and say 'my friend Tony Jones's third office line please', and from the random pay phone be voice recognised as you and thereby indicating which Tony Jones is being refered to. In the meantime, the post office shouldn't 'own' my street address, and the phone company shouldn't 'own' my electronic (phone) one. [Moderator's Note: The post office does not own your street address. The only organization which possibly 'owns' your street address is your municipal government, which if they operate like ours, has at one time or another passed an ordinance naming the streets and detirmining the measurements used to provide each parcel of land with one or more uniquely identifying numbers. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 00:27:07 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article sp@questor.wimsey.bc.ca (Steve Pershing) writes: >konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: >> I remember reading about some of the Demon Dialers of yesteryear and I >> was wondering what is still available today. Specifically, I'd like: > Zoom Telephonics in the Boston, Ma. area are still in business. They > made probably the best "Demon Dialer". My Graybar Telecommunications catalog list them as catalog numbers #176T (176 number capacity) and #93T (93 numbers) on page 1-51. Includes a number of other capabilities I won't copy here. (Email if necessary). It's 1A2, key-system, touch-tone compatible. I think the prices were about $80 and $110 when I last checked. ------------------------------ From: David Farber Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 31 Mar 91 01:47:12 GMT Reply-To: David Farber Organization: University of Pennsylvania Unless I got a dud, the new AT&T Digital Answering set is an unreliable machine which fails to answer at unpredictable times. Its quality is fair. I would recommend some other, quieter unit. ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 31 Mar 91 15:37:30 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , ronnie@sos.com (Ron Schnell) writes: > I was recently in an AT&T Phone Center and saw a new answering machine > that they have brought out. It was a completely digital answering > machine, and shaped in a '50s art-deco style (more vertical than > horizontal), with a LED display on the front. The person who worked > there knew nothing about it, and even a friend who works for Ma Bell > didn't know much about it. It costs about $129, and would really > solve the sleep disturbances caused by my current answering machines > clunky sounds. I can tell you a little about the new AT&T solit-state answering machine: It uses no magnetic tape. Both the greeting and the messages are digitized and stored in semiconductor memory. When you are listening to your messages, you may save or erase individual messages, leaving others. You may listen in any order. It remembers new and old messages, more like AUDIX or other voicemail systems. I'm not sure how much storage it has, but it's far less than cassette-based machines. I think I remember someone telling me that it can take less than ten minutes of messages, if there are no "old" messages saved. There is a battery that maintains the memory in the event of a power outage, but its life is only a few hours. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ From: jonathan white Subject: Re: Sprint Says NO to Increased Account Security Date: 31 Mar 91 16:29:51 GMT Organization: New York University wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > MCI offers account information via their 800 number also ... > [Moderator's Note: Oh really? Would you please post the number we I called 1-800-444-3333 and although I got a real live customer service rep when I said that I had called for automated account information I was told that it was normaly available and that the system was down. [Moderator's Note: I just now tried the above number, and not only does the automated system discuss 'your' existing MCI account and balance, it also allows you to convert 'your' line to MCI One Plus service if desired. So, I converted several of you to MCI as your primary carrier while I was there. :) ha ha! PAT] ------------------------------ From: jonathan white Subject: Re: Calling Card With no Surcharge (was: MCI Around Town) Date: 31 Mar 91 16:38:43 GMT Organization: New York University wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > Below is a list of carriers that offer no surcharged calling card > calls: > ITT/Metromedia is now going under Metromedia Communications(or > something like that ... dropped the ITT part). I think their 950-0488 > rates are higher than 1+ ... also their 950-1011(?) rate is different. According to Metromedia customer service rep "April" rates on my residential account are, for interstate calls: 1 + calling card day $0.17 - $0.26 $0.26 - $0.29 evening $0.11 - $0.21 $0.16 - $0.19 nite $0.09 - $0.16 $0.13 - $0.17 This is per minute rates. You have to figure out at what point it is cheaper to use a calling card with a surcharge. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 11:23 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land Ron Schnell writes: > Recently GTE converted our C.O. to a "much more advanced and improved > digital switch", according to a letter sent to all customers (I assume > it was 5ESS or similar). However, since this "improvement", I have > noticed several degradations. The switch you describe is none other than an Automatic Electric GTD-5, probably the worst affliction to ever plague the telecom industry. It is (by modern standards) featureless, had been virtually abondoned by the manufacturer (for good reason), and has the worst feature implementation of any digital switch on the planet. For some reason, GTE droids always refer to that switch as "advanced". The last time I quite properly badmouthed the GTD-5, I got some flack from GTE types about how it was really a wonderful switch with all kinds of capabilities. All of that is total rubbish; the switch IS garbage. It has software and hardware deficiencies that render it only suitable for GTE CO service (since GTE couldn't care less about its level of service in the first place). It does not have, nor will it ever have ISDN, CLASS, or any other advanced features. The three-way calling problem you describe simply indicates that GTE did not think you were worth ordering the advanced conference bridge and that you would put up with the standard pathetic digital three-way. > What I would really like is some advice on the best way to take these > complaints to GTE. Especially since they are highly technical > compared to what most business office reps could understand. Sorry, you are out of luck. First off, GTE will cancel your first three trouble reports as "resolved" to make its report to the PUC look good. Second, since GTE could not care less about customer satisfaction, you will be told, in essence, to take a hike. > 1. Three-way calling - When I flash and dial the third party, I > can't flash back right away. Inherent in the switch; nothing can be done. > 2. Three-way calling - THIS IS THE WORST PART OF THE WHOLE THING - > During three-way calls, the line suddenly becomes one-way. This is the digital conferencing. It COULD be solved, but would require the installation of a hardware/software pack. Remember, you are dealing with GTE. > 3. Flashing in general - It seems like flashing the switchook is > much less dependable since the change. Again, inherent in the switch. > 4. Infinite Dialtone - Sometimes I get a dialtone that won't go > away. This is a hardware malfunction. It can be fixed, but good luck trying to get GTE to do anything about it. > I dread trying to bring these things to GTE's attention. You should. My opinions on Pac*Bell notwithstanding, you stand a much greater chance of having it all work if you moved into PB territory. Pac*Bell may have thin feature offerings, but what it has seems to work perfectly. From the GTE Definitions Handbook: reorder -- What you typically get after dialing most numbers from a GTE telephone. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Re: Information Needed on WE 2500 DM Set Date: 31 Mar 91 15:49:33 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA In article , davidb@pacer.uucp (David Barts) writes: > Recently, someone posted that a 500 D set was just like a 500 set, > except it was designed for use on a party line with divided ringing. I > own two Western Electric 2500 DM sets that were formerly used on a > LARGE centrex system (two NNX prefixes!). What is the difference > between a 2500 DM and a "normal" 2500 set? The 500 D was a Dial set. (The 500 C was the non-dial version with the large round plastic cover where the dial was.) Many older telephone sets carry the designation 500C/D meaning that they were field-convertible between dial and non-dial use. The 2500 is the 500 with touch-tone dialing, and was sometimes identified as 2500 D. (There was no 2500 C, however, since the 500 C would work just as well!) Eventually, the D was dropped. The M was added when modular hardware was installed. A 2500 DM means a dial set with touch-tone, and modular handset and mounting cords. Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #258 ******************************  ISSUE 258 AND 259 REVERSED IN TRANSMISSION. 259 IS FILED BEFORE 258, AND 260 COMES NEXT IN THIS FILE.  Received: from dsinc.dsi.com by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04761; 1 Apr 91 3:47 EST Received: by dsinc.dsi.com (/\=-/\ Smail3.1.18.1 #18.39) id ; Sun, 31 Mar 91 20:25 EST Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 19:25:42 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #260 BCC: Message-ID: <9103311925.ab23825@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 31 Mar 91 18:31:46 CST Volume 11 : Issue 260 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Mail and News Delivery Complaints [TELECOM Moderator] FORBES and BUSINESS WEEK on Local Competition [Peter Marshall] Sprint's Billing and Service: A Nightmare For Me [Marshall Barry] Testing For BUGS on Your Phone Line [Scott Marshall] Return to the Land of Selective Ringing [David Lesher] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:44:40 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Mail and News Delivery Complaints There have been numerous problems with mail and news delivery since Friday, beginning with issue 248. I am aware of all of them, including duplicate copies in the mail and some people not getting copies at all. Because the 'deliver' program here at eecs is apparently out of order, (at least not working where telecom is concerned) mail is being handled from a backup site -- a place where we had to re-write a bunch of addresses on the list, etc ... and still the bounced mail is rolling in at a fast pace. I am remailing the copies by hand when I can figure out what was wrong. The comp.dcom.telecom side of things was working okay ... but apparently some problem occurred with the maps over the weekend, and a few places in my nntpxmit could not get correctly resolved by the server. Then, issue 256 got out from here only partially edited due to another software flaw ... So -- live with it. What you see is what you are getting. Things will get back to normal whenever. There is no need to write me about duplicates or non-delivery problems until at least a few more issues have gone out ... if the problems continue at that point. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 09:22:01 -0800 From: Peter Marshall Subject: FORBES and BUSINESS WEEK on Local Competition "The Baby Bells Learn a Nasty New Word: Competition," BUSINESS WEEK, 3/25/91: Breaking up local phone monopolies -- via new technologies -- looks to be the "issue of the 1990s...." After sweeping the long-distance business in the 1980s, competition is headed for local phone service. The regional monopolies of local phone companies are beginning to be undermined by such technologies as microwaves, fiber optics, and wireless phone systems. Long-distance carriers and cable-TV companies are trying to grab some of the market for local communications. And government officials are questioning the need to maintain the century-old system of regulated local phone monopolies. All that makes competition in local phone service "the biggest telecommunications issue of the 1990s." But there's a hitch: Local phone companies complain that they're not yet free to compete. There's little danger of the phone monopolies crumbling overnight. Still, veterans of the 1984 Bell System breakup know how quickly -- and how drastically -- things can change. Some Baby Bell executives are seizing on the nascent competition to justify deregulation. The challengers who claim they will make all this happen are not a formidable lot -- yet. For example, the combined revenue of the alternate-access companies -- fiber-optic and microwave -- will be $150 million this year, says Yankee Group Inc. All but one of the upstarts are losing money. But they have on their side the awesome power of an idea whose time has come: competition. Already, regulators are beginning to hand down rulings that challenge the monopoly system. In 1988, for example, the Federal Communications Commission issued a precedent-setting ruling that softens the previously rigid geographic boundaries of local phone companies. It allowed Southwetern Bell to provide phone service to an Atlantic Richfield Co. research center in an area served by a GTE Corp. phone company. Similar border crossings are probably happening quietly all over the country. To date, the states have outdone the FCC in promoting competition -- particularly New York. By the end of the decade, small businesses and even residential customers may have some choice in local phone services, too. That is, if new wireless phones, called personal communications networks (PCNs), live up to their promise. Backers say that PCNs could actuallly form a second phone system paralleling the wired system. Not surprisingly, the Baby Bell holding companies are eager to seize control of PCNs. In a move that could undermine the local wired system, some are seeking to operate PCNs themselves, rather than through their regulated telephone companies. A more immediate threat to the phone monopolies could come from the cable-TV industry. If phone companies gain admittance to the cable-TV business -- as they have been lobbying for permission to do -- several cable-TV companies are poised to counterattack. Even as competition appears, however, business customers complain that the local phone companies still behave like monopoly public utilities. According to some critics, the Baby Bells largely ignored the local phone business. In the seven years since the Bell breakup, they have pumped millions into other businesses. In 1989, the Baby Bells actually generated slightly more cash flow from depreciation than they spent on new investments. In effect, they treated their core businesses as cash cows. Meanwhile, the new competitors continued to attack with derring-do. Traditional phone companies just don't work that way. The difference in corporate culture is immense. However quickly competition comes, the direction is certain. The walls, indeed, are tumbling down. "Divestiture Revisited," FORBES, 3/18/91: Since the breakup of the Bell System seven years ago, the regional telephone utilites have been in clover. Their comfortable business of colelcting monthly rent for telephone lines and taking a large commission for handling connections for long-distance companies has made them Wall street favorites. The stock prices of the seven regional Baby Bells have on average tripled, to a level of twice book value. All this good fortune is built on an assumption that is no longer valid: that local telephone service is and will remain a monopoly. An onslaught of new technologies, hungry entrepreneurs and pro-competition regulators are all teaming up ... the fuse is lit. The money at stake is an annual revenue stream of about $14 billion. This revenue excludes the fixed-rate "access charge". Bypassing the local telephone company in most American cities to avoid padded monopoly charges is now a fast-growing business of $100 million a year. Bypassers are starting to do to the local phone companies what MCI did to AT&T's long-distance business in the 1970s. But the competitive threat doesn't stop there. Competitive forces are only starting to be felt now in local service. If nothing else happens, the competitors could quite possibly siphon off an estimated $5 billion in revenues from the telephone companies by the end of this decade. More important, the mere threat of bypass, microwave and radio links will be enough to force realignments in rates. Is there economic justifiaction for the $14 billion in fees paid to local monopolies? Some, but not much ... where did the 45% rate- sharing formula come from? Out of the air. Competition is coming to the local telephone monopoly, bringing with it all kinds of new services for the Information Age. The smartest thing that politicians and regulators can do is get out of the way. ------------------------------ From: Marshall Barry Subject: Sprint's Billing and Service: A Nightmare For Me Reply-To: mbarry@isis.UUCP (Marshall Barry) Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 21:45:38 GMT John Higdon wrote about Sprint's billing... Figured I'd add one more wonderful note about the same sort of thing. When I moved from Phoenix to Los Angeles, I disconnected my number there, and terminated (I thought) my Sprint 1+ access. Wrong. TWO YEARS later, I suddenly received a bill for over $400.00 for long distance for six month's worth of calls. Seems Sprint had been chosen for the "default" 1+ access account, and just reconnected it with my current one in another city, two years later. Another wonderful case where they PROMISED to fix it, and it took three months for them to straighten out the original charges ... in the meantime adding new charges to MY account. Neither letters nor phone calls seemed to make any difference, until I finally had my attorney write them a letter, threatening legal action, a show cause as to why they should be allowed to provide service, and a class-action suit. Matter was fixed in five days. In article John Higdon further writes: > ... headaches and go elsewhere for long distance service. At this > point, Sprint would have to be nearly free for me to consider using > it further. For the record, I have had a Sprint account since it > was Southern Pacific Communications offering the excess capacity of > the railroad communications. Considering the resouces, technology, > and talent that operation has had available to it, it certainly has > become a monumental disappointment. Sorry for really chopping your message, but you brought up a couple of interesting points. First, I had been a Sprint User for QUITE some time myself - but, after a $31K (yes THOUSAND) Sprint Bill (someone hacked my "access code" and handed it out to places I never heard of) - and the fact that it became $31K due to the fact it took Sprint eleven weeks (almost three months) from the time I reported the first "unauthorized accesses" to the time they deleted the code, I was - to say the least - disappointed. When Sprint told me that I would have to PAY that bill, in full, because I was a "company" and it was "probably some disgruntled employee who gave it out to everyone" - I was more than disappointed - I was OUTRAGED! They did everything down to sending collection agents to MY HOME to get this "money that was due them". After several MONTHS of complaints - To everyone from the PUC to the FCC, I finally got to someone in Sprint's office who said, simply, "Do you know where xxxx is?" "No." "Do you know anyone in the xxxx County Jail?" "Where?" ... followed by "This has OBVIOUSLY gotten out of hand ... you reported the access when the total amount due was $640, how much of that is yours and how much is the `unknowns'?" I figured out that I owed about $370 of that bill (which was about our average monthly billing) - and I paid it. They then came after me for another $500 (which THEY figured I had to owe them - and we went round and round again). Finally - I got THAT straightened out, and connected to 1+ for Sprint - biggest mistake I ever made. I got billed three, four, five, and six times for the EXACT same call (time date number, etc. all Identical) and was told to pay it and submit documentation as to why I should be re-imbursed ... etc. Thanks, Sprint, but no thanks. BTW, got billed for SOME calls six or seven months after they were made and billed for two HOURS on a call I know was under two minutes. is also Data: (303) 657 0126 +&+ (303) 426 1942 3/12/2400 baud Snail Mail: P.O. Box 486, Louisville, CO 80027=0486 [Moderator's Note: It sounds like you have really been through the wringer with those people. Do they still have droids calling you on the phone from time to time offering big savings on your long distance bill, free calculators, and five dollar rebates if you change your one-plus over to them? I manage the phone system in our office, and we had a very sour, very bitter experience with Sprint over a check for several thousand dollars which they misapplied and could not locate. We finally had to sue them. I may write more details soon. PAT] ------------------------------ From: DISC3C1@jetson.uh.edu Subject: Testing For BUGS on Your Phone Line Date: 31 Mar 91 05:28:00 CST Organization: University of Houston Who needs to buy one of these things? There are numbers you can call, that are supposed to show you if your line is been tapped. They call it a sweep. It is an alternating pitch supposedly; and is meant to stay high pitched if your line is being bugged and alternate if not. For example, call this sweep: 214-357-8686 Scott Marshall : Sterling Sysop of - : Aviation The Hornets' Nest : Sciences (713)868-4372 : 11625 Martindale Rd 24oo/96oo/14.4K : Houston, TX 77048 Baud Rates : USA [Moderator's Note: Where did you get your information from, Scott? Yes, you do connect with a (probably unsupervised) sweep tone when you dial the above number, however I called it from six different phone lines today and get the alternating high and low tones in each case. I find it hard to believe that *any* phone I used is 'bugged', let alone all six. And how would a location in Texas know anything about a bug on my line in Chicago in any event? Someone gave you bad information, I'm afraid. PAT] ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Return to the Land of Selective Ringing Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 15:56:24 EST Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers John asked about a noise while dialing those with party lines, and how the ANI worked. Larry is surely the man for the both questions, and I'll defer to him. But there was ANOTHER distinctive noise you could hear during ring cycle: bridge lifters. Here's the story, as it was explained to me: Party lines were intended for conservation of wire. The typical application was: CO-----------------------------------------Mr. Tip |-Ms. Ring where the distance between them was small. But when private lines became widely available, Bell had a problem. Most folks would opt for them, and only one party would be out there (Say Ms. Ring) by herself. She still WANTED party line service. A similar situation existed when Mr. Tip called the business office and raised Cain because Ms. Ring was ALWAYS on the phone to her commodities broker. Ma's options were: a) Force Ms. Ring to change to private line service. b) Give her a private line without charging extra. c) Leave her as the ONLY party on a given party line. d) Party her with someone NOT next door. Now Ma often tried tactic a), but the problem with it was the PSC and/or the FCC frowned on such coercion. The Beancounters LOATHED c) and b) cuz they wanted every penny. That left d). Now the reason you could NOT just do this: ___________________________Mr. Tip co/ \ \______________________Ms. Sleeve was a guy named Farad. Cable is capacitive. When Mr. Tip was dialing, he was breaking the loop current with the pulser in his dial. BUT, the stub going off to Sleeve's condo had a lot of capacitance in in, and it terminated in a good sized ringer cap, too. (Maybe several, if Ms. Sleeve had a set in each room.) That (total) capacitor distorted Mr. Tip's dial pulses, and confused his Strowger Switch. It could also, I suspect, shunt audio to ground during talking, but I have never bothered to do the needed math to prove or disprove that. [Of course, there is another solution: Touch-tone. As I recall TT was first proposed to eliminate the problem of dial pulse distortion on ultra-long rural loops.] So Ma called her elves at Murray Hill, and they invented a bridge lifter. It goes between the CO and the outgoing pair and lifts (disconnects) Mr. Tip when Ms. Sleeve is off-hook, and vice versa. I'm now speaking out of my hat, but I THINK it only affected things during dialing. Otherwise, how could the other party demand surrender of the pair for an emergency? In any case, you can HEAR the bridge lifter, in an office with ringing sidetone, (as opposed to those that give you the switch generated tone) as a "raspy" quality to the ring. I often notice this while calling a doctor's office. In closing, I was sure that you could get party line service here in Miami in 1989, but I now see no mention of it. [Moderator's Note: Do you think the ringing you heard on the call to the doctor's office was due to the doctor's line probably being bridged to a live answering service in some other exchange, etc? PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #260 ******************************   Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 19:34:21 CST From: TELECOM Moderator To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #261 Message-ID: <9104011934.aa15314@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 Apr 91 19:33:32 CST Volume 11 : Issue 261 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends on Where You Are [John Covert] Sprint Outage in CA Last Week [Steve Elias] ANI and ONI [Larry Lippman] Revertive Calling [Larry Lippman] Calling Party ID on Two-Party Lines [Dave Levenson] "Dial 900 Directory": Guide to Services [TELECOM Moderator] Interop 91 Conference Notice [TELECOM Moderator] User Interfaces (was Envoy 100 Gateway Instructions) [Ralph W. Hyre] Request for Etymology [Daniel DanehyOakes] Cellular Phone Use in Aircraft [David Cornutt] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 08:47:19 PST From: John R. Covert Subject: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends on Where You Are Dave Levenson wrote: > The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten > digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no > sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls intra-NPA. We call this "The New Jersey Plan", because New Jersey never had 1 + 7D within the area code. It was the Bellcore recommended plan, but it met with objections all over the country. All of the following places have, within the past few years, either gone to or announced 1 + 10D within the NPA: Dallas-Fort Worth, Northern Virginia, Maryland, Toronto, Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama, San Antonio, Detroit, Arizona Philadelphia dropped the "1", but it is a relatively small area code, close enough to New Jersey to have been able to get away with the New Jersey plan. Arizona announced 7D, and had so many objections they changed to 1 + 10D. Here in Massachusetts, dropping 1+ has been mentioned, but it hasn't been mentioned loudly and definitely enough yet to attract attention. In 508, 7D couldn't happen until the SxS exchanges, of which there are still a large number, are all gone. The Washington, DC, area has the best plan: 7D is local within your own NPA (whether that be 202, 703, or 301); 10D is local to one of the other two NPAs; and 1 + 10D is toll, either within your own NPA or to one of the other NPAs. 1 + 10D is accepted for local calls to other NPAs, and the call gets routed and billed the same as if you had dialed just 10D. I wish that would become the nationwide plan. Regards, john ------------------------------ Subject: Sprint Outage in CA Last Week Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 16:48:39 PST From: Steve Elias thomas%mvac23.uucp@udel.edu (Thomas Lapp) wrote: > My question for those in the know: What was the cause of the fiber > break which caused the Sprint outage last week? Details please. If > it was along a RR right-of-way (and buried) how was it cut? Not by a > train wreck I assume? Right? Wrong! According to the local news here in the bay area, the fiber was cut by the train wreck. The video they showed made this easy to believe. The train wreck had ripped up the track badly, along with all sorts of other stuff that must have been under or along side the track. The newsfolk did make some comment indicating that those who had put the fiber down may not have gotten the appropriate permissions from the track owners, however. As an aside, there was a similar controversy (but no train wreck or fiber cut) in Framingham, MA about a year ago. eli ------------------------------ Subject: ANI and ONI Date: 31 Mar 91 20:42:05 EST (Sun) From: Larry Lippman In article kent@sunfs3.bos.camex.com (Kent Borg) writes: >> ANI was added around 1973, before that you >> dialed a toll call as 1+ ..., but the operator had to ask "Number, >> please?"; you KNEW she meant the number you were calling from! ANI from WECo was in service as of 1960 for SxS CO's. This was ANI-B, which used a 5 KHz or so identification tone. ANI-B was quickly replaced with ANI-C by 1963 or so. ANI-C and the later ANI-D became the standard methods of providing ANI in SxS CO's, and I would not be surprised if some is still in service in rural areas. ANI-C and ANI-D used short 340 volt DC pulses on the sleeve lead that were decoded using a neon lamp matrix. > I never knew. I always had to ask what she meant. I had assumed that > they knew where I was calling from (you mean I could have lied and > gotten away with it? -- never occured to me), yet I had just dialed > the number I wanted, so why would she ask that? Fraud by giving an incorrect number to the ONI operator was a problem, but not that serious. The first line of defense was that the called party (we know *that* number for certain!) would be contacted should the billing number not be in service, or should the call charges be contested by the party upon whose bill they appeared. Some ONI fraud was easy to spot - like giving a telephone number from a CO other than the one calling from! The ONI operator certainly knew what CO belonged to the trunk being answered. In some areas the ONI operator had a chart of valid thousands and hundreds groups for each CO served by the ONI position; this somewhat reduced the problem of being given non-existent numbers. There was a more sophisticated approach tried in some areas. The ONI position automatically used the keyed numbers to access a special test trunk back to the originating SxS CO, which used a special test distributor and connector to ascertain if the calling number that was furnished to the ONI operator was busy. If it did test busy, it was presumed that the number furnished to the ONI operator *could* be valid. It it did not test busy, then it was presumed that the number furnished to the ONI operator was phony. I never personally saw one of the above verification systems since comparatively few were installed due to their marginal value at reducing fraud. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Subject: Revertive Calling Date: 31 Mar 91 21:29:06 EST (Sun) From: Larry Lippman In article rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) writes: > > Using polarity-dependent superimposed > > ringing, four unique parties could be signaled. Eight-party lines > > used coded ringing, and could be dialed directly since there were SxS > > connectors arranged for automatic coded ringing selection. > I don't know what our old (Bell System) switch was before it was > replaced with a 1A some time in the late '70s, but it had ringback on > 491x. Different values of 'x' would give eight different coded rings > plus continuous ring. I miss this feature. Our current switch > doesn't even have a ringback number that I can find (I've tried all > the test prefixes, and located all kinds of tones, battery, > terminated-no-battery, and so on, but no ringback). I feel certain that your CO has a ringback number; it may well be "hidden" as a three or four digit number, rather than a seven-digit test line number, however. Ringing another party on the same party line is a unique case called "revertive calling". Such a call cannot be completed using the conventional SxS connector. It was accomplished using apparatus known as a reverting call selector. While there was more than one way to implement revertive calling in a SxS office, a typical method was to dial four digits such as NNYD, where NN is a two-digit access prefix common to the CO, Y is your party code number and D is the party code number of the destination station. After dialing the appropriate four-digit number above and hearing an acknowledgement tone, your handset was placed on hook. Your telephone then rang along with that of the destination party. When the ringing stopped it indicated that the other party had answered and you picked up your handset. To abandon an unanswered call required momentarily picking up your handset. Implementing revertive calling the *right* way was a little tricky from a circuit design standpoint, since your ringing code is *not* the same as that of the called party! How could your telephone ring to indicate that the called party was being rung with a different electrical and/or cadence code? This is why in a better reverting call implementation, two digits were dialed: your ringing code and that of the called party. What really happened is the the ringing cycle was split. During your silent interval the ringing condition for the other party was placed on the line; during their silent interval your ringing condition was placed on the line. If your ringing was electrically the same condition but with different cadence for the other party, you simply heard their cadence and the ringing cycle was not split. Less sophisticated reverting call selectors did not ring your telephone at all. You dialed an access code followed by the party code of the called party. You heard an acknowledgement tone and hung up. After you *think* the other party has had time to answer the telephone, you then picked up the line. If they were there, fine; if not enough time or they picked up and heard silence and then hung up -- tough. In some ESS CO's where party lines were almost non-existent, *no* reverting call trunks were installed at all. If you wanted to call another party on your party line, you were required to go through the operator. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: Dave Levenson Subject: Calling Party ID on Two Party Lines Date: 1 Apr 91 04:42:04 GMT Organization: Westmark, Inc., Warren, NJ, USA John Higdon asks how party identification works on two party lines. The party whose ringer is connected between Tip and ground, known as the 'tip party', has the hookswitch wired so that part of the ringer is connected between tip and ground without the normal DC blocking capacitor whenever the handset is off-hook. The other party, called the 'ring party', does not. After collecting enough digits to identify the called party, the originating register in a five-crossbar switch performs a tip-to-ground resistance check for about 100 msec. This is the 'click-plunk' you hear when originating from either party on such a line. If it finds resistance less than about 2000 Ohms, it identifies the caller as tip party. This is why, years after most of us could walk into almost any appliance store and buy a telephone set equipped with a modular jack and take it home and plug it in, subscribers on party lines are denied this right. The fine print in the phone book, and some mouldy old Bell System Practice, no doubt, requires that only non-modular telephone sets furnished by the telephone company may be used on two-party service with ANI. The telco must wire the correct selective ringing and party identification option when installing the set. Any why doesn't the unbalanced line condition result in hum during the call? Because the ringer's inductance hides the ground-loop-induced AC hum path! Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 2:17:03 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: "Dial 900 Directory": Guide to Services A little publication came to my attention today which I want to mention to you for whatever it is worth. Since subsctiptions are free, you might want to send in your name. The "Dial 900 Directory", which bills itself as 'your complete guide to 900 services' is published quarterly by Dave Edwards. The current 32-page issue lists several dozen 900 numbers, ranging from sports and business news through a variety of adult services. Party lines, jokes, confessions, sports, trivia contests, product giveaways, etc are all categories represented. Since the 900 industry is heavily into sex programing, the 900 Directory reflects this with several full page ads for adult services, but a full page ad for the Business News Network is also there, along with ads for lottery results and rock music promotions and a wake-up service. From 900-321-SINS to 900-999-KINK as it where, and a lot more. This is the first time I have seen such a large collection of 900 numbers in one publication, unless you count the ads in the {Weekly World News}. To order your copy and be on the mailing list for quarterly updates: 1-800-786-4-FUN (surprise! 800 number rather than 900!) Then enter code number 906363 when requested. If you prefer to order by mail, write: The 900 Directory ATTN: Dave Edwards Post Office Box 2270 Temecula, CA 92390 You would also contact Mr. Edwards if you have a 900 service you want to list in his directory. PAT ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 2:34:22 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Interop 91 Conference Notice The Interop '91 events will be held this year at the San Jose Convention Center, October 7-11. The three main components to this year's program include: In-Depth Tutorials, October 7-8 Executive Interop, October 7-8 Conference and Exhibition, October 9-11 The events will include some 45 coference sessions, and displays by 250 or more vendors. For more information, to register or receive a detailed conference program, call 1-800-INTEROP. From outside the USA: 1-415-941-3399. Interop, Inc. is located at: 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100 Mountain View, CA 94040-1219 FAX: 4154-949-1779 PAT ------------------------------ From: "Ralph W. Hyre" Subject: User Interfaces (was: Envoy 100 Gateway Instructions) Date: 1 Apr 91 16:15:05 GMT Reply-To: "Ralph W. Hyre" Organization: AT&T OSS Development, Cincinnati In article ndallen@contact.uucp (Nigel Allen) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 259, Message 2 of 3 > * forwarding a message originally from phil@shl.com (Phil Trubey) > To reach someone with an Envoy account, send your message with the > following address in the "To:" field: > /ID=envoy_id/S=last_name/G=first_name/I=F/SITE=TELECOM.CANADA/ > @{internet site [name deleted]} This is a pretty sad statement for X.400 implementations. Hasn't anyone built a reasonable user agent to these ISO beasts? The Internet user@hostname convention is pretty straighforward. Telecom Canada should follow Compuserve's example and build an Internet Gateway, rather than forcing the entire load on one US government facility that happens to translate RFC822 into X.400. As a user, I won't accept any system that forced me to remember the arcane X.400 syntax. Is there a delivery or user agent that works with the ISO directory stuff? (X.2500?) I want to be able to use my 'old' user interface {user@organization - which is all the X.400 address really captures anyway.} [Example: Bob.Allen@AT&T] ------------------------------ From: Dan'l DanehyOakes Subject: Request for Etymology Date: 1 Apr 91 17:43:20 GMT Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA I may have asked this before, but if so nobody answered (or I didn't receive the answer) ... What "slamming" is is pretty evident from context -- but why is it called that? D ------------------------------ From: David Cornutt Subject: Cellular Phone Use in Aircraft Organization: NASA/MSFC Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1991 17:59:49 GMT There's one hell of an argument going on in the Usenet rec.aviation group about the use of cellular phones from aircraft. Can anyone answer: (1) what effects this could have on the cellular phone net? (2) what, if any, FCC regulations might apply? David Cornutt, New Technology Inc., Huntsville, AL (205) 461-6457 (cornutt@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov; some insane route applies) "The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of my employer, not necessarily mine, and probably not necessary." ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #261 ******************************   Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 22:35:57 CST From: TELECOM Moderator To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #262 Message-ID: <9104012235.aa22306@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 1 Apr 91 22:35:17 CST Volume 11 : Issue 262 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Jeff Wasilko] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Michael Ho] Re: New Hotel Ripoff [Bob Yazz] Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Herman R Silbiger] Re: Sprint's Billing and Service: A Nightmare For Me [John Higdon] Re: Questions About New Service Being Installed [Al L Varney] Re: User's Evaluation of Handheld Cellular: Fujitsu / Motorola [J Gottlieb] Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed [Damon Schaefer] Re: What Happened With Sprint's Outage [Jim Maurer] Re: Movie Excerpt / Ringing Phones [Carl Moore] Re: An HONEST PacBell Survey About CLID [R. Kevin Oberman] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Wasilko Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1991 00:18:15 EST Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable In article Barton.Bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) writes: > for providing local white pages. I get really POd when I have to > battle to get ALL the Metro Boston books I am entitled to, and when > 411 is so badly configured that you MUST tell them what phone book > (Central, North, South, West) to look in or they won't even look for > you. 411 was bearable because it was free, but now they 'traded' > charging for 411 for providing 911. I had to call Boston DA today to track down a Boston area number. I knew the company was in the Boston area, but not in Boston. I told the operator this, she checked the Boston listings, and told me she couldn't find a listing. I asked her to check the surrounding areas, she said she had to know the name of the town. When I asked her to do a cross-directory check, she hung up on me! I called back, asked for the supervisor and told her what happened. She said that the operators can do a search of surrounding areas without any problem. She took some info about the call (the DA operator didn't giver a name, either) and said she would look into it. When I asked the supervisor about why the DA operator would have hung up on me (hinting that the operator didn't want to spend the time due to a time quota), she said there is no quota and suggested that it was an equipment problem. Can anyone tell me what it's really like behind a DA console? Surely there must be quotas/time limits per call. What kind of searching capability do the operators have? How is the informatio presented to the operator when there is more than one matching name? Thanks! RIT VAX/VMS Systems: | Jeff Wasilko | RIT Ultrix Systems: | BITNET: jjwcmp@ritvax +----------------------+ INET:jjwcmp@ultb.isc.rit.edu| INTERNET: jjwcmp@ritvax.rit.edu |____UUCP:jjwcmp@ultb.UUCP____| ------------------------------ From: ho@hoss.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...) Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 01:47:01 GMT In konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > The Supreme Court ruled unanimously that phone book listings are not > creative works and that the factual contents are not protected by > copyright. Specifically, anyone else can reproduce the alphabetical > listing right from the phone book! If the sweeping generalities in the Post article are true, I have to disagree with the Supreme Court, because it left this big, vague "originality" problem in case law. But in this particular case, I'm actually chuckling quite loud. Here's a rural telco that basically didn't feel like giving its directory information out to anyone, and they got spanked -- but in the process, they apparently brought grief to other telcos (like US West) who have maintained copyrights on the White Pages but have been willing to license the subscriber lists. Now, anyone can rip 'em off for free. Everybody say 'thanks' to that li'l telco. (I bet the BOC's are gonna be as happy with that company as the press is with CNN for launching that silly prior restraint case.) Michael Ho, University of Nebraska Internet: ho@hoss.unl.edu | Face it. Harry was WAY too homely for Sally. Disclaimer: Views expressed within are purely personal and should not be applied to any university agency. ------------------------------ From: Bob Yazz Subject: Re: New Hotel Ripoff Date: 31 Mar 91 22:33:10 GMT On that Del Mar Hilton the phone bill overcharge -- This hotel is in my local calling area so I called them up and asked about it. I got the manager in charge of their phone system. She insisted that it was Pacific Bell that programmed their system and that Hilton charged their hotel guests a non-local rate Only because Pac Bell charged Hilton a non-local rate. I insisted her information was false. She offered to look at my bill, and I believe that if I had been the guest with the bill she'd have refunded the $4.86 for "guest relations" reasons and let it go, but she did promise to get with Pac Bell and make sure they were charging correctly. She also indicated exactly what the earlier poster indicated -- that a call to La Jolla (an abutting community to the south) was a local call from the Pac Bell payphone in the lobby but Not a local call from the Pac Bell programmed Hotel Telephone System. My Pacific Bell directory indicates that Del Mar to La Jolla is a zone 1 (as local as it gets) call. Anybody at Pac Bell or Hilton reading this? Payphone ripoff problems in California? Call Pacific Bell at 800/352-2201 Bob Yazz -- yazz@lccsd.sd.locus.com They take complaints M-F, 8-5 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 19:48:32 EST From: Herman R Silbiger Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories In article , kddlab!lkbreth.foretune. co.jp!trebor@uunet.uu.net (Robert J Woodhead) writes: > There are international VCR's that do what you want. The Akihabara in > Tokyo is lousy with them, as they are a big hit with tourists. These > VCRs can play PAL, SECAM and NTSC VHS tapes, and also have tuners that > can pick up all the formats. They have an internal converter and, I > THINK, can drive a PAL, SECAM or NTSC tv or monitor. The 47th Street Photo catalog shows several multi-standard VCRs, as well as multi-standard TV sets and camcorders, all at prices not much different from NTSC equipment. They also have multi-standard coffee makers. Herman Silbiger ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 18:22 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Sprint's Billing and Service: A Nightmare For Me Marshall Barry writes: > Another wonderful case where they PROMISED to fix it, and it > took three months for them to straighten out the original charges ... > in the meantime adding new charges to MY account. The person that spoke with me last month indicated that it takes months for Sprint to resolve billing problems. He told me that he would be following up monthly until charges for the old number stopped appearing. This is not impressive. What I am doing about it is simply turning off all usage of the account until it is fixed. Not one call will be routed over Sprint until two months have gone by with no new charges on them. I have never had this sort of problem with AT&T. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 20:20:05 CST From: Al L Varney Subject: Re: Questions About New Service Being Installed Organization: AT&T Network Systems Oops! Some corrections: In article varney@ihlpf.att.com (Al "Oops" Varney) writes: > [In other articles, Fred R. Goldstein and Jim Rees write:] Fred> The 1ESS has relays in it, not to do the actual switching, Fred> but to switch ringing voltage and the like on to the loop. It makes a Fred> lot of noise, although nothing like a panel office! This is correct, in the sense that the "switches" are not "relays". Jim> The 1ESS (and the 1A, which uses a less antiquated processor) uses Jim> reed relays to do the actual switching. They're vacuum-sealed, so Jim> they're quieter than the old ones. I suspect that the 1 can do Caller Jim> ID too, though Im not sure. > The No. 1 ESS Switch indeed uses sealed relays for the switching But I meant to say "reed switch" here ^^^^^^ > fabric, but "reed relays" ??? Nope. The actual T/R path is through > magnetic-latching relays, surrounded with some metal and a coil. ^^^^^^ ...and here > Pulse the coil one way, the contacts close and REMEMBER to stay > closed. Pulse the other way, the contacts open and REMEMBER to stay > that way. No current is used to maintain either position. I E-mailed a better explanation to Jim, but in summary, the reason I disagreed about the term "reed relay" was because of the word "relay"; but then I used it myself (Ooof)! They are "switches" because they do not actually switch a current based on another current or pulse. They are switched "dry" (sans current); the contacts can't be cleaned and will stick or weld shut if switched "wet" frequently. Therefore, external relays to trunks and lines must be used to remove battery/ ground before setting up a path through the network. A matrix of switch crosspoints is arranged so that closing a tip/ring crosspoint in a matrix automatically opens all the other pairs in the same X row and Y column. When a path is "released", it's X and Y matrix points are marked idle, but the crosspoints remain closed until some other action selects another crosspoint in the same X row or Y column. Further errata: > Instruction set vaguely resembles an orthoganal version of 1E, with No "Freudian" jokes, please... it's ^^^^^^^^^^ "orthogonal". > a typical instruction (24 or 48 bits wide) taking .7 milliseconds. let's try "microseconds", eh? ^^^^^^^^^^^^ >Al Varney, AT&T, Lisle, IL You really ought to read the stuff before you publish, dum-dum. Al ------------------------------ From: Jim Gottlieb Subject: Re: User's Evaluation of Handheld Cellular: Fujitsu vs Motorola Date: 31 Mar 91 07:24:24 GMT Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan In article kddlab!lkbreth.foretune.co. jp!trebor@uunet.uu.net (Robert J Woodhead) writes: > The complaint is that the Japanese government closed it's market > to the Micro Tac, and then subsidized the creation of a competitor. The issue is very complicated. I never fully understood it until I read an article that explained the whole incident. Now I forget both where I read it and most of the details. But I thought I would point out a major difference in the cellular market here as compared to the U.S. In the U.S., one buys a cellular telephone on the free market and then must pick a carrier. The free market (and carrier kickbacks) keeps the price of equipment low, while the duopoly of cellular carriers in any given market forces the customer to be ripped off, with little real choice. Here in Japan, the duopoly extends to the equipment side. You don't see cellular phones being sold in stores here. Rather, you choose your cellular carrier (either NTT [the telco] or IDO in Tokyo), and they also rent you the telephone. You have very little selection. The NTT hand-held that most people carry around looks quite old-fashioned when comapred to what is sold in the U.S. NTT is now running a large campaign on T.V. and in the print media featuring Bruce Willis, announcing at least three new hand-held cellular phones. Japanese who have come to visit me when I'm in Los Angeles have been impressed with my Mitsubishi 900 hand-held, saying they've never seen such a nice-looking and small unit in Japan. The new NTT-offered sets will change this, but if I understand correctly, they could never offer the Motorola MicroTAC because Motorola's phones are not compatible with the NTT system. I bet if Motorola were a Japanese company, rather than cry to the government about there being no cellular systems in Tokyo compatible with their equipment, they would have seen to it to build compatible telephones. ------------------------------ From: Damon Schaefer Subject: Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed Date: 31 Mar 91 01:38:19 GMT Organization: Hewlett Packard, Vancouver, WA The original questioin was from a "while" ago... X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 614, Message 1 of 9 I think this will catch the attention of many. Bell Atlantic Business Supplies is marketing a device called "CLASSMATE". It is a device that plugs has a RJ-11 and a DB-25 connector on it. It converts CallerID to Your serial port. It comes with some software that allows you to hook the output of the box to your favorite database (or other application program.). The device is priced at about $49.00 and will be shipped in about two to three weeks. Judging by the usefulness of this unit I would order early... Note for the PROGRAMMER: Please let me know about the interesting software you write for this GEM!! The phone number for Bell Atlantic Business Supplies: 800-523-0552 James Van Houten POTS (301) 507-9191 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: What Happened With Sprint's Outage Date: Mon Apr 1 14:33:08 1991 From: jim@slxinc.specialix.com In V11, #255 Thomas Lapp wrote: > My question for those in the know: What was the cause of the fiber > break which caused the Sprint outage last week? Details please. If > it was along a RR right-of-way (and buried) how was it cut? Not by a > train wreck I assume? Right? If you mean the Sprint outage in the San Francisco Bay area last week, yes the fiber break was along a railroad right-of-way, and yes it was a train wreck. A Southern Pacific freight was traveling southbound through Hayward, CA on a section of track where the max. speed is 10 MPH. One of the cars had old fashioned style friction bearings (probably a car used in company service, those style bearings are no longer legal for interchange) and it developed a "hot box", meaning the bearing overheated. What usually happens in a hot box is the end of the axle melts and the wheel comes off the axle, followed rapidly by the car derailing! In this case it was followed by about twelve other cars. Fortunately there were no hazardous materials involved, just frozen chickens and stuff. When that much weight hits the ground it can dig some very deep trenches, and it seems they never bury the fibers deep enough! It took a few days, but the line is now opened, and I believe Sprint has fixed their line. Jim Maurer Specialix Inc. jim@specialix.com ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 10:40:59 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Movie Excerpt / Ringing Phones Since the earlier message, I stopped in a motel which had a note saying that if your call goes unanswered after FOUR rings, try hanging up and redialing. (Otherwise, you may be charged for call even though it's unanswered.) ------------------------------ From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: An HONEST PacBell Survey About CLID Date: 31 Mar 91 17:23:40 GMT In article , root@surya.uucp (The unknown Florentine) writes: > It was also interesting to note that the poll (and the "informative > brochure") did not mention CLID blocking or BLocked Call blocking. > Sounds like PACBELL has no intent to provide these. No, Pac*Bell has no reason to ask. California state law requires that CLID blocking be available. So why bother asking? Actually, there is one valid question--total blocking or per-call blocking. Pac*Bell wants per call while several "consumer" groups want total blocking. So it's not whether to block CLID, but how. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: oberman@icdc.llnl.gov (415) 422-6955 Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my typing and probably don't really know anything useful about anything. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #262 ******************************  ^A^A^A^A Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05149; 3 Apr 91 12:28 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ac02297; 2 Apr 91 12:01 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa20957; 2 Apr 91 0:01 CST Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 0:01:02 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #263 BCC: Message-ID: <9104020001.aa05145@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Apr 91 00:00:08 CST Volume 11 : Issue 263 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Jeff Carroll] Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws [Roger Fajman] Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone [Brent Chapman] Re: Lorain Products Co. and More on Telephone Power Plants [Dan Boehlke] Re: Computerized Phone Callers [John R. Levine] Re: Is There a Selective Ringing Blocker? [Tad Cook] Re: Information needed on 2500 DM Set [John R. Covert] Re: More on Selective Ringing [Rolf Meier] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Randy Borow] Re: Telephone Number > Address Service Needed in Houston [Randy Borow] Re: Caller ID Hearings in California [Jim Gottlieb] Digest Gets Forged Message! [Ron Schnell] Information Needed on Internet <=> Sprintnet Gateway [Joseph Tucker] Re: I Can't Wait For Caller ID to Start in Chicago! [Christopher Owens] Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards [Scott Dorsey] Telecom Archives and FTP (was: Delivery Complaints) [Peter M. Weiss] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Jeff Carroll Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws Date: 1 Apr 91 19:56:14 GMT Reply-To: Jeff Carroll Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics In article ryan@cs.umb.edu (Daniel Guilderson) writes: > It's different for phone companies because some calls take up more > resources than others. Which makes me wonder about how a computer > network could be billed. I figure a TCP/IP (or some kind of ISO based > protocol) network would be a highly desirable thing for a lot of > people. I don't think it's good enough to limit it to SLIP because > then the only time your connected to the network is when you call it > up. I would want something that's always connected. I figure the > fairest way to bill this kind of network would be to only charge for > packets that originate from your node. What do you think? This topic is discussed rather heavily in the comp.protocols.* newsgroups by people far better qualified than I; but I'll offer my 0.16 bits. My feeling is that the additional overhead involved in per-packet accounting would result in unnecessarily high costs to everyone. I'd advocate flat-fee billing to all but those who impose significant burdens on the network, who could be charged by some coarse measurement of bandwidth consumed. Jeff Carroll carroll@ssc-vax.boeing.com ------------------------------ From: Roger Fajman Date: Mon, 01 Apr 91 17:55:45 EST Subject: Re: Cable TV vs Telco Connectivity Laws > As of April 1, they are renumbering the channels and converter > boxes will not be required for those not subscribing to the premium > channels (HBO, etc.). I got an additional piece of information today. The channel numbering with converter boxes is still going to be different than without a converter box. Can anyone say why this is done? It's confusing when you have some sets with converters and some without. ------------------------------ From: Brent Chapman Subject: Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone Date: 2 Apr 91 00:35:40 GMT Organization: Ascent Logic Corporation; San Jose, CA In john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone > at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected > to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place > 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). > [Moderator's Note: On I-55 from here to St. Louis all the food/gasoline > stops along the way have a similar arrangement. At each booth in the > restaurant, a wall-phone is hooked to a one-way outgoing line. All > calls from the phone must be zero-plussed or 10xxx zero-plussed with > billing on a collect, third number or telco credit card basis. PAT] If you look at the customers at these joints, you'll probably see a relatively large number of long-haul independent truckers. These phones are commonly found at restaurants along Interstate highways. The drivers use them for such things as arranging delivery details of their current loads, lining up future loads, and simply calling home. I believe that many of them will allow incoming calls, on the assumption that if the driver is sitting there waiting for a call back, he's likely to order something to eat or drink while he waits. Brent Chapman Ascent Logic Corporation Computer Operations Manager 180 Rose Orchard Way, Suite 200 chapman@alc.com San Jose, CA 95134 Phone: 408/943-0630 ------------------------------ From: Dan Boehlke Subject: Re: Lorain Products Co. and More on Telephone Power Plants Date: 31 Mar 91 01:03:39 -0600 Organization: Gustavus Adolphus College, St. Peter, Minnesota In article , kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > A truly scary experience is to move a piece of old RH or RHW > rubber-insulated power feeder cable, watch both the outer insulation > and the rubber flake into dust, and see exposed conductor within a > fraction of an inch of grounded metal! I could never understand > why WECo continued to use potentially unstable rubber-insulated > power cable for almost forty years after far superior plastic > insulation was available following World War II. It is my understanding that good real rubber products resist acid better than even most of today's plastics. Acid resistance would be very important arround batteries. Dan Boehlke Internet: dan@gac.edu Campus Network Manager BITNET: dan@gacvax1.bitnet Gustavus Adolphus College St. Peter, MN 56082 USA Phone: (507)933-7596 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Computerized Phone Callers Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 1 Apr 91 13:01:47 EST (Mon) From: "John R. Levine" In article <1991Apr1.081053.6680@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> you write: > They would have to establish that the calls where made from your > phone. This would require them to subpoena the Phone Company's > records. Nope. Most 800 numbers get itemized billing, so your calls show up as line items on the bill. > They then have to prove material damages. Nope. Most places in the U.S. using the phone to harrass someone is against the law whether or not the victim loses money thereby. I'm no fonder of annoying phone pitches than anyone else, but using your computer to annoy them back is a bad idea. Personally, I find the most effective thing to do to them is to put them on hold indefinitely. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Is There a Selective Ringing Blocker? From: tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) Date: 1 Apr 91 19:49:35 GMT In article , mpd@anomaly.sbs.com (Michael P. Deignan) writes: > Okay, we've all heard of those nice devices which allow you to split a > Selective Ringing line into a fax-line, modem-line, etc., by the > addition of a little device obtainable from Hello Direct or other > telephone equipment suppliers. > But, here is a one which I haven't seen: A Selective Ring blocker. > For example, say I have Selective Ringing, and use it for the > following: > Normal: Voice Line > Two Short: Fax line > Now, with one of those little gems from Hello Direct, I can > successfully split the line so my fax will pick up when I get two > short rings. > However, in both cases, regardless of which line the call is destined > for, my "normal" line will ring - somewhat of a pain-in-the-you-know- > what if someone in Singapore is sending me a fax at two in the > morning, when I really don't want to hear the "normal" line ring, even > two short rings. Why would this happen? If this is true, why does the box separate the calls into two outputs? From the Hello Direct catalog: "Our Ring Director automatically connects each call to the phone or device associated with that phone number." > Is there a device which will "block" the normal line from ringing when > someone calls in on one of the alternate "selective" numbers? This > way, emergency client phone calls can get "thru", but the occassional > fax-at-2-am will not cause the phone to ring, awakening the household? Sure! Its EASY! Just install the device ahead of everything, just like the instructions for these units always show. The only way you could ever hear the calls to your fax machine is if you left a telephone wired to the incoming line BEFORE it reaches this device. This is why there is a "normal" output ... that is the one you hook your telephone to, and it only rings when someone dials your "normal" phone number. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 13:16:44 PST From: "John R. Covert 01-Apr-1991 1615" Subject: Re: Information needed on 2500 DM Set > The M was added when modular hardware was installed. Not so. The "M" indicates that A-lead control is provided. Internally, the set is wired so that the switchhook, when lifted, makes a contact closure between the Black and Yellow wires, in order to provide control if the station has an appearance on a key system. /john ------------------------------ From: Rolf Meier Subject: Re: More on Selective Ringing Date: 1 Apr 91 18:01:54 GMT Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. In article David Lesher writes: > few years ago North Supply listed replacement ringers for 500 sets in > four different schemes. Donald named three terms. I recall: > 20, 30, 40, 50, hz [decimatic??] > 22, 33, 44, 55, 66 hz > 16, 25? 35.5? etc hz > From REA form 522, Part III: single frequency: 20 Hz decimonic: 20 Hz 30 Hz 40 Hz 50 Hz harmonic: 16 2/3 Hz 25 Hz 33 1/3 Hz 50 Hz 66 2/3 Hz [actually I added this one since it is sometimes used] sychronomic: 20 Hz 30 Hz 42 Hz 54 Hz Another interesting spec is that the voltage increases as frequency increases, and the generator must be capable of up to 140 Vrms on the higher frequencies! Hope this helps. Rolf Meier Mitel Corporation ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 1 13:48:21 CST 1991 Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Chris Petrilli discussed AT&T's new digital answering machine. Actually, it's not that terribly new, since they were in the stores back in November of '90. I was seriously considering purchasing one (and at our employee discount the price was great :-) ); however, the big drawback for me was that the outgoing message is limited to a maximum one minute in length; and, with the type of business I run out of home, I occasionally must leave outgoing messages of greater than one minute. All in all, though, I was impressed with the machine: remote programmability (even with rotary or pulse phones), voice prompts, time and date stamps, LED message indicator, personal memo feature, auto disconnect (of machine) when picking up any extension, etc. Another tidbit: the machine is tapeless; it uses two digital chips to do its job -- and no, it's not a computerized voice. You can record your own messages. Like Chris said, it's thin: about seven inches tall, one inch thick, and six inches wide and stands vertically. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL. ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 1 15:04:32 CST 1991 Subject: Re: Telephone Number > Address Service Needed in Houston Raymond Jender asked what the Houston 713 CNA Number is. Bad news, Ray. That number is one where you need an authorization code in order to obtain information. Unlike Illinois Bell's CNA number here in Chicagoland, the Houston number is not available to the general public. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadow, IL. ------------------------------ From: Jim Gottlieb Subject: Re: Caller ID Hearings in California Date: 1 Apr 91 10:09:55 GMT Reply-To: Jim Gottlieb Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan In article Robert_Swenson.OSBU_North@ xerox.com writes: > Also planned is a per-call blocking feature which requires a three > digit code before placing each call. It's already implemented. Dial *67 from almost any Pacific Bell ESS-served line and you will hear a confirmation tone followed by dial tone. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 17:50:31 -0800 From: Ron Schnell Subject: Digest Gets Forged Message! The article with ID telecom11.254.6@eecs.nwu.edu says its from me, but it's not. Please post something immediately so that I don't get any replies. Ron ronnie@sos.com [Moderator's Note: Here it is. Sorry about that, and I wonder who would have been so nasty to us? Its kind of a stupid thing to do, considering the non-controversial nature of the message. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 12:10 CST From: JTUCKER@vax2.cstp.umkc.edu Subject: Information Needed on Internet <=> Sprintnet Gateway Could someone please post the instructions on the gateway between Sprintnet and the Internet. Joseph Tucker ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 09:48:43 CST From: Christopher Owens Subject: Re: I Can't Wait For Caller ID to Start in Chicago! In comp.dcom.telecom rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com writes: > Personally, I am eager for CLID to begin -- and with no blocking > whatsoever. Why? I have been getting tons of annoying, gross, > disgusting phone calls. So, what's wrong with the solution of allowing blocking, but allowing your line to be set up to reject calls that originate with CLID blocked? Seems like that would please everybody. ------------------------------ From: Scott Dorsey Subject: Re: Conversion of TV Transmission Standards Reply-To: Scott Dorsey Organization: NASA Langley Research Center Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1991 14:10:26 GMT In article kddlab!lkbreth.foretune. co.jp!trebor@uunet.uu.net (Robert J Woodhead) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 251, Message 1 of 11 > steff@cernvax.cern.ch (morten steffensen) writes: >> My question: Does there exist a commercial "plug-in-and-play" >> converter box between these different signals. What would be the best >> for her to do? Re-export the TV and the video? > There are international VCR's that do what you want. The Akihabara in > Tokyo is lousy with them, as they are a big hit with tourists. These > VCRs can play PAL, SECAM and NTSC VHS tapes, and also have tuners that > can pick up all the formats. They have an internal converter and, I > THINK, can drive a PAL, SECAM or NTSC tv or monitor. Most of these units are VCR's that produce a PAL signal from PAL tapes and an NTSC signal from NTSC tapes. Changing from one scan rate to another is very, very difficult (anyone remember the Eidekoscope with the three storage CRTs?), but building equipment designed to use either one isn't all that hard. International VCR's will probably work only with international TV sets. You might be able to get your NTSC TV to synch up on a european TV signal, although you probably won't get the sound carrier and the color won't be there. Oh, there are shops in NYC that do sell multistandard TVs and VCRs. Scott ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 07:52 EST From: "Peter M. Weiss" Subject: Telecom Archives and FTP (was: Delivery Complaints) Would it be worthwhile to note that back issues are available by FTP from lcs.mit.edu? Pete [Moderator's Note: Good point. And when you have used anonymous ftp to login to lcs.mit.,edu, you will need to then 'cd telecom-archives' to get into our section. Feel free to help yourself! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #263 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05731; 3 Apr 91 12:41 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ad02297; 2 Apr 91 12:07 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa32285; 2 Apr 91 1:18 CST Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 1:18:29 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #264 BCC: Message-ID: <9104020118.aa31358@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 2 Apr 91 01:05:44 CST Volume 11 : Issue 264 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson End of the [Party] Line [AP wire via Bill Berbenich] Party Lines, ANI and ESS [Larry Lippman] Calling Party ID on Two Party Lines [David Lesher] Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones [Julian Macassey] Slam Your Friends! [Michael Ho] Re: Telecommunications: The Transmission of Information [Carol Springs] The "Sweep" Tone [Fred Ennis] Party Line Service on our Exchange Thirty Years Ago [Fred Ennis] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bill Berbenich Subject: End of the [Party] Line Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 20:49:24 EST Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu I read this story off the AP wire and was reminded of the days, not so long ago in 1982 and '83, that I had a party line in rural Maine. I felt like I was reliving a little bit of early Americana by having a party line in the Eighties. As I recall, it was either have a party line or wait a few months and pay an extremely high installation fee to get a private line. Anyway, I hope you all enjoy this story as much as I did. By JANET L. CAPPIELLO Associated Press Writer WOODBURY, Conn. (AP) -- In the bucolic towns of western Connecticut, where farmhouses and antiques shops dot the rolling hills, about 100 people are hanging onto a piece of the past: the telephone party line. But as the Woodbury Telephone Co. starts to upgrade its equipment this spring, the holdouts will all be switched to private lines, forced into the age of computerized telecommunications. Woodbury Telephone, itself a relic from the days of small, independent phone companies, has received permission from state regulators to replace the last of its two- and four-party lines with private lines. Southern New England Telephone Co., which serves 1.5 million customers to Woodbury's 16,000 customers, eliminated its last party line in January. Around the nation, the number of party lines has been steadily decreasing but one study in 1987 by the United States Telephone Association said there were still 2.8 million people on party lines. In 1985, there were 4.6 million party lines, it said. Although the party line is going the way of hand-cranked telephones, J. Garry Mitchell, Woodbury Telephone's president, sees no reason to mourn. He calls party lines old-fashioned, and has been trying to abolish them for two decades. "Party lines (are) nothing to be proud of," Mitchell said. Party lines were popular from 1910 until the early 1960s, he said. Customers share a phone wire but have separate telephone numbers. Even the people with party lines, mostly older customers, say they've put up with the occasional inconvenience of finding someone else already on the line more for economy than out of a sense of nostalgia. In 1961, Woodbury Telephone charged $6 a month for a two-party line, $4.95 for a four-party line, and $7.25 for a private line. Today, those costs haven't risen more than 50 cents per month. Robert Keating, a 61-year-old Woodbury architect who grew up with a party line, says he has one now because it's the cheapest way to have separate telephone numbers for his home and the business he operates out of his house. Still, having party lines is "sort of nice, in a way," he said. "It sort of keeps the town rural, if you want to call it that." Telephone lore has it that party lines were a great source of gossip for busybodies bold enough to eavesdrop on their neighbor's conversations. Norma Bennett, 72, a retired Woodbury operator, remembers the story about two women who were chatting on their party lines while a third listened in. "One said, `I wonder when the mailman is coming?' And the one who was listening in answered, `Soon, because he just went by here."' Party lines were once standard telephone fare because there wasn't enough equipment to provide private lines, Mitchell said. Some party lines accommodated up to ten customers, usually all in one neighborhood. Woodbury Telephone has provided telephone service in the towns of Woodbury, Southbury and Bethlehem and parts of Roxbury and Oxford since 1899. SNET serves the rest of the state, except for a small corner served by New York Telephone. Woodbury Telephone is being allowed to eliminate the service now because of a $1.8 million equipment upgrade, Mitchell said. Eliminating party lines also became imperative because of computerized 911-emergency response systems. When a caller dials 911, the caller's address appears on a computer screen at the dispatch center. With party lines, there's a risk that the address could be that of the other customer, Mitchell said. Freida Gauthier, 78, who has had a party line "ever since I had the phone ... over 40 years," says she's willing to pay a little extra for the sense of security she will get having the emergency 911 service. "I live alone," she said. She too has kept the party line because the service is less expensive, and she rarely uses her telephone. She talks fondly of the days when people got much of their news through party lines. "Other people would listen in to what was going on. That was fun," she said. She quickly added that she had never eavesdropped herself. Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Party Lines, ANI and ESS Date: 2 Apr 91 00:15:36 EST (Tue) From: Larry Lippman In article wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher) writes: > While I have not dug too deeply into this aspect, one advantage of at > least the two party Bell method was ANI. While the trick with the > tapped ringer coil added some noise, it DID allow the CO to figure if > Mr. Tip or Ms. Ring was calling Fargo without a "numberpleeze." > The isolators, such as a 28A or a 425A, are gas tubes. They don't > conduct until a LARGE (~90v) dc voltage is impressed on the line. > Ringing is on top of that. Thus, during talking, no unbalance thru the > ringer coil, and less noise. But, if you have a 28A or other of the > myriad items Ma mentions (11A's, 687B's, 425&6A tubes, 426N diodes and > D180036 isolators, to name a few) can you ALSO have ANI, and if so, > HOW? ANI party detection based upon a balanced ground was only used with two party lines which had fully selective ringing. Four party and eight party lines were always assigned a class of service for ONI if the originating CO were equipped with ANI. > Here's a mix of old and new: Can you have party line selective > ringing on ESS's? ESS always had the technical support for two party, four party and eight party lines. However, contemporary with new ESS installation was usually an effort to upgrade outside cable plant to minimize or even eliminate party lines. No operating telephone company really wants to maintain party lines. This was also accompanied by a tariff change filing and notification of affected party line subscribers that they *had* to change to private line service. In some cases where a state public utility commission would not permit total elimination of party line tariffs, the telephone company would bill a "recalcitrant" subscriber at a lower rate for two party service, but in fact give them the equivalent of a private line. To make this "legal" for accounting purposes, the subscriber in question was often assigned the "ring party" on a hypothetical two party line. For practical purposes, the ring party on a two party line is no different from that of a regular subscriber with a private line. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Calling Party ID on Two Party Lines Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 21:05:15 EST Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers John Higdon asks how party identification works on two party lines. Dave Levenson explains... > This is why, years after most of us could walk into almost any > appliance store and buy a telephone set equipped with a modular jack > and take it home and plug it in, subscribers on party lines are denied > this right. Err, Ma didn't always do this correctly. A technician (who worked on a project of mine at a past agency) bought his party-line 500 set from Ohio Bell. He wanted to install some more sets. You guessed it - he was ring party! We wired the other 500 sets to also provide the ground through the ringer. I never *did* figure out how Ma was so confused that She could provide party line service, charge for party line service, and yet not KNOW it when they offered to sell him the phone! Yet when he called them about it, they pitched him about getting private line service. ;_] By the way, Lou was one of the hold-outs I mentioned. He had been the ONLY party on the pair for several years, and had NO intention of giving in, when I last talked to him. ------------------------------ From: Julian Macassey Subject: Re: I Take Issue With Moderator Buying Radio Shack Phones Date: 1 Apr 91 06:59:08 GMT Reply-To: Julian Macassey Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article contact!ndallen@eecs.nwu.edu (Nigel Allen) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 243, Message 7 of 14 > Several posters have referred to some modern residential telephones, > manufactured by AT&T and other companies, as "lightweight". > Northern Telecom's Harmony telephone set, which Bell Canada and some > other companies rent but do not sell, is a modern electronic telephone > set. The working parts and plastic shell do not weigh very much, and > apparently Northern Telecom's market research with prototypes of the > phone showed that consumers equated low weight with low quality. > And *that's* why there are lead weights in a Harmony telephone. > People who want a heavy telephone will find that manufacturers will > address that demand, but perhaps in an unexpected way. There are a couple of reasons to add weight to today's modern electronic phones: 1. Give the handset enough weight so it can activate the hookswitch. The alternative to this is to use cheezy microswitches instead of decent solid multicontact switches. Yes, this is one thing that distinguishes garbage phones. 2. Give the base some weight so the damn thing doesn't keep being yanked off the desk and dropping to the floor. Cheezy, crummy, sleezy, phones that are supposed to handle today's telecommunications needs are also often lighter because they use thin wall plastic that cracks and bends easily. A good phone (and that includes Northern telecom) is made from thick wall ABS such as Monsanto Cycolac T grade. This stuff is hard to break or flex. Modern handsets, even if they are using decent G3 style handsets, often are lighter because they have an electret element rather than a carbon T1 type element. Old style phones also had metal bases and gong ringers with iron and brass in them. These weighed more than phones with Ceramic resonator disc warble units. I have always considered TIE phones to be excellant examples of cheap, nasty, crummy, cheezy phones with nasty plastic, nasty little hook switches and armies of dweebs in polyester suits peddling them door to door. They managed to move telecommunications back five decades by selling phone systems that blew fuses when Tip and Ring were shorted. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: ho@hoss.unl.edu (Tiny Bubbles...) Subject: Slam Your Friends! Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 21:44:02 GMT In acf5!whitejon@cmcl2.nyu.edu (jonathan white) writes: [MCI's account information line] > [Moderator's Note: I just now tried the above number, and not only > does the automated system discuss 'your' existing MCI account and > balance, it also allows you to convert 'your' line to MCI One Plus > service if desired. So, I converted several of you to MCI as your > primary carrier while I was there. :) ha ha! PAT] Waitjustaminnitbuster. Are you saying that by calling this number, someone can arbitrarily cause 'his or her' (read: ANY) line to be slammed? Time to call the phone company and see if we can get slam protection here. (Is 'slam' an 'official' word, or did c.d.telecom just adopt it as an apt description?) (Or was I swallowed up in a Moderator joke? Hmmm...) Michael Ho, University of Nebraska Internet: ho@hoss.unl.edu Disclaimer: Views expressed within are purely personal and should not be applied to any university agency. [Moderator's Note: No, it was not a joke. Well, the part about converting you over to MCI was, but not the part about being able to do it. One of the menu choices given was 'to set up your phone with one plus dialing' ... and I am sure they did not mean with AT&T as the default carrier! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 13:05:28 EST From: Carol Springs Subject: Re: Telecommunications: The Transmission of Information Organization: DRI/McGraw-Hill, Lexington, MA In Volume 11, Issue 245, Donald E. Kimberlin highly recommends the following new book which he received through his book club: > Telecommunications (The Transmission of Information) > Dayton, Robert L., McGraw-Hill, 1991, 184 pp., case bound > ISBN 0-07-016189-5 > (My book club's price: $27.95) I called the McGraw-Hill bookstore at corporate headquarters this morning to order this book. I just received a voice mail message from the bookstore saying that the book shows up as not having been published yet, and that the warehouse doesn't know exactly when it will be available. So don't be surprised if the book isn't in bookstores and libraries yet and if your efforts to get a store or library to order a copy are unsuccessful at first. The general public may have to wait a few weeks longer for the book. The woman from the McGraw-Hill bookstore recommended that I try my order again at a later time. I shall do so. Carol Springs carols@drilex.dri.mgh.com ------------------------------ Subject: The "Sweep" Tone From: Fred Ennis Date: Tue, 02 Apr 91 00:07:25 EST Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Scott Marshall recently gave a "sweep" number that he wrongly thought would provide a "sweep" of the line for bugs or taps. The "sweep" at that number is a sweep of frequencies, which you either monitor on a scope or with a meter to check the frequency responsoe of the line. Since a search for bugs or taps on a line is also called a "sweep" we can see how the "urban legend" got started. Bottom line is that it's nearly impossible to detect a properly installed legal wiretap. The best you can do is just try to confuse whoever might be listening in (grin). ------------------------------ Subject: Party Line Service on our Exchange Thirty Years Ago From: Fred Ennis Date: Tue, 02 Apr 91 00:07:25 EST Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada Someone was asking about the use of eight party lines when the telco only had four ringer options (tip +/- ground and ring +/- to ground). Back when I was growing up in the 50's and early 60's we had Nxx-5911 in our exchange. Dialing any last digit would still ring our phone, with 5912 giving two rings, 5913 giving three rings, I think 5914 gave us four rings and 5915 gave a long and a short. They were repeated at 5916 thru 5910. This is pure conjecture here now, but I'd assume Bell could run ten parties on such a system, because there could be five distinctive rings on tip to ground and another five on ring to ground. And, from our "That's not a bug, that's a feature!" department, I used to give out 5913 to my friends, so mother and dad always knew if the phone was for me. I now find it funny that telco marketing folks have rediscovered this concept and are now selling it as "distinctive ringing"! Plus ca change, c'est plus la meme chose! F. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #264 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12162; 4 Apr 91 19:18 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21603; 4 Apr 91 2:28 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa27044; 4 Apr 91 1:23 CST Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 1:09:47 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #265 BCC: Message-ID: <9104040109.ab09537@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Apr 91 01:09:29 CST Volume 11 : Issue 265 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Delays, Backlogs, etc. [TELECOM Moderator] Re: Request For Cellular Phone Service Manuals [Carl Wright] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Mark Rolfs] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Carl Wright] Re: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land [Carl Wright] Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless [Martin McCormick] Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless [Nils Arbeitstein] Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Jamie Cox] Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed [Gilbert Amine] Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service [Ed Greenberg] Re: Sprint's Billing and Service [Christopher Lott] Re: Sprint's Billing and Service - A Pleasure For Me [Pankaj Mayor] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 0:03:54 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Delays, Backlogs, etc. As many of you know, this past weekend there was a major problem on portions of the Internet with a network server which caused a great deal of mail (including a dozen or more issues of the Digest) to go undelivered; get bounced back to the sender; or get delivered in some random and unpredictable order. In the case of this Digest, there were numerous instances of duplicate and triplicate copies of issues; in many instances missing issues; and in general a lot of havoc including out of numerical order delivery. I've been spending literally *hours* here the past couple of days responding to requests for missing issues, answering complaints of 'did you get my article; why did I not get a reciept; why has it not been published, etc' ... Because I physically cannot work 24 hours per day -- or even several hours per day on a regular basis -- on the Digest, and because there has been a huge flow of stuff arriving in the past few days which was clogged up in the system over the weekend, I had to take a rather drastic action: most articles received in the past few days have been returned to the sender with a request that they be held at least a week or so, and only submitted if they remain relevant at that time. Quite honestly, in the nearly three years I have been involved in the production of this Digest, I have **never** seen a backlog as I have experienced the past three days! You will note there were no Digests at all on Wednesday ... I spent several hours handling administrative mail. So, if you sent an article here anytime since last Sunday and got it back with a form letter saying 'thanks, but no thanks', do not take it personally ... about 95 percent of the other correspondents got the same thing ... and at that, I still have enough here to fill a couple issues today! In all, about 100 messages were returned unused. Again, PLEASE read all replies before you write your own. If the topic is covered (or saturated is more like it), then DO NOT send anything. Do not send your article here and to an unmoderated telecom (or other) newsgroup at the same time. One person did that Monday and I am still getting copies of his two line, totally irrelevant message. 237 copies have arrived so far. You MUST write to this group by mail. You cannot post messages direct. PAT ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: Re: Request For Cellular Phone Service Manuals Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1991 03:38:59 GMT Brandon Allbery asks for information on cellular phone service. He and other readers may be interested in books from the Cellular Bookstore (tm). They offer the with info on 150 phones. Also of interest will be the which provides programming information on over 200 models of cellular phones. Both are available for $149 from: Bishop & Assoc. 1018 164th St. S.E. Suite A-24 Mill Creek, WA 98012 206-485-0572 Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ From: Mark Rolfs Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 3 Apr 91 18:23:51 GMT Organization: HP Fort Collins, Co. Randy Borow writes: > All in all, though, I was impressed with the machine: remote > programmability (even with rotary or pulse phones), voice prompts, > time and date stamps, LED message indicator, personal memo feature, > auto disconnect (of machine) when picking up any extension, etc. > Another tidbit: the machine is tapeless; it uses two digital chips to > do its job -- and no, it's not a computerized voice. You can record > your own messages. Like Chris said, it's thin: about seven inches > tall, one inch thick, and six inches wide and stands vertically. Either some of your information is in error or there is more than one AT&T digital answering machine available. I bought one recently and am reasonably pleased with it but it does not have voice prompts, time-date stamp, or remote programming via a rotary phone. It does have the rest of the features you mentioned and has a total message capacity of about seven minutes, according to the documentation. Mark Rolfs ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1991 04:17:19 GMT In response to Moderator's assertion that alternate phone directory companies are a bunch of cheating copy-cats, I must disagree. Our local alternate pays 45 cents per name to obtain the names from Michigan Bell to prepare their book. They used to pay two cents per name less than ten years ago. They didn't actually tell me how long ago it was, but the young lady I spoke to couldn't have been working longer than that. The practice of including "ringers" in compiled lists is common in compilations of information, but the practice doesn't mean that people actually steal the information frequently. Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: Re: Can Someone Please Help us in SO-Cal GTE-Land Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1991 04:34:11 GMT Notwithstanding John Higdon's certainty that you will get your problem reports marked "resolved" with no actual solution, report them on the phone and then report them in writing. If John ends up being right, call the CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) and also write them. The information is below. CPUC President - G. Mitchell Wilk 415-557-2444 Commissioners are: Norman Shumway 415-557-1407 Patricia Eckert 415-557-3700 John B. Ohanian 415-557-2440 Danel Fessler 916-752-2896 Division of Ratepayer Advocates John Leutza 415-557-1272 Commission Advisory & Compliance Division S. Robert Weissman 415-557-2558 The address is: CPUC 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102 415-557-0647 Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 91 16:42:07 CST From: uccxmgm@unx2.ucc.okstate.edu Subject: Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless The interference to the cordless phone from the halogen lamp is a perfect example of an irritating problem which began to show up about 25 years or so ago when silicone control rectifiers, (SCR's) and triacs, (double SCR's), began to be used as control devices in everything from power tools to light dimmers. These marvelous devices have made it possible to build light dimmers and motor speed controllers which are a fraction of the size and cost of older rheostat based controls. The problem is that they do this voltage control by turning on once each AC cycle in the case of SCR's and once each half-cycle in the case of triacs. Any time current is rapidly switched into a conductor, electromagnetic energy is produced. When the halogen lamp is dimmed, the control lead of the SCR or triac is being fed with an AC signal with sufficient phase shift to turn the SCR on just as the AC sine wave is nearing the zero point. The SCR turns itself off when zero is reached and won't come on again until about the same point in the next cycle. The result is that the bulb is fed with short saw-tooth pulses rather than a sine wave of lower voltage. The upshot of this involved description is that modern solid-state lighting and motor controls can generate stupendous electromagnetic interference in the low-frequency radio spectrum. The best defense is a good AC line filter between the lamp and the power outlet. The problem may be in finding a filter which can handle the wattage of the lamp without cooking. Finally, try this little test. If you are lucky, no one will see you do this and think your crazy, but it demonstrates what I just told you. If the room is very quiet, put your ear near the lamp bulb and very slowly, turn the brightness control up. If the control is a full-range control, the bulb may barely start to glow. At the same time, your interference should start and you should also hear a faint buzzing or ringing sound from the bulb. This is the electromagnetic shock of that saw-toothed wave form. Now turn up the light and you will probably hear the noise vanish or soften. This is because the wave form is more like a sine wave. Don't burn your ear on the bulb while doing your research. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Oklahoma State University Computer Center Data Communications Group Stillwater, OK ------------------------------ From: Nils Arbeitstein Subject: Re: Halogen Lamp Interfering With Cordless Date: 1 Apr 91 02:23:41 GMT Organization: Hack-Tic This story sounds familiar to me. Try and shield the transformer, which usually is located within the stand of the halogen light. Don't forget to not just put some metal around it, but also to connect it to ground. That ought to do the trick. nils@ooc.uva.nl ------------------------------ Subject: Re: New AT&T Digital Answering Machine Date: 3 Apr 91 00:54:24 GMT Reply-To: jcox@x102a.ess.harris.com (Jamie Cox) Organization: Harris Govt. Aerospace Systems Division The new machine is the "Digital Answering System 1337". I saw one the other day at the AT&T store. My brochure states that it has seven minutes of "total recording time". It has an LED which shows the number of messages received. It looks very different from any other answering machine I've seen, but I don't know how well it works. One nice thing about a digital machine is that you can go directly to a specific message without waiting for intervening messages to go by. Jamie Cox jcox@mlb.ess.harris.com | Phone: 1 407 727 6397 (work) Harris Government Aerospace Systems,| 1 407 723 7935 (home) MS 19/4827, P.O. Box 94000, | "Speaking only for myself." Melbourne, Florida USA ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 17:51 GMT From: Rochelle Communications <0004169820@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed In an article which appeared in the TELECOM DIGEST V11 #249 on March 29th, 1991, George Sipe writes: > I'm interested in Caller ID for my home, but would want an > RS-232 interface to it... Can anybody give me any pointers? > ANY RS-232 Caller ID interface would be of interest since I've > found none so far. There are two products on the market which provide a Caller ID/RS-232 interface. The first product is ANI-232, available from Rochelle Communications of Austin, Tex (800-542-8808). It provides Caller ID decoding (compatible with both US and Canadian formats), ring detection, and on-hook/off-hook indication (for call timing, and to keep track of unanswered calls). The ANI-232 is available now and sells for $85. It comes with a free demonstration software which displays the Caller ID data on an IBM PC. A Developer's Package is also available for serious developers/VARs. Rochelle has also developed a PC-based Caller ID Telephone Line Simulator for testing and demonstration of Caller ID products. The second product is CLASSMATE Model 10, developed by MHE Systems (Tustin, California), and is distributed by Bell Atlantic Business Supplies (800-523-0552) for about $50. It is a cost effective solution for hobbiests and developers who do not need the ring detect and off-hook detect features. The CLASSMATE is not compatible with the Canadian and US WEST implementations of Caller ID. Gilbert Amine Rochelle Communications, Inc. gamine@mcimail.com +1 512 794 0088 ------------------------------ From: Ed_Greenberg@3mail.3com.com Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 10:41 PST Subject: Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service Phydeaux writes: > ..... I've never had inside wiring problems. I tried to convince one > friend of this recently. She lives in an apartment building and is > spending $2 each month for "wire maintenance." What a rip-off. I live in an apartment building. We have an interesting situation for inside wiring. Pairs are multipled through apartments and down to a phone closet on the side of the building. There they are cross connected to the incoming cable on nut and bolt type blocks. The entire shebang is locked with a lock that says "Bell System"! Inside this locked island of pre-mfj phonedom is one (count 'em) grey modern demark for my two lines. I had the telco mount this during my one inside wire failure. My inside wire failure was sabotage, or more probably vandalism. Somebody seemed to have reached into the cabinet (it's open at the bottom) and pulled down a loop of wire (mine.) The telco charge to fix this was $60, which was paid (cheerfully) by the building management. Thus I have established a precedent that inside wire maintenance is, at least at 1600 Stokes Street, a building repair. Next question: If I want to perform my own connection to the inside wire, will the telco send a man at no charge to unlock the lock? edg [Moderator's Note: Here in Chicago, in one of the very bad neighborhoods, a situation like yours culminated in one group of neighbors going after another group with *guns*, each accusing the other of disrupting phone service while trying to install their own lines. They had gotten into each other's pair multiples and made a terrible mess. It turned out one person had paid the janitor in their building to 'run a wire' for them. He knocked out the others ... just another of the wonderful aspects of permitting the federal judiciary to administer the phone system in the USA. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 12:49:29 -0500 From: Christopher Lott Subject: Re: Sprint's Billing and Service Organization: The University of Maryland Dept of Computer Science Here's our Sprint billing story - my housemate seems to have several Sprint accounts, despite his repeated efforts to have them closed down. One month they didn't credit our account with one of our checks and listed that amount on the next month's bill as a balance. We sent in a copy of the cancelled check, got the credit, forgot about it. Then some time later an account statement for one of the old accounts showed up, with the disputed amount shown as a credit balance. Seems that they applied the missing check to one of the "closed" accounts instead of our active account. So we asked for a refund check. Got it some time back. Hey, they had their chance. We don't feel too guilty about it. Why in heck don't they close old accounts out, finis, when asked? Christopher Lott \/ Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 cml@cs.umd.edu /\ 4122 AV Williams Bldg 301 405-2721 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 15:26:38 EST Subject: Re: Sprint's Billing and Service - A Pleasure For Me Organization: Syracuse University From: Pankaj Mayor In article mbarry@isis.UUCP (Marshall Barry) writes: > BTW, got billed for SOME calls six or seven months after they > were made and billed for two HOURS on a call I know was under two > minutes. Nearly two years ago I made a 55 minute call to India using Sprint's access code (I had AT&T as my primary carrier then). I never got billed for that call. Thanks US Sprint for a gift of over a hundred bucks. Pankaj ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #265 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12217; 4 Apr 91 19:19 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04725; 4 Apr 91 4:35 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa25274; 4 Apr 91 3:29 CST Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 2:48:22 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #266 BCC: Message-ID: <9104040248.ab29049@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 4 Apr 91 02:48:11 CST Volume 11 : Issue 266 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Where Can I Purchase Old Pay Phones? [Phil Collins] SouthWestern Bell Testing CLASS Services [Rich Zellich] Dublin Number Expansion [Charles Bryant] Strange Phone Call [David E. Bernholdt] New FCC Modem Tax? [Arun Baheti] New CRTC Brochure [Nigel Allen] Add Washington State to the 1+10D List [David Barts] Raytheon Single Mode Equipment [Rick Battle] Modular Adaptor for British Phones [Tad Cook] What are Tymnet et al? [Adam Denton] Lack of TELECOM Infrastructure Affects Elections in Albania [R. Budd] MCI Eliminates Mercury (in TV Advertising) [Earl Hall] Telephones in Taverns and Restaurants [Larry Lippman] Phoneline Levels, Studio Interfaces in E Europe [Robert Horvitz] Research on "Intelligent Nets" in the US [Dr Sabine Thuermel] Information Needed on Phoenix Telecom Conditions [Steve Wolfson] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Phil Collins Subject: Where Can I Purchase Old Pay Phones? Date: 3 Apr 91 14:06:52 GMT Organization: Alliant Computer Systems, Littleton, MA A few years ago you could buy old pay phones to use in your house or whatever. Does any one know where I can buy one now at a resonable price? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 9:14:43 CST From: Rich Zellich Subject: SouthWestern Bell Testing CLASS Services From this morning's {St. Louis Post-Dispatch}: Columnist Susan Thomson, after a long discussion of how SWB is providing, through a third party, a pay-your-phone-bill-by-phone service (for big bucks - $3.95 for each charged phone bill under $50 & $4.70 for each one between $50 & $100. Wow! What a "service"! ... makes me want to run right to my phone and start giving money away :-(), goes on to discuss ongoing and future trials. Apparently, SWB has, for the past year, been testing Call Return, Call Blocker (pre-blocking of specific numbers), Call Cue (auto redial), Priority Call (special rings on incoming calls, even overriding busy), Selective Call Forwarding, and Call Trace. In Joplin, the first four services are a package within a package; each one $3/month alone, each add'l one $1.50 to a total of $7.50 for all four. Call Trace has an installation fee - $7.50 residential, $14.50 business -and costs $8 for the first call "traced" each month, and $2 for each subsequent one. Selective Call Forwarding is $3.30/month alone, or $2 with any of the other options. The article says "similar" prices are applicable in Chillicothe and Kirksville, where SWB is testing a combination of Call Return, Call Cue, and Call Trace. SWB plans to offer some form of this "call control" in St. Louis sometime next year, and eventually throughout it's five-state territory, but no decision has been made yet on what combination of options (gee guys, why not just offer _all_ of 'em?) will be offered where and at what prices. Caller ID is said to be planned for a startup test next month in Muscogee, OK. Someone other than SWB will offer the display units starting at $30, and SWB's price for the feature will be $6.50 residential and $8.50 business. SWB says it will offer per-call blocking free as a matter of course wherever it offers Caller ID (the article discusses _only_ per call blocking, but actually states just "will offer blocking free" with no explicit mention of default blocking). Block-blocking isn't mentioned, either. ------------------------------ From: Charles Bryant Subject: Dublin Number Expansion Organization: Datacode Communications Ltd, Dublin, Ireland Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 15:10:01 GMT With our bills Telecom Eireann customers have got a leaflet giving the first stages of the 01 area number expansion plan. Last year the first stage expanded numbers starting with 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 70 and 79 adding a 6 on the front. This put Dublin in the unusual position of having numbers both six and seven digits long in the same calling area (does anywhere else have variable length local numbers?). From April 8th all numbers starting with 69, 8 will have a 2 added to make them 269 XXXX and 28X XXXX. By 1994 all numbers will have been changed to start with 2, 4, 6 or 8. By experiment, I verified that the 2 is currently optional. It makes me wonder why British Telecom split London from 01 into 071 and 081. Why not just add a digit? And if eight digit numbers are too long, why not split into 017 and 018 leaving more room for expansion. Or even split 01 DXX XXXX into ten areas 01D DXX XXXX removing the need for the tables to convert old number to new area. Charles Bryant (ch@dce.ie) ------------------------------ From: "David E. Bernholdt" Subject: Strange Phone Calls Date: 3 Apr 91 15:34:54 GMT Organization: Quantum Theory Project, Univ. of Florida I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." After several seconds of silence, it says "I am trying to connect your call, please hold." (Or something to that effect.) This was repeated about four times, then it said "Are you still holding?" and I mechanically answered "Yes". The voice said "I'm sorry, but I have not been able to connect the call. I will try again later," and hangs up. It called again, perhaps 20 minutes later. Same drill, except this time I didn't answer the "Are you still holding?" question. It said nothing more, and held the line until I hung up. The third time it called, I hung up after the first "I am trying to connect your call ..." It didn't call back after that. I've never heard of anything like this before. Does anybody recognize what it might be, besides a failure (at least in this case)? David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 6365 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1991 11:21 CST From: Arun Baheti Subject: New FCC Modem Tax? Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is being considered? ab ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 10:53 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: New CRTC Brochure Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto The Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission has just released a free brochure that explains in simple, non- bureaucratic language how it regulates telecommunications, broadcasting and cable television in Canada. The brochure was developed "as part of the Commission's ongoing efforts to strengthen its communication with Canadians." The booklet is called, "So, what good is the CRTC?". If you would like to receive a free copy, write to: Information Services Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1A 0N2 telephone (819) 997-0313 (voice) fax (819) 994-0218 TDD: (819) 994-0423 You can also order a free copy of the CRTC annual report from the same address. I would particularly encourage anybody who works for a regulatory commission to order the booklet, and think about preparing a similar one for their own agency. (A word of explanation about the 819 area code: The CRTC is actually located in Hull and has Hull phone numbers, but like many federal government offices in Hull, receives its mail through the Ottawa post office.) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 21:59:00 pst From: David Barts Subject: Add Washington State to the 1+10D List > All of the following places have, within the past few > years, either gone to or announced 1 + 10D within the NPA: > Dallas-Fort Worth, Northern Virginia, Maryland, Toronto, Georgia, > North Carolina, Alabama, San Antonio, Detroit, Arizona You can add Western Washington State to the 1+10D list, as US West announced that permissive dialling would begin sometime around November in NPA 206. David Barts N5JRN Pacer Corporation, Bothell, WA davidb@pacer.uucp ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 16:19:57 -0500 From: Rick Subject: Raytheon Single Mode Equipment Does anyone know if Raytheon makes fiber optic single mode equipment. I have part numbers M90 and RDM428. Any ideas??? Thanks, Rick Battle battle@umbc4.umbc.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Modular Adaptor for British Phones From: tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) Date: 3 Apr 91 23:32:05 GMT Does anyone know of an adaptor that will plug into a standard RJ11 modular jack and adapt it for a British telephone? As I recall, British phones do something funny where they break out the ringer on a separate wire, and there needs to be a capacitor in the phone outlet in the wall in series with this lead. So the adaptor I need would have a male RJ11 plug on one side, then the three wire connection to the British phone on the other, with the capacitor (I assume running from the ring side of the line to the third wire on the British jack) in the adaptor. Any source for something like this in the USA? Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 16:13:53 EST From: Adam Denton Subject: What are Tymnet et al? Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Middletown, NJ What are these? Are they services that provide long-distance data connections by dialing a local or semi-local number? How much do they cost, and how can I find out more about them? Thanks in advance, Adam Denton asd@mtqua.att.com [Moderator's Note: Tymnet and Sprintnet (formerly known as Telenet) are two major public data networks. They employ local dial-up lines to connect with their networks. Both have numerous local sales offices for inquiries, etc. In the case of Telenet, call 1-800-TELENET. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Apr 91 21:40:39 EST From: KLUB000 Subject: Lack of TELECOM Infrastructure Affects Elections in Albania The lack of communication between rural areas of Albania and Tirana and other major cities played a crucial role in the inability of opposition parties to bring their message through to all the people. This was the conclusion drawn from an analysis by the New York Times and the Associated Press on the first free elections in Albania's history. In rural areas, where the Communist Party won representative seats by landslide margins, what telephones existed, and there were very few, belonged to privileged Communist families. Other modern means of communication, fax machines, computer networks, even automative transportation was non-existent. The Democratic Party, the main opposition party, had difficulty campaigning in many villages, despite being given telephones, computers, and private automobiles (which are illegal in Albania) by the Communists because of their inaccessibility due to the mountainous terrain of the country and a poor road system. Communists also continued to control the communications media. From descriptions of the country provided in travelogues, much of Albania is still trying to enter the 19th Century, never mind the 21st. According to news reports, the Communists garnered 70% of the total vote despite overwhelming opposition victories in Tirana, Durres, Shkoder, and other cities and the turning out of the President, Ramiz Alia, from his legislative seat. The point is the impact proliferation of information through telecommun- ications instruments can have on the development of alternative opinions and the push to democracy. However, poor telecommunications infrastruc- ture can undermine such an effort. Richard Budd | E-Mail: IBMers - rcbudd@rhqvm19.ibm VM Systems Programmer | All Others- klub@maristb.bitnet IBM - Sterling Forest, NY | Phone: (914) 578-3746 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 31 Mar 91 03:19:31 PST From: cdp!erhall@labrea.stanford.edu Subject: MCI Eliminates Mercury (in TV advertising) The advertising people have done it again! First AT&T gave Fiji an NPA areacode ("Baku Vinaku Beachside"). Now MCI has eliminated British Telecom's domestic competition. In a "Friends and Family" television commercial I saw 2 nights ago, a British-accented woman in the commercial says: "In England, there's only one phone company. In America, we get a choice - and a better hamburger." (But, can MCI give us decent Fish and Chips?) Earl Hall | via PeaceNet: | GEnie: ERHALL Chicago IL | cdp!erhall@labrea.stanford.edu | +1 312 685 9735 ------------------------------ Subject: Telephones in Taverns and Restaurants Date: 2 Apr 91 01:09:23 EST (Tue) From: Larry Lippman In article john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone > at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected > to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place > 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). > A group of us had dinner there a number of months ago and it was great > entertainment playing with the phone while waiting for our meals to > arrive! I don't know if they are still in business, but during the 1970's in Hartford, CT there was a tavern called "The Dialtone Lounge" that had a telephone at every table and booth. While there was no outside line access, one could call in orders and call from one table to another. Calling from table to table was a great way to initiate conversations with the opposite sex, and probably accounted for the popularity of the establishment! :-) Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 00:23:27 pst From: Robert Horvitz Subject: Phoneline Levels, Studio Interfaces in E. Europe I am writing a pamphlet describing how to build a low-cost, low-power radio station under conditions prevalent in Central/Eastern Europe. It will be translated and distributed in those countries. Many applicants for radio licenses in the post-communist countries are particularly interested in airing telephone talk shows. So my question to TELECOMDigest readers is: Do Eastern Europe telephone systems operate at the same line levels as in the US? Can anyone recommend a particular telephone interface unit that combines low cost with the ability to handle noisy, unstable phonelines? Equipment specs and source addresses with phone, fax and telex numbers will be most appreciated - and included in the pamphlet's listing of "Sources." Respond by email, if you wish, or post your comments to the Digest. Either way, thanks in advance! Robert Horvitz 1122-1/2 E St. SE Washington, DC 20003-2232 USA antenna@well.sf.ca.us ...{apple,pacbell,hplabs,ucbvax}!well!antenna ------------------------------ From: Dr Sabine Thuermel Subject: Research on "Intelligent Nets" in the US Date: 2 Apr 91 12:17:00 GMT Organization: Siemens AG, Munich, W-Germany We at Siemens, Munich are doing research on intelligent networks. I would like to get into contact with US universities working in the same field. I am grateful for any pointers. Sabine Thuermel e-mail: thuermel@ztivax.siemens.com snail-mail: Dr. Sabine Thuermel ZFE IS SOF22 Siemens AG Otto-Hahn-Ring 6 8 Muenchen 83 Germany phone: +49/89/63644705 fax: +49/89/63640757 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 10:01:20 CST From: Steve Wolfson Subject: Information Needed on Phoenix Telecom Conditions I am relocating to the Phoenix Area and would appreciate a quick synopsis of the local state of telcom, costs customer service etc. Anyone other than the BOC (U.S. West?) operating in the area. Also a comparison the cellular carriers if possible. If it matters, I expect to be living around Chandler/Tempe. Thanks, Steve Wolfson -- Motorola Inc. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #266 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01938; 5 Apr 91 7:43 EST Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24751; 5 Apr 91 6:44 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa04277; 5 Apr 91 3:48 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa11208; 5 Apr 91 2:41 CST Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 1:45:22 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #267 BCC: Message-ID: <9104050145.ab04106@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Fri, 5 Apr 91 01:45:11 CST Volume 11 : Issue 267 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends Where You Are [A Boardman] Re: Cellular Phone Use in Aircraft [David Lemson] Re: Taking an Agressive Stance With Harassing Callers [Larry Riba] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Daniel R. Guilderson] Re: End of the [Party] Line [Lars Poulsen] Re: Caller ID Hearings in California [Bob Yazz] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Tad Cook] Re: Sprint Outage in CA Last Week [Jim Maurer] Re: Sprint Says NO to Increased Account Security [David Smallberg] Re: MCI Around Town followup [Fred E.J. Linton] Re: Calling Cards With No Surcharge [Steve Forrette] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 17:09:37 -0500 From: amb@ai.mit.edu Subject: Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends on Where You Are > The Washington, DC, area has the best plan: 7D is local within your > own NPA (whether that be 202, 703, or 301); 10D is local to one of the > other two NPAs; and 1 + 10D is toll, either within your own NPA or to > one of the other NPAs. 1 + 10D is accepted for local calls to other > NPAs, and the call gets routed and billed the same as if you had > dialed just 10D. This will never be possible in at least one place -- the 516 NPA is within the LATA from the 212 NPA, and a call carried by NY Tel. Dialing without the 1+, however, would lead to some sort of time-out scheme to decide whether one was dialing 516 as an NPA, or just the 212-516 exchange in 212. From 212, incidentally, all out-of-NPA calls are dialed 1+, and all 0+ calls, even within 212, are dialed 0+212+7d. Talk about a full NPA ... Andrew Boardman amb@ai.mit.edu ------------------------------ From: David Lemson Subject: Re: Cellular Phone Use in Aircraft Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Wed, 3 Apr 1991 23:23:33 GMT cornutt@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov (David Cornutt) writes: > group about the use of cellular phones from aircraft. Can anyone > answer: > (1) what effects this could have on the cellular phone net? We've been through this before. The bottom line, from several authoritative sources that I'm told, is: In rural areas where cells are likely to be fairly spread apart, the impact on the cellular network is likely to be minimal. It might be even "ok". (If you can even get a tower!! The antennas that cell phones use, including on the site towers, have almost zero coverage straight up, where you are!) In metro areas, such as if you were in a heli over Manhattan, it would WREAK HAVOC, as it keeps bouncing you from channel to channel trying to only receive you at one site, which it receives you at several sites at once! This is discounting the fact that you might hear others' conversations. As for FCC rules, it appears that there are no regulations that disallow this, but it is REALLY not a good idea. Cell phones were made for people to be travelling relatively slowly. David Lemson U of Illinois Computing Services Student Consultant Internet : lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu UUCP :...!uiucuxc!uiucux1!lemson ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Apr 1991 23:12 MST From: LARRY RIBA Subject: Re: Taking an Agressive Stance With Harassing Callers In , Randy Borow (rborow@bcm1a09.attmail. com) writes: > BTW, it was revealed that the reason this guy had been bugging me was > because he "cared for" my friend so much. Huh? My friend was 25, this > guy was 50ish! I think he was of a "different persuasion," shall I > say. Geez, I sure picked a winner down there on campus. (You should > have seen the judge's reaction to this!) Would it have mattered less to you if the calls were being made by a 20-year-old female? Are you suggesting that older gay people are more likely to harass others via the telephone? Perhaps the moral of your story is that it doesn't pay to socialize with those of a "different persuasion." I fail to see how these ageist and homophobic comments relate to the harassing calls. Larry Riba | University of Colorado at Boulder | Boulder, CO 80309-0530 Internet : riba_l@cubldr.colorado.edu | voice +1 303 628 6924 [Moderator's Note: I did not interpret his 'guy was 50-ish' remark as what you term ageist. I took it to mean he thought the guy should have been a bit more mature -- at his age -- than to seek pleasure from playing games with his telephone. I think he was saying he fully expected to find a much younger person responsible. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 30 Mar 91 19:08:00 EST From: "Daniel R. Guilderson" Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable > PAT writes: > [Moderator's Note: [stuff deleted] > If *I* had anything to do with telco directory compilation and > distribution, my response to the Supreme Court would be to abolish > phone directories entirely. That would wipe out the leeches in the > directory-publishing industry overnight and prevent any futher > theft of my work, whether the Supreme Court liked it or not. PAT] That would be a counterproductive response for a company which was in the business of pleasing its customers. Publishing a directory probably doesn't cost the phone company a whole lot relative to the entire business. Since it is great public relations and great advertising, it would be prudent to keep producing and distributing them. Another thing to consider is that the cost of compiling and checking the directory information is probably miniscule compared to the cost of manufacturing and distributing the directories. My last thought on this is that the competing directory publishers have to get the information somehow. I would think that it would be easier and cheaper to buy the information directly from the phone company, probably in electronic form. I say this because of all the different white page directories I have ever seen, I have never seen one that wasn't reformatted to fit in more advertising. With that in mind, I would imagine that the cost of buying the electronic info would be small compared to the cost of working with a hardcopy or the cost of scanning in the information. By the way, the framers of the US Constitution never intended copyrights to protect personal information. They were intended to protect creative works. Trying to apply a limited law to a more general case will most likely be disastrous. Daniel Guilderson UMass Boston, Harbor Campus, Dorchester, MA USA ryan@cs.umb.edu [Moderator's Note: You say it would be 'easier and cheaper' to get the informaiton by paying telco -- but the court ruling we are discussing said the competitors no longer have to pay telco the first nickle. They are free to take the information, period. Telco cannot forbid them to rip off the information in the directory, nor can they force them to pay for it. You say 'telco is in the business of pleasing its customers' ... but what about the alternate directory people? Are they trying to please anyone, or just make a fast buck show up even faster? Since they no longer have to pay telco for the directory listings (for to force them to pay if they were unable to do so would be denying them what the court said they could have with no strings attached), how many of those companies do you think will actually volunteer to pay anything? Do you have money you wish to give away to telco? If I was in telco's place, I'd suspend directory publishing at least for two or three years and let the lucky benefactors of the Court's Wisdom wind up bankrupt and out of business, *then* start publishing directories again. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Lars Poulsen Subject: Re: End of the [Party] Line Organization: Rockwell CMC Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 20:52:24 GMT TELECOM Digest vol 11 issue 264 msg 1 reprinted an AP wire service story submitted by Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 about the end of party line service in Woodbury, Connecticut. I enjoyed the story, but would like to make a couple of technical comments. I wish there were a way to get them back to Ms Cappiello of AP. > By JANET L. CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writer ... > Woodbury Telephone is being allowed to eliminate the service now > because of a $1.8 million equipment upgrade, Mitchell said. > Eliminating party lines also became imperative because of computerized > 911-emergency response systems. > When a caller dials 911, the caller's address appears on a computer > screen at the dispatch center. With party lines, there's a risk that > the address could be that of the other customer, Mitchell said. This does not ring true to me. If the switch software can provide ANI for billing, I would expect it to provide ANI for E911 witout problems. It disturbs me when businesses deliberately tell lies to regulatory agencies. (It also disturbs me that we set up regulatory agencies that aren't technically competent to see through such fibs). While this particular obfuscation is relatively harmless, I bet that if the company fibs about harmless things they probably lie through their teeth about facts that have a material impact on the ratesetting. Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer CMC Rockwell lars@CMC.COM ------------------------------ From: Bob Yazz Subject: Re: Caller ID Hearings in California Date: 4 Apr 91 07:25:17 GMT Jim Gottlieb writes: > Dial *67 from almost any Pacific Bell ESS-served line and you will > hear a confirmation tone followed by dial tone. On my DMS-100 line in San Diego, I get a CPC disconnect and the DMS-100 "catch-all" recording -- "We're sorry, your call did not go thru". A couple of times the equipment got confused and required 30 seconds on-hook to be able to provide dialtone again. Could be because I'm on DMS-100 or because I'm in San Diego and the CLID trials are planned for LA and SF. Bob Yazz -- yazz@lccsd.sd.locus.com Payphone ripoff problems? Californians call Pac Bell at 800/352-2201, M-F, 8-5. From elsewhere try the FCC's enforcement division at 202/632-7553. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls From: tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) Date: 4 Apr 91 23:19:22 GMT In article , bernhold@red8.qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt) writes: > I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last > night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says > "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." > After several seconds of silence, it says "I am trying to connect your > call, please hold." (Or something to that effect.) > I've never heard of anything like this before. Does anybody recognize > what it might be, besides a failure (at least in this case)? This is an automatic dialing system used by phone solicitors. The idea is to increase the productivity of phone solicitors by having a machine call people and que them up for the next available solicitor ... kind of like when you call the airline, and get a recording saying "ALL OUR AGENTS ARE BUSY NOW...PLEASE HOLD FOR THE NEXT AVAILABLE AGENT"... only in reverse. These things are supposed to be set up for minimum or no waiting time, based upon statistics and a large number of agents. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Sprint Outage in CA Last Week Date: Wed Apr 3 16:58:01 1991 From: jim@slxinc.specialix.com In vol. 11, issue 261 Steve Elias wrote: > The newsfolk did make some comment indicating that those who had put > the fiber down may not have gotten the appropriate permissions from > the track owners, however. As an aside, there was a similar > controversy (but no train wreck or fiber cut) in Framingham, MA about > a year ago. Sprint did have permissions to put the fiber alongside that track. When they put the fiber in they had to shut that line down and ran work trains to haul equipment and supplies. They did the same thing when MCI put the fiber along the track from San Jose to San Francisco, only since that line is double track they only shut down one track. Many railroads are now getting large sums of money for letting the phone companies put in fiber along their right-of-way, and as we've seen in this wreck and the wreck in Cajon Pass a couple of years ago (which also had an oil pipeline rupture) show that these fibers can be disrupted. Both this wreck and the one in Cajon Pass were on the Southern Pacific, a large "ICC Class One" railroad, imagine what could happen on some of the smaller short lines with low quality trackwork. Maybe the long distrance carriers should have redundant fiber on a different routing? (Like also along the Union Pacific from San Jose to Oakland.) That way one wreck won't disrupt the long distance network. Jim Maurer Specialix Inc. jim@specialix.com ------------------------------ From: David Smallberg Subject: Re: Sprint Says NO to Increased Account Security Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 20:55:44 GMT In article fulk@cs.rochester.edu (Mark Fulk) writes: > I just spoke to Gena Fulmer at the above number [ 1-800-347-8988 ]. She > admits to having heard quite a few complaints, and indicated that they would > likely be acted on. Maybe Rochelle Richter and Gena Fulmer don't talk to each other. I just got off the phone with Ms. Richter. Here's the history of the system: a survey of customers showed that people would love automated access to the kinds of information that they had previously had to ask a human operator for. Originally, a caller would give his Sprint account number to access the system. This was a pain for many people, and *lots* of complaints were received; things were changed so that your phone number is accepted instead. Sprint examined the Privacy Act, and does not disclose things that the Act prohibits (call details, customer name or address). They do, of course, give the total amount of your bill. Her claim is that the cost of the programming change to require a PIN is not yet justified by the number of complaints. There is some consideration of flagging a number to disallow automatic billing info access. It's a numbers game -- oodles of people like the system, whereas I'm only the 19th person to have called her (she's keeping a list, to let us know if things change). I gave her the "boss suspects you're looking for another job" and "jealous boyfriend suspects you're doing a lot of calling to that guy you met from far away" scenarios. I didn't think she felt that these were problems, given that no one's complained that it's happened to them. One thing she said was "Well, you can't have perfect security -- someone who really wants the information could probably find some way to get it." Oh, and since the number is that of Sprint's executive offices, I would imagine that those of you who've been having serious billing problems could direct your complaints there (You probably already have). David Smallberg, das@cs.ucla.edu, ...!{uunet,ucbvax,rutgers}!cs.ucla.edu!das ------------------------------ Date: 2-APR-1991 22:12:31.46 From: "Fred E.J. Linton" Subject: Re: MCI Around Town followup In response to a recent query, the ITT "Longer Distance" service-questions 800 number *was* 1 800 221 4064 (ages ago, when they sent me my ITT LD card). Hope that's still valid. Fred ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 13:43:00 -0800 From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: Calling Cards With No Surcharge Cable & Wireless also has a calling card that has no surcharge. They have 950 access in many areas, and 800 access for the rest. Steve Forrette, forrette@cory.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #267 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa10643; 6 Apr 91 14:31 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa28764; 6 Apr 91 12:58 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa29085; 6 Apr 91 11:52 CST Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 11:11:33 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #268 BCC: Message-ID: <9104061111.ab06446@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Apr 91 11:11:14 CST Volume 11 : Issue 268 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Loop Checker Lines and the Human Imagination [Larry Lippman] 411 Will Now Connect Call Direct [Stephen Fleming] First Day of CLID in Delaware [Ken Weaverling] 10xxx Dialing From Hotels == Potential Fraud? [Ed Greenberg] A New Low for Western Union [haynes@cats.ucsc.edu] Directory Assistance "Quotas" (was: Supreme Court: White Pages) [R Bowles] Info on Motorola "Ultra Classic" Cell Phone Needed [Phydeaux] Voice Actuated Phone Systems [John Boteler] Can I Convert a Single Line Cordless to Multi Line Use? [Daniel Wynalda] Seeking Comparisons on Cellular Equipment and Systems [stehle@erg.sri.com] Information About Digital Switching Software [SheshaPrasad G. Kris] 56kbps Alternatives? [Mark McWiggins] Latest on Text-to-Speech Processing? [R. Steve Walker] Converting PCM to ADPCM [Quinn Jensen] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Loop Checker Lines and the Human Imagination Date: 2 Apr 91 11:04:04 EST (Tue) From: Larry Lippman In article DISC3C1@jetson.uh.edu writes: > Who needs to buy one of these things? There are numbers you can call, > that are supposed to show you if your line is been tapped. Oh, right. Like 1-800-FIND-BUG or 1-900-FIND-TAP. :-) > They call it a sweep. It is an alternating pitch supposedly; and > is meant to stay high pitched if your line is being bugged and > alternate if not. For example, call this sweep: 214-357-8686 I think someone has been watching too many James Bond movies. While I had a pretty good suspicion as to what the above number actually is, I called it to make certain. It sounds to me like a 24B Loop Checker circuit. These "sweep tone" lines, which exist in many, but by no means all central offices, are used by installers to make a rapid assessment of the transmission quality of subscriber loops. Dialing the number associated with the test line connects it to a loop checker generator circuit which places a continuously repeating sweep tone on the line. The sweep time period is usually 15 to 20 seconds. In the field, an installer uses a simple audio frequency level meter with a specially calibrated scale (it usually has red and green colored regions for "go" and "no-go"). The installer watches the meter while listening to the sweep tone; if the needle states in the green, then the loop transmission quality is usually "okay". The above system is usually called a "Loop Checker". From a transmission measurement standpoint, it provides rather imprecise information. However, it is a quick and dirty measurement method which requires inexpensive field equipment and does not require much training on the part of the installer for use. It is important to realize that the amplitude of such loop checker generator lines is NOT CONSTANT over the swept frequency range. Therefore, this line is of no value for serious transmission measurements. The expected amplitude variation is taken into consideration on the level meter indicator scale. Needless to say, loop checker test lines have *NO* utility in the detection and location of eavesdropping devices on a telephone line. > [Moderator's Note: Where did you get your information from, Scott? The human imagination has no bounds, eh? :-) Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: portal!cup.portal.com!fleming@uunet.uu.net Subject: 411 Will Now Connect Call Direct Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 08:36:56 PST Just called local information (411) in northern Virginia. Got a new recording: "You may be connected to this number for an additional charge of 30 cents. The number is: xxx" Nice. Very nice. Especially when I'm in my car trying to juggle pencil and paper. Should get some use. (Disclaimer: for all I know, NT invented this service, but *I've* never encountered it before!) Stephen Fleming | Internet: fleming@cup.portal.com | Director, Strategic Mktg. | CI$: 76354,3176 AOL: SFleming | Northern Telecom | BIX: srfleming X.500: ??? | 7900 Westpark Drive, A220 +----------------------------------| McLean, Virginia 22102 | Opinions expressed do not | (703) 847-8186 | represent Northern Telecom. | ------------------------------ From: Ken Weaverling Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 12:48:21 EST Subject: First Day of CLID in Delaware Caller*ID started Monday (1 April 91) in Delaware. I called Diamond State last week to order it, and was told that they couldn't take orders for it until the first day that they were authorized to offer it. So, I spent all morning trying to call Customer Service today and all I got was an engaged signal. Finally, around lunch time, I got through to an automated message that put me on hold for 10 minutes for the first available operator. I've had to wait until April 3 it to be installed on my line. :-( I just HATE having to wait to play with my new toys! ------------------------------ From: Ed_Greenberg@3mail.3com.com Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 10:57 PST Subject: 10xxx Dialing From Hotels == Potential Fraud?? Bull Puckey! > There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone > at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected > to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place > 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). Some have said that permitting 10xxx+0 dialing could result in fraud, since the perpetrator, oops, I mean customer, might request a call to be completed by the operator and billed to the calling number (as in "I'm having trouble dialing, could you please call... ") Why not offer dial-8 access to Charge-A-Call lines? Why not? Because it wouldn't be possible to rape the customer that way. edg ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu Subject: A New Low for Western Union Date: Tue, 02 Apr 91 11:52:00 GMT As if things there weren't bad enough, I see that Western Union is trying to change its corporate name to "New Valley". ------------------------------ From: Richard Bowles Subject: Directory Assistance "Quotas" (was: Supreme Court: White Pages) Date: 5 Apr 91 00:12:22 GMT Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, MD 21218 I don't know about Boston, but once-upon-a-time I worked for the DA vendor for Pacbell in California -- and probably half of the software involved gathering huge amounts of statistics regarding DA operator performance. The items included how long per call, per key-stroke, number of keystrokes per call, number of listings retrieved per call ... and many more. The key issue is that the DA operator was PAID based on his or her performance on a number of the criteria, so you can rest assured they are at least tempted to be less than cooperative on potentially long or complicated calls. While I didn't have a lot of contact with the actual operators (I was a programmer), what I saw and heard made it sound like one of the worst, most demeaning, and high-pressure jobs available. These people were monitored constantly, handled calls at an unbelievable rate without any pauses, and even had put up a little sign when they needed to go the bathroom. DISCLAIMER: My knowledge is over five years old and a bit fuzzy. Opinions are just that and mine. This has NOTHING to do with my present employer. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 09:50:57 PST From: Phydeaux Subject: Info on Motorola "Ultra Classic" Cell Phone Needed I just got the above mentioned phone. I'm looking for a way to outfit it with an RJ-11 jack. When you remove the battery there are some contacts that are obviously there for something (the battery connections are at the other end so they are not for power). Does anyone know what they are? I know there are some vendors out there who make attatchments for some of these phones. An address or telephone number would be helpful. Also, one functions on the phone is "CYCLE BATT" which I assume has something to do with the Ni-Cad batteries. There's nothing in the documentation about this. Anyone have an idea what this function is? reb *-=#= Phydeaux =#=-* reb@ingres.com or reb%ingres.com@lll-winken.llnl.GOV ICBM: 41.55N 87.40W h:558 West Wellington #3R Chicago, IL 60657 312-549-8365 w:reb ASK/Ingres 10255 West Higgins Suite 500 Rosemont, IL 60018 708-803-9500 ------------------------------ Subject: Voice Actuated Phone Systems Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 9:06:54 EST From: John Boteler Barton F. Bruce typed: > Wouldn't it be nice to simply speak into the phone and say 'my friend > Tony Jones's third office line please', and from the random pay phone be > voice recognised as you and thereby indicating which Tony Jones is > being refered to. Come on, we had this in the early part of this century. She was called "Central". She even provided Caller*ID! John Boteler bote@csense {uunet | ka3ovk}!media!csense!bote SkinnyDipper's Hotline: 703 241 BARE | VOICE only, Touch-Tone(TM) signalling ------------------------------ Subject: Can I Convert a Single Line Cordless to Multi Line Use? Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 10:16:42 EST From: Daniel Wynalda Although I'm not a bad systems analyst, I wouldn't consider myself any kind of electrical engineer. I can, however operate a soldering gun. Here's my problem: I have a single line cordless phone that I want to work on several phone lines. Ideally, this is what I'd like to do: After a flash (hangup) on the phone, I'd like a box that will listen for a tone from the keypad on the phone. This tone will select the phone line that I wish to be connected to. This box doesn't seem like it would be that hard to build, and I'm surprised that no one else has done this and marketed it. Is there anyone out there who's attempted a project like this? It is not that important that the phone actually ring when calls come in on any of these lines. I just want to be able to pick up line 3 when I hear a page for "Line 3". Without walking a half-mile. I would think a tone decoder wired to three relays could do the logic for three lines -- just press 1 to flip relay 1 on (thus forcing 2 and 3 off). This would work for all three lines. My main question in the design would be how to DISCONNECT the phone from the phone lines on flash (hangup) but still supply voltage to the phone to decode the tones. I suppose I could monitor the phone line for voltage change when returned to hook. This could disconnect the phone from the lines -- but what voltage should I feed the phone so the decoder can watch for a tone? After the tone is heard, I'd want the box to drop off the line (or ignore more tones -- because I'll have to dial out sometimes). Any suggestions? Is this a project that is feasible for a near-beginner or is there someplace I can purchase such a device?? I have had some basic electrical classes including digital circuits in college. Any information is appreciated. Daniel Wynalda | (616) 866-1561 X22 Ham:N8KUD Net:danielw@wyn386.mi.org Wynalda Litho Inc. | 8221 Graphic Industrial Pk. | Rockford, MI 49341 ------------------------------ Subject: Seeking Comparisons on Cellular Equipment and Systems Date: Thu, 04 Apr 91 11:07:00 -0800 From: stehle@erg.sri.com I would like to receive comments from readers of this net on the comparative evaluations of cellular subscriber equipment (i.e., handhelds, transportables, mobile transceivers) and systems (i.e., cell sites, base stations, switches). The inquiry extends to products for both the US and international markets. The recent messages comparing the Motorola and Fujitsu are a good start in my search. I hope the traffic will concentrate on the relative technical merits of the product lines. I am not especially interested in the marketing approaches/restrictions, but I would be receptive to those comments as well. I am particularly interested in products of the following manufacturers: Motorola Fujitsu Oki Panasonic NovAtel Ericsson/GE Nokia NEC Mitsubishi AT&T Northern Telecom Comments are solicited on: Technological advancement (Innovative design, RF sensitivity, handoff algorithms, talk time, cell site equipment modularity) Reliability & Servicability Human Factors (Packaging, Ease of Use, Voice Quality) Completeness of the product line Future product announcements IN ORDER TO CONSERVE NET BANDWIDTH, please send e-mail to: stehle@erg.sri.com I will maintain a file of all messages received, if others are interested in the comments received. I am encouraged by the helpfulness that I have seen and received from the readers of this net. Let me express my appreciation in advance. Roy Stehle SRI International ------------------------------ From: "SheshaPrasad G. Kris." Subject: Information Wanted About Digital Switching Software Organization: Computer Science Department, Oregon State Univ. Date: Thu, 04 Apr 91 21:54:25 GMT I am looking for information in Digital switching (Telephone exchange) software. I have worked as design engineer for 3 years, developing softawre for Telephone exchanges in India. I am looking for some organisations or universities which are developing switching software. I am developing Digital switching software simulation module. If you can pass some e-mail addrees it would be great! Please reply by e-mail. Thanks, SheshaPrasad Krishnapura G. Internet: shesha@jasper.cs.orst.edu Computer Science Department UUCP : hplabs!hp-pcd!orstcs!shesha Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331 (503) 754-6313 ------------------------------ From: Mark McWiggins Subject: 56kbps Alternatives? Organization: Integration Technologies, Inc. (Intek) Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 22:43:04 GMT My prospective employer is using a leased line for 56kbps service between two remote offices. I've read the blurb for UUNET's Alternet service, and I got an e-mail note saying that PSInet offers something similar. Presumably either of these is much cheaper than a leased line, but what would one be giving up by changing from a leased line to Alternet or PSInet? Are there any other alternative services that one should consider? Thanks in advance for any insight on this. I'd be especially interested in hearing from someone who's made this switch. Mark McWiggins Integration Technologies, Inc. (Intek) +1 206 455 9935 DISCLAIMER: I could be wrong ... 1400 112th Ave SE #202 Bellevue WA 98004 mark@intek.com ------------------------------ From: "R. Steve Walker" Subject: Latest on Text-to-Speech Processing? Date: 5 Apr 91 01:06:58 GMT Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology I'd like to know what the latest (or current) technology is for the Text-to-Speech processing market. What is being used and what are the latest breakthroughs. I'm familiar with DecTalk, but I'm looking for equipment that can run on a PC or Mac platform & works w/ a voice mail system. Thanks for your help! Richard S. Walker Georgia Tech Research Institute GA Tech Box 35302 SWALKER@gtri01.gatech.edu (vm) Atlanta, GA 30332 swalker@vms62a.gatech.edu (vms) [404] 874-1886[W] gt5302b@prism.gatech.edu (unix) [404] 607-0958[H] 71021.1544@compuserve.com (cis) ------------------------------ From: Quinn Jensen Subject: Converting PCM to ADPCM Organization: Sanyo/Icon International, Inc., Orem, Utah Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 15:23:08 GMT I am looking for some routines, hopefully in C, to convert 8-bit companded PCM samples to ADPCM. I want to convert the samples in not-necessarily real time. If no software is available, I'll probably attempt myself to impliment a transcoder in fixed-point using C, with the TI app note as a reference ("32-kbts/s ADPCM with the TMS32010," _Digital Signal Processing Applications with the TMS320 Family_, Sect. 17). The code and documentation found on Dr. Bub for the 56001 should be helpful as well. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #268 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03138; 7 Apr 91 1:31 EST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa32269; 7 Apr 91 0:04 CST Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa09766; 6 Apr 91 22:59 CST Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 22:47:59 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #269 BCC: Message-ID: <9104062247.ab14873@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Apr 91 22:47:39 CST Volume 11 : Issue 269 Inside This Issue: DON'T FORGET! Set Clocks Forward Western Electric Power Cable [Larry Lippman] Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [David E. Bernholdt] International Tariff Expertise Sought [Carl Wright] Telemarketing Sleezoids [David Lesher] Two Wire vs Four Wire Subscriber Line [Gerald Peppers] Multi-Line Ringer Sought [Rod Erickson] I Have AT&T, and I Can't Call Home [Christopher Wolf] Caller-ID Specifications Needed [David Berman] "Hello, I'm Digit Dialing ..." [John Palmer] Auto Dialing Deskset? [Gary Delong] D-I-Y Slamming [David Barts] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Western Electric Power Cable Date: 6 Apr 91 00:24:11 EST (Sat) From: Larry Lippman In article DAN@gacvx2.gac.edu (Dan Boehlke) writes: > > A truly scary experience is to move a piece of old RH or RHW > > rubber-insulated power feeder cable, watch both the outer insulation > > and the rubber flake into dust, and see exposed conductor within a > > fraction of an inch of grounded metal! I could never understand > > why WECo continued to use potentially unstable rubber-insulated > > power cable for almost forty years after far superior plastic > > insulation was available following World War II. > It is my understanding that good real rubber products resist acid > better than even most of today's plastics. Acid resistance would be > very important around batteries. Synthetic rubber does have good chemical resistance to acids in concentrations likely to be found in storage battery electrolytes. In fact, common telephone industry practice for cable connecting directly to battery terminals is to use finely stranded welding cable with "SO"-type rubber insulation. However, WECo traditionally used type RH or RHW rubber insulation for ALL power cabling in gauges ranging from 14 AWG to 750 MCM. Chemical resistance to acids was not really an issue once outside of the battery room. As a somewhat interesting aside, WECo 750 MCM power cable had "non-traditional" uses. A sixteen inch length (which weighs about three pounds) makes an excellent "attitude adjustment tool" for telephone company personnel who have to work in crime-ridden urban areas. I once saw its effectiveness in deterring a car theft in the parking lot of a New Jersey Bell central office in Newark. The power cable section also had the advantage of not being an unlawful weapon. After all, it's an engineering sample, right? :-) Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ From: "David E. Bernholdt" Subject: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) Date: 5 Apr 91 16:25:48 GMT Organization: Quantum Theory Project, Univ. of Florida In article I wrote: > I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last > night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says > "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." After a couple more of these calls the next day, I finally found out what it was. A call arrived at roughly the interval it had been retrying at from the holder of my student loan -- the Illinois Student Assistance Commission. After discussing the matter of my continued student deferrment, I asked if they used such a computerized system as had been bugging me. They do. The system is called Voicelink, and is produced by a company of the same name in Seattle, WA. A computer dials the phone number in question and listens for an answer. If an answering machine answers (recognized by a long speech, I imagine), it leaves a computerized message saying that the ISAC is trying to reach you and will call back. If a human answers it connects you immediately to a human to take the call (this transfer was unnoticable to me). The place I got caught is that there were no humans available to take the call, so the computer tried for a little while to find one, then apologized and hung up. All in all, there are a bunch of humans takining a bunch of automatically dialed calls at the same time. The obvious utility of this system for the _caller_ is that human time is expended only in talking to a human. Several people who responded to my original posting say that this is also being used in telemarketing. Someone mentioned that you can also employ a human to dial the numbers and connect in the computer if there are (legal) problems with computer-dialed calls. (Boy, what a job!) The person managing VoiceLink for the ISAC said that her Visa company uses such a system as well. She said she appreciates it. Apparently she only gets calls when she's away, so there is a message on the answering machine. She claimed that situations like mine, where no human was available to take the call were quite rare (though it happened to me five times in two days). I suggested that the computer should identify the call as being from the ISAC in such situations, and she promised that she would talk to the vendor to see if it could be done. She reacted quite calmly when I said that I would hang up on future calls which didn't identify the caller -- her only concern was to be sure that I _would_ speak to a human if everything worked as it was intended to. Of course now that I know who the caller (probably) is when it happens again, things are somewhat less bothersome. I must say that it was rather disconcerting, having never met such a system before -- and everyone has to have a first experience with it _sometime_. David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 6365 ------------------------------ From: Carl Wright Subject: International Tariff Expertise Sought Organization: UMCC, Ann Arbor, MI Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 18:07:54 GMT I am seeking individuals who can discuss how the revenues from international calls are distributed and determined. Any names are appreciated. Anywhere in the world. Carl Wright | Lynn-Arthur Associates, Inc. Internet: wright@ais.org | 2350 Green Rd., #160 Voice: 1 313 995 5590 EST | Ann Arbor, MI 48105 ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Telemarketing Sleezoids Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 19:48:47 EST Reply-To: David Lesher Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers We got hit by the {Miami Herald's} Telesleeze dialer yesterday. Seeing as we just got DID with about one hundred incoming numbers, it was a royal pain. I immediately asked the name of the man in charge of this verbal whorehouse. He actually accepted my call. (Gee - working for the people I do has SOME advantages ;_) I demanded he remove our entire trunk group from his machine. Time will tell if he does or not. But the real reason I write today was his claim that newspapers are immune to the law about telesleezi. He said it was a First Amendment issue. I pointed out that I had reread the First Amendment very recently, and sure did not see anything about newspaper telemarketing in it ;-} He backed off, and said it was a Supreme Court decision. I did believe THAT either, so I checked. Here's what I found: Florida Statute section 501.059 allows residential subscribers to get on a "no sales solicitation calls" listing maintained by the Dept of Agriculture Division of Consumer Services ($10 first time, $5 yearly renewal). Once you're on the list, unsolicited telephone sales calls can not be made to you except (1) in response to your express request, (2) primarily in connection with an existing debt or contract, (3) to any person with whom the solicitor has a prior or existing business relationship, or (4) by a newspaper publisher or his agent or employee in connection with his business. (This from a friend in the state gov't.) So I guess the newspaper lobbyist got their bonus paid this year. John Hignon, I suggest that you do NOT move to Florida. wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (305) 255-RTFM ------------------------------ From: Gerald Peppers Subject: Two Wire vs Four Wire Subscriber Line Date: 5 Apr 91 19:40:19 GMT Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Div., Arlington Hgts, IL I have a question for which I hope that more knowledgable people in telephony can assist me with! What is the difference between a two wire subscriber line and a four wire subscriber line? That is to say, if I am a cellular switch owner and don't know a lot about cellular but my management staff does, how do I go about making an informed decision on the selection of two wire vs. four wire subscriber lines coming into and out of my switch? What are the advantages of using two wire subscriber lines coming into the switch? What are the advantages and disadvantages of using four wire subscriber lines? Is the decision made based on the direction of the trunk circuits (Inbound , Outbound or Two-Way Trunks)? Please advise, anyone! Thank you, Gerald Peppers usenet address: !motcid!void!peppers ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 09:46:36 PST From: "Rod Erickson, x2505" Subject: Multi-Line Ringer Sought I'm looking for a ringer which can be connected to three or more phone lines, providing distinctive ringing for each. One could track down separate ringers which sound sufficiently different (any pointers on sources? many sound alike), but a single unit would make for a neater and more compact installation, and its rings might be more easily distinguished. Does such a device exist? P.S. What's the most tidy way to wire up three-line switching in a residential installation? Should I buy one of those five-button switches with a modular plug on one side and a 25-pair plug on the other? Roddy Erickson erickson@ingres.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Apr 91 13:23:28 EST From: CMWOLF@mtus5.bitnet Subject: I Have AT&T, and I Can't Call Home Here's the story. Any help someone could give me would be nice. My school has this wonderful little thing they started this year. Instead of phone bills being sent to the room, and quite possibly having a phone disconnected because one of several roommates didn't pay, each student has their own 'PIN' number that will work when calling long distance from any phone ON CAMPUS. This is the only place this number will work. Well ... Before break, I received a phone bill for $4-5. Being as it was small, I figured to wait till next month to pay it. When the next one came, it had a total of about $30 on it, and ... a warning saying that since I didn't pay the $5 from before, I'd be disconnected in several days if I didn't pay up. Well, I mailed off the check. Well, now my PIN had been disconnected. I don't know why. Funny thing is, neither does AT&T. I called and asked what's up. They put me on hold for about ten minutes listening to a tape about all this wonderful AT&T equipment I can't afford, but would make my life oh so much more easier, and when the gentleman came back, he said he didn't know why the code didn't work. He said maybe his information hadn't been updated. He said I should start contacting people around here. Campus telecommunications department. Local telco address to make sure a local computer isn't screwed up. Etc. I asked him for another number to contact, but he wouldn't give me one (like someone who would have up-dated info on me.) Anyone know something I can do to get this fixed? Christopher Wolf P.S. I can't call home but from a pay phone, and that's expensive. ------------------------------ From: @comspec.uucp (David Berman) Subject: Caller*ID Specifications Needed Organization: Comspec Communications Inc., Toronto Ontario Canada Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 13:22:08 GMT Northern Telecom has had their Maestro phones out a while, I think. And I also believe that the Caller*ID transmissions from the phone company are kind of standardized. I think. Question: Does anyone reading know what is sent out? How the phone number or alpha information is encoded on the ring cycle? Has it been done in a reasonable way so that decoding is sensible? (etc) Addresses the future? Or: Does anyone know where such information is published for reference? Further: Will Toronto (416)'s Caller ID transmissions be compatible with the ones in the United States, say, in AT&T territory? Or will they be similar, but different, so that Maestro phones in Atlanta, GA, won't work in Toronto, even though they have fixed the design flaw down there? (I have even more questions, but hope that I will be able to follow the thread as others ask in response to your answers ...) [thanks] Dave Berman 436 Perth Av #U-907 daveb@comspec.UUCP Computer at work Toronto Ontario uunet!mnetor!becker!comspec!daveb Canada M6P 3Y7 416-785-3668 Fax at work ------------------------------ From: jpp@tygra.UUCP (John Palmer) Subject: "Hello, I'm Digit-Dialing ..." Organization: CAT-TALK Conferencing System, Detroit, MI Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 13:51:04 GMT I was in my car the other day and had my office line forwarded to my car. Got the following call: Me: "Hello, , can I help you?" Woman: "Yes, I'm digit-dialing and I was wondering if your company has any other numbers in this prefix?" Me: "What's digit dialing?" Woman: "I'm dialing all of the numbers that begin with 881-8" Me: "Why? Why are you doing this?" Woman: "I'm telemarketing." I go on to bawl her out for invading my privacy and tying up my business line. I hand her some line about how that is illegal and that she better not call me again or I'd call the police. She politly says, "Thank you. Goodbye" Hmmmm. Someone wrote a very bad telemarketing script for her. They actually told her to be *HONEST* about it!! E-MAIL Address: jpp@tygra.UUCP ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 16:17:52 EST From: Gary Delong Subject: Auto Dialing Deskset Needed At this time I am assisting our local PBS station setup for their auction by installing the wireing and jacks for almost 50 phones. Two of them are going to be in a public area so that people can call into the auction. Those two lines have been ordered as toll restricted, however because they are "business" lines, the PBS station will be billed for ALL calls. Does anyone have any ideas how I can reduce the potential for misuse of these phones? In the past I have encountered telephones (with no dial) that when picked up dialed a pre-defined number. Any info out there on where one can obtain a couple of these and what kind of price I might be looking at? Or, would some of you close to southern NH be willing to lend us a couple in exchange for on-air credit? BTW: Its Channel 11, New Hampshire Public Television. Gary gdelong@ctron.com [Moderator's Note: I would suggest you just order a couple of ring-down lines from telco ... when they go off hook, they automatically start ringing at the other end, where they terminate in the ACD (to in turn get passed out to the call-takers on the floor as available) or on a phone on the desk of one of the call-takers, etc. That would prevent any calls from those phones at all except calls coming specifically to you. No need to take chances, and ring-downs would not be that expensive for a few days connected locally. You see a lot of phones like this in airports at the car rental and hotel reservation courtesy stations. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 12:18:15 PST From: David Barts Subject: D-I-Y Slamming > [Moderator's Note: No, it was not a joke. Well, the part about > converting you over to MCI was, but not the part about being able to > do it. One of the menu choices given was 'to set up your phone with > one plus dialing' ... and I am sure they did not mean with AT&T as the > default carrier! PAT] So, now I suppose we can all go around our neighborhoods looking for COCOTS that use sleazy AOS's and do a little 'de-sleazing'! Nothing like a little neighborhood improvement to make your town a more pleasant place to live. :-) :-) :-) David Barts N5JRN Pacer Corporation, Bothell, WA davidb@pacer.uucp ...!uunet!pilchuck!pacer!davidb ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #269 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa07639; 7 Apr 91 4:38 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa22552; 7 Apr 91 3:12 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa02646; 7 Apr 91 1:05 CST Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 0:00:51 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #270 BCC: Message-ID: <9104070000.ab23753@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 00:00:39 CST Volume 11 : Issue 270 Inside This Issue: DON'T FORGET: Set Clock Forward! Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Dik T. Winter] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [H. Peter Anvin] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Carl Moore] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Peter da Silva] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Jim Budler] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Jeff Sicherman] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [W. H. Sohl] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Heath Roberts] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Nigel Allen] Re: Calling Card With no Surcharge (was: MCI Around Town) [Mark Henderson] Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed [Donovan Wallace] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers (COCOTs Strike Again!) [Mark Anacker] Re: Interop 91 Conference Notice [Carl Moore] Re: Can I Convert A Single Line Cordless to Multi Line Use? [Doug Faunt] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Dik T. Winter" Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Date: 6 Apr 91 12:52:26 GMT Organization: CWI, Amsterdam In article ch@dce.ie (Charles Bryant) writes: > This put Dublin in the unusual position of > having numbers both six and seven digits long in the same calling area > (does anywhere else have variable length local numbers?). Yes, there are very many places where that does occur. In Amsterdam it was only a month ago that all six digit numbers were changed to seven digit numbers. Many places in Germany and Italy have variable length numbers. For instance, in Muenchen numbers vary from four to eight digits. dik t. winter, cwi, amsterdam, nederland dik@cwi.nl ------------------------------ From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Organization: Northwestern University Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 19:49:06 GMT In article Charles Bryant writes: > This put Dublin in the unusual position of > having numbers both six and seven digits long in the same calling area > (does anywhere else have variable length local numbers?). I don't know if you are referring to Ireland, but this is commonplace in my home country of Sweden. It is rather a rule than an exception that there are varying length local numbers, except in four-digit area codes (due to a nine-digit limit and a five-digit minimum for the number). Examples: Stockholm, 08, has seven-digit numbers if the number starts with 6 or 7, otherwise six digits. V{ster}s, 021, has six-digit numbers if the number starts with 1 or 3 (City of V{ster}s), otherwise five-digit numbers (surrounding areas). Actually, 020 (toll free) is the only exeption I am aware of. All 020 numbers have the maximum possible six digits. 071, pay-per-call (like U.S. 900) came after I left Sweden; it is likely to work the same way. P.S. 08 = +46 8, 021 = +46 21 etc. hpa = H. Peter Anvin (in case you wondered) * Heja Sverige! INTERNET: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu FIDONET: 1:115/989.4 HAM RADIO: N9ITP, SM4TKN RBBSNET: 8:970/101.4 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 18:12:24 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion I understood the London 071/081 split to be a part of number-length standardization; apparently, UK city codes are now to start with N where N is not 0 or 1 (this is ignoring the leading 0 used to call between UK areas). ------------------------------ From: Peter da Silva Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: A corner of our bedroom Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 03:55:22 GMT > [Moderator's Note: You say it would be 'easier and cheaper' to get the > informaiton by paying telco -- but the court ruling we are discussing > said the competitors no longer have to pay telco the first nickle. For what? The white pages? They still have to get the information into their database: the telco can just give them a phone book and say "have at it". Now how much are the *tapes* worth? peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com ------------------------------ From: Jim Budler Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: Silvar-Lisco, Inc. Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 04:27:52 GMT > [Moderator's Note: They are free to take the information, period. Yes... That's what the court said. > Telco cannot forbid them to rip off the information in the > directory, nor can they force them to pay for it. You say 'telco is > in the business of pleasing its customers' Yes, and maybe rationality will now set in. Scenario: I get a phone from the LEC. Customer Service: "Do you want your phone listing published? It will cost $xx.xx" Me: "No." Customer Service: "OK" Finally, the customer who wants more will pay more, and the customer who wants less, will pay less. Pat, I'm very happy with this decision, because it's very realistic. The phone numbers, once assigned, belong to the customer, not the phone company. At some point as a result of this decision, I will be able to stop bribing the phone company to keep my phone number private. Cheers, Jim Budler jimb@silvlis.com Silvar-Lisco, Inc. +1.408.991.6115 703 E. Evelyn Ave. Sunnyvale, Ca. 94086 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 00:46:15 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article ryan@cs.umb.edu (Daniel R. Guilderson) writes: > My last thought on this is that the competing directory publishers > have to get the information somehow. I would think that it would be > easier and cheaper to buy the information directly from the phone > company, probably in electronic form. I say this because of all the > different white page directories I have ever seen, I have never seen > one that wasn't reformatted to fit in more advertising. With that in > mind, I would imagine that the cost of buying the electronic info > would be small compared to the cost of working with a hardcopy or the > cost of scanning in the information. [deleted] > [Moderator's Note: You say it would be 'easier and cheaper' to get the > information by paying telco -- but the court ruling we are discussing > said the competitors no longer have to pay telco the first nickle. > They are free to take the information, period. Telco cannot forbid > them to rip off the information in the directory, nor can they force > them to pay for it. You say 'telco is in the business of pleasing its > customers' ... but what about the alternate directory people? Are they > trying to please anyone, or just make a fast buck show up even faster? > Since they no longer have to pay telco for the directory listings (for > to force them to pay if they were unable to do so would be denying > them what the court said they could have with no strings attached), > how many of those companies do you think will actually volunteer to > pay anything? Do you have money you wish to give away to telco? If I > was in telco's place, I'd suspend directory publishing at least for > two or three years and let the lucky benefactors of the Court's Wisdom > wind up bankrupt and out of business, *then* start publishing > directories again. PAT] This is unlikely and unproductive for a number of potential reasons: 1. Attempting to drive a competitor out of business is often frowned upon by various regulatory and securities and legal authorities. Can you say 'anti-trust' ? This doesn't give the competitor any guarantee of existence but unfair business practices are out. 2. The absence of directories would hurt both consumers and merchants and potentially the phone companies themselves (except for DA of course, and that might be looked upon badly by the PUC's). 3. The officers of the phone companies have a fudiciary responsibility to maximize profits, not act out of spite. 4. The issue raised by the poster is that it could be more cost effective for the alternative directory publishers to buy the information in an already computerized form at a cheaper rate per entry than capturing it via human or automated means. 5. Selling it would become a profit center for the telco's. If you have to provide it to outsiders with no protection from copyright, you might as well make some money on the deal. [Moderator's Note: Well then, I would hand them a phone book -- probably one removed from service after a couple months at a pay station with the cover defaced and half the pages missing and tell them to have at it ... :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: "24460-W. H. Sohl(L145" Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 21:12:45 GMT Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Reply-To: "24460-W. H. Sohl" Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Pat, our Moderator said: > [Moderator's Note: You say it would be 'easier and cheaper' to get the > informaiton by paying telco -- but the court ruling we are discussing > said the competitors no longer have to pay telco the first nickle. > They are free to take the information, period. Telco cannot forbid > them to rip off the information in the directory, nor can they force > them to pay for it. But, I believe, the court did not say that the telco MUST give away the directory listings in any readily available electronic form. The writer to which Pat responds had pointed out it was probably cheaper to buy the list than to "retype" or scan an existing hard copy. I tend to agree. Remember, the case on which the Supreme Court rule stemmed from the refusal of the telco to even consider selling the data. The plaintiffs then copied the data from existing directories. The plaintiffs were apparently willing (and I'd guess would have prefered) to buy an electronic list. This is my personal view and not necessarily that of my employer. Bill Sohl || email Bellcore, Morristown, NJ || UUCP bcr!taichi!whs70 (Bell Communications Research) || or 201-829-2879 Weekdays || Internet whs70@taichi.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ From: Heath Roberts Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: NCSU CATT Prog Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1991 01:53:21 GMT In article ryan@cs.umb.edu (Daniel R. Guilderson) writes: (see earlier messages in this issue) >[Moderator's Note: (and likewise, see earlier messages) I think what the original poster meant was that as long as the telephone company is willing to sell directory information at a reasonable price, the third-party vendor is better off buying a magnetic tape containing white page information from the telco than if they read/scan the information directly from the phone book themselves. Heath Roberts NCSU Computer and Technologies Theme Program barefoot@catt.ncsu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 23:55 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto, Ontario Reply-To: ndallen@contact.uucp Even if a directory publisher unaffiliated with the local telephone company is free to reprint listings from the local telephone book, those listings will still be somewhat out of date compared to those available in the telephone company's database. The telco directory is only published once a year, and has a cut-off date some months before the actual publication date to allow for typesetting, printing, binding, etc. So a reputable competitive directory publisher may well want the actual telco database in order to produce a relatively current book (and to avoid the expense of re-entering the information from the printed telco directory). In general, can competitive directory publishers get this information for a fee from the telco? (I suspect that this varies between the states, as I have not seen any references to U.S. federal policy on competitive directories.) Nigel Allen ndallen@contact.uucp [Moderator's Note: I don't think telco has to sell them anything except phone service. I certainly don't think telco would have to sell them access to their data base or up to the minute mag tapes. I guess by this new rule telco can't stop them from copying the directory by hand, however. PAT] ------------------------------ From: "Mark C. Henderson" Subject: Re: Calling Card With no Surcharge (was: MCI Around Town) Date: 6 Apr 91 19:56:24 GMT Reply-To: "Mark C. Henderson" Organization: Computer Research Laboratory, Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton OR In article acf5!whitejon@cmcl2.nyu.edu (jonathan white) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 258, Message 9 of 11 > wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: >> Below is a list of carriers that offer no surcharged calling card >> calls: ITT/Metromedia does have a surcharge for access via their 800 number (1-800-327-9488, I think), so if you happen to be in a part of the U.S. where 950-0488 doesn't work, you still end up paying a surcharge. Mark C. Henderson, Computer Research Laboratory, Tektronix, Inc. MS 50-662, P.O. Box 500, Beaverton, OR 97077, U.S.A. INTERNET: markh@crl.labs.tek.com MCI MAIL: 378-4996 Tel: +1 503 627 6280 Fax: +1 503 627 5502 TELEX: 6503784996MCI UW ------------------------------ From: Donovan Wallace Subject: Re: Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed Date: 6 Apr 91 18:16:08 GMT Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. There is a company in Austin that has what you're looking for. They have a product called "Caller ID+Plus". The complete interface is contained in a DB-25 connector housing (RS-232) and plugs into a serial port on a PC. They also have application software for the PC. Here's the info: Rochelle Communications Inc 8716 N. Mopac, Suite 200 Austin, Texas 78759 Phone: (512) 794-0088 Fax: (512) 794-9997 By the way, the interface sells for $85. Donovan Wallace Mitel Corp. Kanata, Ontario CANADA ------------------------------ From: Mark Anacker Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers (COCOTs Strike Again!) Date: 3 Apr 91 17:34:34 GMT Organization: Digital Systems Intl., Inc. In article , dsinet!marka@quick.com (Mark Anacker) writes: > town, so we pulled up at one of the many, *OFFICIAL-LOOKING* pay > phones. It wasn't until it refused to complete her call, and ate her > quarter, that I went over and found it was one of those infernal coin I gotta admit, when I called to complain about the phone, they did finally send me a refund (a quarter taped to a form). The carrier of the COCOT is identified as Interwest Telecom. They may not know how to program a phone, but at least they paid up. I think I'll go use the GTE phone in that town from now on. Mark Anacker ...{!dsinet,!toybox}!marka Digital Systems International, Inc. Redmond, WA USA (206) 881-7544 [Moderator's Note: A COCOT proprietor here in Chicago answered my complaint one day by sending me a check for 25 cents!. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 10:08:07 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Interop 91 Conference Notice You put an extra digit after area code 415 in the Interop number, which is apparently 415-949-1779. [Moderator's Note: Shame on me! This is the second year in a row I have had a blunder with the Interop press release. I wonder if it is some kind of psycological hangup ... sorry. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 13:57:10 -0800 From: Doug Faunt N6TQS 415-688-8269 Subject: Re: Can I Convert a Single Line Cordless to Multi Line Use? The new Radio Electronics (May, 91) has an article on building a couple of units to use your house telephone system as an intercom, that could easily be adapted to your function. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #270 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09543; 7 Apr 91 5:55 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa01459; 7 Apr 91 4:17 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab22552; 7 Apr 91 3:12 CDT Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 1:40:41 CST From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #271 BCC: Message-ID: <9104070140.ab14811@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 01:40:34 CST Volume 11 : Issue 271 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Administrivia: Clocks; Mail Backlog; A Personal Matter [TELECOM Moderator] Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone [Tad Cook] Your Remote Access Service is Neoowwwww Ownnnnn [John Boteler] What Fire?? Channel 2 Uses Criss-Cross [Jens von der Heide] Let's Get This Straight [Lars Aronsson] Congress Concerned About Elderly/Telemarketing? [Carl Moore] Cryptography Used in Network Security [Paul Dobrovolny] Fax Line "Managers" [Tim Stephens] Two Wire to In and Out Line Signals [Ashley Salisbury] Looking for NON-Statistical Line Multiplexers [Geoff Goodfellow] Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine [Randy Borow] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Tom Perrine] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 0:34:47 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Administrivia: Clocks; Mail Backlog; A Personal Matter Sunday, April 7 at 2:00 AM (your local time) marks our semi-annual tinkering with our clocks in the USA ... and as 'they' say, we spring ahead and fall behind (one hour each time). This is the last issue of the Digest you will see with a CST time stamp for a few months. Speaking of falling behind, the incoming rush of new mail to telecom has slowed down a little, and with some dedicated effort on my part and a few issues of the Digest on Sunday, everything should get cleared out. But this experience -- the past several days of *hard* work and *long* hours to get the Digest out to you has taught me one thing, or maybe two: Effective immediatly, I can no longer give any acknowledgement of what is sent other than the auto-ack which goes out to most of you. I can no longer return mail not used; nor will I be able to take the time to do a lot of editing work. You will have to do it. Save copies of your articles (which you send here) if you consider them valuable. I've been trying to publish at least half of what comes in; I receive, on an average, 60-80 items daily, but this past week there were a couple days with well over 100 items received each day. Combined with last weekend's fiasco, that created a huge backlog here. I still want to publish as much as possible -- to present as many wide and divergent viewpoints as I can within the limits placed on me as a human being who otherwise works 8-10 hours daily at a place of gainful employment, but *something* has to give! From the most prolific of you: please, only one or two items per week if possible. You know who I mean. To all of you: Please match up the subject threads correctly. When you REply, use the header as it appears in the original. Otherwise, I have to go back to the old issues and look for the correct matching word. Try to edit your text and check your spelling. If I must select only a few of the several *good* articles which arrive daily, I will pick the ones that: are short and to the point; require little editing; use a minimum of quoted text; and are not redundant two weeks after the fact. If you get behind reading, that's too bad, but don't send in REplies to articles which appeared here two or three weeks ago without reading everything in the thread to make sure your point has not been made by others since. The more YOU do to help, the more I can publish here. If the Digest winds up taking much more of my time than it takes now, then it won't take any time at all ... I'll close it down out of a desire to preserve my own sanity. Enough said. For next: my father is quite ill. Actually, he has been ill for some time, and this is his second stay in the VA hospital in two months. From all indications, he'll be leaving us soon. When that time comes, I'll be away for a few days -- perhaps a week -- and of necessity will have to suspend the Digest for the interim. I'll let you know, and ask you to hold submissions until I return. PAT ------------------------------ From: Tad.Cook@ssc.uucp Subject: Re: Our Landlord Has a Charge-a-Phone Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 15:59:22 PST In article , john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > There is a diner in Los Angeles (the name escapes me) that has a phone > at every table. They are "genuine Bell" phones and each is connected > to CO dial tone. These are, in effect, Charge-a-Calls. You can place > 800, 10XXX, 950, 0+ (goes AT&T), but not local calls (except as 0+). > A group of us had dinner there a number of months ago and it was great > entertainment playing with the phone while waiting for our meals to > arrive! > [Moderator's Note: On I-55 from here to St. Louis all the food/gasoline > stops along the way have a similar arrangement. At each booth in the > restaurant, a wall-phone is hooked to a one-way outgoing line. All > calls from the phone must be zero-plussed or 10xxx zero-plussed with > billing on a collect, third number or telco credit card basis. PAT] I got a call recently from a guy who had purchased "a box" from a company in Florida that converted a standard cordless phone into a coinless private pay phone. He was planning on installing these in truck stops, where the weary trucker would request a handset from the waitress, who would bring it to him, and he would place credit card calls. The box allegedly had some credit card billing system where it would dial up some central AOS location. My caller was suspicious because this service was supposed to be provided by the distributor of the box, but the box seemed to let all calls go through. I told him that I didn't think this scheme was a good idea. Anyone with a VHF scanner could sit outside the truck stop listening to the 46 MHz signal from the base unit, and easily decode the credit card numbers. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET: ...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ Subject: Your Remote Access Service is Neoowwwww Ownnnnn Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 23:05:39 EST From: John Boteler This CLASS offering in Florida is named 'Remote Access Service'. It provides a remotely-variable Call*Forwarding service to subscribers. This allows you to change the destination number to which your calls will be forwarded from any phone, not just your own. It uses the same prompts as the rest of the CLASS suite. Pretty useful to someone on the go. John Boteler bote@csense {uunet | ka3ovk}!media!csense!bote SkinnyDipper's Hotline: 703 241 BARE | VOICE only, Touch-Tone(TM) signalling [Moderator's Note: Just today, I bought a Radio Shack "Duofone Call Forwarding System (CFS-200). The local store had them on sale for $29.95! This model requires the use of two actual phone lines -- one for incoming calls; one to dial out -- but it is remotely programmable, which is a nice feature. The best part was the $29.95 :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jens von der Heide Subject: What Fire?? Channel 2 Uses Criss-Cross Organization: Motorola Inc. Software Research & Development, Rolling Mdws, IL Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 05:45:08 GMT The other day my roomate received a strange call: "Hi, I'm calling from Channel 2 News. Could you tell me if you see a building on fire next door ?? Are there a lot of fire trucks around?? Are you sure?? Could you look out your window ?? Well, OK, bye." Needless to say, there was no fire activity around. Later that night the mystery was explained. We recently moved, and, kept the same phone number. The apartment next door to our previous address was on fire. Apparently, the local news station looked up our phone in a phone directory that lists numbers by address and probably wanted to see if the activity was worth covering. I don't what eventually happened, except that some former neighbors are out of an apartment. jens@corp.mot.com Voice: (708) 576-3312 UUCP: uunet!motcid!jens ------------------------------ From: Lars Aronsson Subject: Let's Get This Straight Organization: Lysator Computer Club, Linkoping University, Sweden Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 16:51:38 GMT This is a size 6/6 modular plug: | | || | || Cord | || | +---------------+ /| Strain relief | + | | | | P i n s | | | 6 5 4 3 2 1 | | +---------------+ |/ / +----/ /----+ +-----+ This is one wiring scheme for an extension cord: 1-1, 2-2, 3-3, 4-4, 5-5, 6-6. Let's call it Scheme A. This is another wiring scheme: 1-6, 2-5, 3-4, 4-3, 5-2, 6-1. Let's call that Scheme B. If you're using your cords for telephones, then Scheme A and Scheme B cords are interchangable. For some other purposes, that might not be the case. I would like to call Scheme A cords "straight", since every pin is connected to a pin with the same number. Scheme B cords I would like to call "cross-connected". The Swedish subsidary of Inmac agrees with me. However, a local vendor uses exactly the opposite terminology, calling Scheme B cords "straight". The explanation is that when you look at a jack-to-jack (female-to-female) joint, Scheme A makes the wires physically cross while Scheme B has physically parallel (straight) wires. Scheme A is like shaking hands (right hand to right hand) with a person. If you face the person, your arms physically cross your eye-to-eye line (unless one of you is standing on her head!). (Along the same lines, your right hand is the one where the thumb points to the left.) This all makes me so confused. Please tell me who is wrong and who is right (!). We Europeans are not that familiar yet with modular jacks and plugs. Is there any standard that defines "straight" and "cross-connected" in this context? Or do you have a de-facto standard? Or is there equal confusion on both sides of the Atlantic? Do you even use the words "straight" and "cross-connected"? Lars Aronsson, Lysator computer club, Linkoping University, Sweden Aronsson@Lysator.LiU.SE Voice phone at home +46-13-17 2143 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 9:45:45 EST From: Carl Moore Subject: Congress Concerned About Elderly/Telemarketing? Today, Senator H. John Heinz of Pennsylvania was to have held a hearing in Philadelphia regarding the elderly. One of the topics I heard of was telemarketing scams aimed at the elderly. I don't have further detail on this. (This comes to my attention via KYW news-radio in Philadelphia; Sen. Heinz was killed yesterday in a collision between his plane and a helicopter.) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 14:08:24 -0500 From: Paul Dobrovolny Subject: Cryptography Used in Network Security I am researching the use of cryptography for authentication services. Please pass on any available information concerning practical methods that have been implemented. Thanks. ------------------------------ From: Tim Stephens Subject: Fax Line "Managers" Date: 4 Apr 91 14:41:51 GMT Does anyone have any experience (other than bad!!) with a fax-recognition switch? I hope I am using the correct terminology. The idea is to be able to use a fax machine and voice on the same line, seamlessly, thus saving the cost of another line. Suggestions, product names anyone? tim stephens stephens@cs.unc.edu ------------------------------ From: Ashley Salisbury Subject: Two Wire to In and Out Line Signals Reply-To: Ashley Salisbury Organization: City University, London Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 11:25:44 GMT Does anyone have details of a simple circuit to convert from a standard two wire telephone current loop circuit to a pair of connections for signal in and signal out ... hopefully with a reasonable degree of feed through cancellation ... ie removal of the injected signal from the signal out from the line. No, I am not worrying about line protection, or echo cancellation just the conversion. Thanks in advance, Ashley Saulsbury ------------------------------ From: Geoff Goodfellow Subject: Looking for NON-Statistical Line Multiplexers Organization: Anterior Technology, Menlo Park, CA, USA Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 23:50:54 GMT I'm looking for line (two or four wire) multiplexers, that would allow me to evenly device a 9600 bps line into to two 4800 bps lines, or a 2400 baud line into two 1200 baud lines. I recall the good ol' Bell 209A modem used to have this capability. I CANNOT use Stat-MUX's because its flow control (XON/XOFF/whatever) would make the line non-transparent to the protocol(s) going over over it. I need to lines to appear as if they each had a dedicated circuit of their own. Any suggestions for such equipment appreciated. Thanks, Geoff Goodfellow Anterior Technology 415-328-5615 geoff@fernwood.mpk.ca.us ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Thu Apr 4 08:36:16 CST 1991 Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine Yes, Mr. Rolfs, there ARE more than one such digital answering machines. The newest one has the features I mentioned, since I throughly looked it over and tried it at the store. You may have to look around. Randy Borow Rolling Meadows, IL. ------------------------------ From: Tom Perrine Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls Date: 4 Apr 91 20:46:45 GMT Reply-To: Tom Perrine Organization: Logicon, Inc., San Diego, California In article bernhold@red8.qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 266, Message 4 of 16 > I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last > night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says > "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." > After several seconds of silence, it says "I am trying to connect your > call, please hold." (Or something to that effect.) > This was repeated about four times, then it said "Are you still > holding?" and I mechanically answered "Yes". The voice said "I'm > sorry, but I have not been able to connect the call. I will try again > later," and hangs up. > It called again, perhaps 20 minutes later. Same drill, except this > time I didn't answer the "Are you still holding?" question. It said > nothing more, and held the line until I hung up. > The third time it called, I hung up after the first "I am trying to > connect your call ..." It didn't call back after that. > I've never heard of anything like this before. Does anybody recognize > what it might be, besides a failure (at least in this case)? I believe this is the latest in boiler-room technology. Instead of the incredible expense of making a real-live person (at minimum wage, no less!) make each and every annoying, unwanted call, they have a machine make the calls. This machine sequentially walks the phone-numbers for any set of prefixes. When it gets an answer, it *then* tries to connect you to a real (?) sales-thug. It saves the incredibly valuable time of the sales-thugs, at only a major annoyance to the victim. In your case, (un?)fortunately, all the sales-thugs were busy annoying other people. Tom Perrine (tep) Internet: tep@tots.Logicon.COM Logicon - T&TSD UUCP: sun!suntan!tots!tep P.O. Box 85158 GENIE: T.PERRINE San Diego CA 92138 Voice: +1 619 455 1330 FAX: +1 619 552 0729 [Moderator's Note: As he explained it in his message in the last issue, it turns out the calls were from a collection office somewhere trying to reach him regarding his student loan. I think it really takes a lot of brass for those outfits to use a device like that to waste *my time* on hold until *they* get someone free to talk to me. When I've received automated voice calls before, I always just hang up, and everyone should take that approach, to end this latest phone nuisance once and for all. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #271 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13312; 7 Apr 91 7:03 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa31145; 7 Apr 91 5:23 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab01459; 7 Apr 91 4:18 CDT Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 3:20:34 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #272 BCC: Message-ID: <9104070320.ab00057@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 03:20:07 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 272 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [R. Kevin Oberman] Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [Robert E. Novak] Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [Tad Cook] Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [Fred R. Goldstein] Re: New FCC Modem Tax? [Ken Abrams] Re: 56kbps Alternatives? [Syd Weinstein] Re: 56kbps Alternatives? [Peter da Silva] Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends Where You Are [J. Covert] Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends Where You Are [Carl Moore] Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information [Macy Hallock] Re: Some Callers and Answering Machines [Robert E. Zabloudil] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: 4 Apr 91 19:30:19 GMT In article , SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? This one just won't die. Back a year or so ago the FCC considered an increase on rates charged for X.25 lines used by Compuserve, Tymenet and other data carriers. This class of service gets a VERY favorable rate. While the proposal was dropped fairly quickly, several news stories talked about an FCC proposal to raise the rates on phone lines used for data. Many readers (who wouldn't know about what X.25 was even if the news story used the term) assumed that this meant modems. An urban legend was born! Now someone sees some reference to that proposal and the whole thing starts again. I see lots of postings on a wide variety of newsgroups about every six months. If you doubt this, call the FCC. They do have a listed number. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: oberman@icdc.llnl.gov (415) 422-6955 Disclaimer: Don't take this too seriously. I just like to improve my typing and probably don't really know anything useful about anything. ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Novak" Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: 4 Apr 91 21:31:51 GMT Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Sunnyvale, California In article SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? I only have negative information. I tried the FCC Docket Information section (202-632-7535) and asked for any docket concerning modems. After about a ten minute wait, they said that thier database search came up empty. I then contacted the Common Carrier Office (202-632-6910). The woman I spoke to there said that they had nothing concerning modems in any proposed Common Carrier Tariffs. Robert E. Novak Mail Stop 5-10, MIPS Computer Systems, Inc. {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!rnovak 950 DeGuigne Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 rnovak@mips.COM (rnovak%mips.COM@ames.arc.nasa.gov) +1 408 524-7183 ------------------------------ From: hpubvwa!ssc!Tad.Cook@cs.washington.edu Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 15:23:38 PST No !!! NOT AGAIN !!! In article , SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? You're KIDDING, right? Is this urban computer legend coming back to haunt us AGAIN? Well, there never was a modem tax ... but just like with the phoney rumor that the FCC is about to ban religous broadcasting, the FCC receives LOTS of mail on it. Funny thing ... the folks promoting this rumor can never supply me with and NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) number! Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP ------------------------------ From: "Fred R. Goldstein" Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: 5 Apr 91 16:04:43 GMT Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA In article , SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes... > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? That's one of the worst "chain letters" in telecom. PLEASE IGNORE IT! To summarize: Around 1987, the Reagan FCC proposed a change in telco billing practices that would have cost on-line services about $5/hour. The idea drew huge protest and was dropped under strong congressional pressure. The Bush FCC, to the best of my knowledge, disavowed the whole mess. The idea keeps popping up because old messages get forwarded and people don't keep track of the age, and 1987's news loses its date and looks new. That's a problem with E-mail; dates can get edited out. Fred R. Goldstein Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice: +1 508 486 7388 Do you think anyone else on the planet would share my opinions, let alone a multi-billion dollar corporation? ------------------------------ From: Ken Abrams Subject: Re: New FCC Modem Tax? Date: 4 Apr 91 18:10:10 GMT Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois In article SABAHE@macalstr.edu (Arun Baheti) writes: > Does anyone have any up-to-date information on the new tax that is > being considered? I assume that this YET ANOTHER re-hash of the proposal that died about four years ago. At that time, a file was being passed around on all the major nets. It usually began something like "I heard this on radio station WXYZ in Los Angeles yesterday.....". Things like this seem to NEVER die since the originator didn't put a date in the file. Some well meaning user stumbles across the thing years later and starts passing it around again. I even saw the Craig Shergold (cards to a dying boy) story crop up again last month. A plea to the original poster: Please provide us a little more detail on the situation you are asking about. If it does turn out to be the old story making the rounds again, please get back to your source and try to stop it. Ken Abrams uunet!pallas!kabra437 Illinois Bell kabra437@athenanet.com Springfield (voice) 217-753-7965 [Moderator's Note: And my thanks to everyone who wrote to debunk this old UL (Urban Legend) *hopefully* one last time. No modem tax, no surcharge, nothing. Please! Post these messages far and wide, and help bring a halt to this story. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Syd Weinstein Subject: Re: 56kbps Alternatives? Reply-To: syd@dsi.com Organization: Datacomp Systems, Inc. Huntingdon Valley, PA Date: Sat, 6 Apr 1991 21:20:52 GMT Mark McWiggins writes: > My prospective employer is using a leased line for 56kbps service > between two remote offices. I've read the blurb for UUNET's Alternet > service, and I got an e-mail note saying that PSInet offers something > similar. > Presumably either of these is much cheaper than a leased line, but > what would one be giving up by changing from a leased line to Alternet > or PSInet? Ok, as a user of a 56KB leased line to connect to PREPnet (our local NSFnet), I don't understand something here... If your employer has a 56KB leased line as DDS or DDS-II service between two offices, what is he running over it? (What protocol?) Is it a proprietary protocol between to multiplexers? an X.25 link? A TCP/IP link running SLIP?, TCP/IP running PPP? TCP/IP running something proprietary for the link? Straight sync data? The thing that Alternet and PSInet sell is a TCP/IP long haul service. You still need a 56KB leased line (or faster) to go from the local office to the nearest Alternet/PSInet Point of Presence and from the remote office to its nearset POP. The only savings I can see is if the link is long haul (remote offices are far away) and the cost of the PSI or Alternet is cheaper than the price of the direct 56KB line. Note, you would need a router at each end of the circuit, and the delay time would be longer under PSInet or Alternet, as in a private 56kb the delay is just two routers, with the network in place its your two routers + as many more as they use in making up their network. Now there is a big gain in connectivity outsite of the two offices, but just for a private link, its not apples and apples we are comparing here but apples and oranges. If you are looking at PSInet, Alternet, et al, time to also look at all the other long haul data networks, such as Sprintnet (nee telenet), Tymnet, Compuserve, and many many others. Sorry to be so long, but you are opening up an entire new direction to explore, not just replacing a simple 56kb data circuit. Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP Elm Coordinator Datacomp Systems, Inc. Voice: (215) 947-9900 syd@DSI.COM or dsinc!syd FAX: (215) 938-0235 ------------------------------ From: Peter da Silva Subject: Re: 56kbps Alternatives? Organization: A corner of our bedroom Date: Sun, 7 Apr 1991 06:12:00 GMT intek01!mark@uunet.uu.net (Mark McWiggins) writes: > Presumably either of these is much cheaper than a leased line, but > what would one be giving up by changing from a leased line to Alternet > or PSInet? About 46 kilobaud. Dialup service over a V.32 modem at 9600 bps doesn't begin to keep up with a 56 kb leased line. If you're doing UUCP, you could get an extra 6-8000 bps with a Trailblazer, but if you're currently using a 56 kb line you're probably not doing UUCP. peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 06:30:22 PST From: "John R. Covert 05-Apr-1991 0904" Subject: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends Where You Are >> The Washington, DC, area has the best plan: 7D is local within your >> own NPA (whether that be 202, 703, or 301); 10D is local to one of the >> other two NPAs; and 1 + 10D is toll, either within your own NPA or to >> one of the other NPAs. 1 + 10D is accepted for local calls to other >> NPAs, and the call gets routed and billed the same as if you had >> dialed just 10D. > This will never be possible in at least one place -- the 516 NPA is > within the LATA from the 212 NPA, and a call carried by NY Tel. > Dialing without the 1+, however, would lead to some sort of time-out > scheme to decide whether one was dialing 516 as an NPA, or just the > 212-516 exchange in 212. From 212, incidentally, all out-of-NPA calls > are dialed 1+, and all 0+ calls, even within 212, are dialed 0+212+7d. > Talk about a full NPA ... It is most certainly possible there -- today. You should have checked before writing: There is no 212-516 NPA. Just as in the DC area, New York has been careful to avoid assigning exchanges that would make this not work. You only lose a few exchanges; in DC there are three that can't be used, and that's it. BTW, "LATA" has nothing to do with it; the only thing that matters is "Local Call." Since nothing in 516 is local to 212 (only to 718), 212 could have a 516 exchange, but they still avoid nearby area codes in order to prevent confusion. The requirement that 0+ calls within your own area code must be dialled 0+10D is in effect not just in 212, but in all the places I mentioned. That requirement is necessary as soon as an area code goes to interchangeable codes. john ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 10:00:17 EST From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: The Plan: 1+Own-NPA+7D or Just 7D -- Depends on Where You Are When it was announced in this Digest that 215 area (which includes Philadelphia) was going to 7D (this refers to intra-NPA long distance), there was also a note that 412, which includes Pittsburgh, already has such calling instructions (but 412 has no N0X/N1X that I know of). 215 not only is near NJ, it's right next door to it! (There are local calls between 215 and NJ, at Trenton and some points further north.) Since when has it become necessary to consider bringing N0X/N1X to Massachusetts? The 617/508 split was done only 3 years ago without N0X/N1X being in use. Yes, I know that many calling instructions will have to change later to accommodate areacodes being generalized from N0X/N1X to NXX. How soon would this begin happening (i.e. change calling instructions for this reason, NOT because that particular area is running short of NNX)? And once areacodes become NXX, would the rule still be NOT to use N0X/N1X prefixes unless NNX prefixes started running out? For those who haven't noticed: If your area has changed its calling instructions to accommodate N0X/N1X prefixes, it should already be able to accommodate NXX area codes, not just N0X/N1X area codes. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 08:05 EST From: Macy Hallock Subject: Re: Request For In-Line Speed Dialer Information Organization: Hallock Engineering and Sales Medina, Ohio USA +1 216 722 3053 konstan@elmer-fudd.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) writes: > I remember reading about some of the Demon Dialers of yesteryear and I > was wondering what is still available today. These are commonly available used now. Seems as though a lot of them were installed behind 1A2 systems that have now beem removed from service. Several brokers list them for $10-20 each. Be sure you get the power transformer with it. You might also want replacement priviledges ... Demon Dialers could be damaged by lightning comparatively easily in many cases. I just had two older ones I've had for years zapped. Guess I should take my own advice and put high speed solid state protection on my phone lines ... even three element gas tubes don't always cut it. For a listing of used equipment brokers, your best source is "Telecom Gear" listings. Last time I checked, you could still call 1-800-LIBRARY and get put on the list if you acted like a telecom equipment seller/user. (This is the number for Telecom Library ... and the publishers of Teleconnect, LAN, Inbound/Outbound magazines and other items of interest) (Be sure to ask them to send you a book list, too, when you call ... Harry and Jerry stock some decent titles ... and those guys are fun at a party, too.) Anybody have any used Mitel Smart One dialers they'd like to sell cheap? Macy M. Hallock, Jr. macy@fmsystm.UUCP macy@NCoast.ORG uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Zabloudil" Subject: Re: Some Callers and Answering Machines Date: 5 Apr 91 20:33:29 GMT Organization: Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center, Columbus In article bill@eedsp.gatech.edu writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 227, Message 8 of 13 > Ever since I got Caller ID, I've noticed that some callers will call, > Call -- CALL, and will never leave a message. I can understand why > telemarketing creatures would not leave a message - they don't want to My answering machine is sort of rinky dink (fixed length OGM, and as a holdover from my radio days, I hate dead air, so I filled the w-h-o-l-e OGM tape), and I tell 'em "we don't really like answering machines ourselves, but we didn't have any choice right now, we had to put it on, so...". One day, someone who thought it was urgent called and hung up, called and hung up, over and over, and filled up the whole tape while we were out of town for the day. She's fairly intelligent; you'd think she would know that we would either pick up the phone and talk to her if we were just monitoring calls (not paranoid, just can't always get there quickly to pick it up, you know), or we would call her back as soon as we could, or maybe we were being antisocial (after the eighth hangup, a different adjective comes to mind). Like you, I wonder sometimes ... I might call back a second time, if I thought they'd forgotten me ... by the time we got back that evening and called her, she was not home, and talking to other people we found they had handled the situation anyway. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #272 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28444; 7 Apr 91 16:32 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa13916; 7 Apr 91 14:30 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa28918; 7 Apr 91 13:25 CDT Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 12:48:04 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #273 BCC: Message-ID: <9104071248.ab19623@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 12:48:01 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 273 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Info Wanted on B_ISDN [Rodney Van Luinen] Re: Research on "Intelligent Nets" in the US [Robert J. Woodhead] Re: MCI Around Town followup [Brian Crawford] Re: End of the [Party] Line [Tom Coradeschi] Re: Caller ID Hearings in California [Al L Varney] Re: 411 Will Now Connect Call Direct [John Higdon] Re: Info on Motorola "Ultra Classic" Cell Phone Needed [John R. Covert] Re: INTEROP 91 Conference Notice [Ole J. Jacobsen] Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [John Higdon] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Apr 1991 10:12:03 +1000 From: rodney@pico.qpsx.oz.au Subject: Re: Info Wanted on B_ISDN. Jim Niemann writes: > What research is being done in broadband ISDN? Is it possible to > purchase a prototype switch that supports it? > Where should I look for more info? Others have written various things about primary rate access etc. Well, that's incorrect. Primary rate is for normal ISDN. B_ISDN or Broadband ISDN is a connection oriented service at very high data rates. Most people regard it as having data rates in excess of 50 Mbits/sec, up to at least a couple of Gbits/sec. It uses what is known as ATM switching, or Asynchronous Transfer Mode Switching, based on small data units referred to as cells, which are a fixed length. It operates on point to point links between ATM switches, and carries anything, for example, packet switched and isochronous data. Routing is performed using VCI (Virtual Circuit Identifiers). So, the short answer is: A hell of a lot of research is being done. Most of it in development of ATM switches that work well. A lot of work is being done in deciding just what services should be offered, and people are working on standardization. You could possibly find someone who knows someone who has a prototype ATM switch, and it is possible (after AT&T's announcement of the BNS2000 cell switch) that AT&T might have something. Don't hold your breath though, because as I understand it, AT&T has started and stopped work on ATM switches at least twice, and the BNS2000 *is* a fast packet switch than can (might?) use ATM. I would guess that you don't have lots of options in getting a prototype switch. As for more information, well, a lot of papers have been written on this, and there are a couple of standards, published by CCITT. The reference numbers elude me at present....... In the meantime, there's always our 802.6 ;-) Any more queries, direct them to me at rodney@pico.qpsx.oz.au If that doesn't work, tack @munnari.mu.oz.au on the end. Cheers, Rodney Van Luinen QPSX Communications Pty Ltd 33 Richardson St WEST PERTH WESTERN AUSTRALIA. ------------------------------ From: Robert J Woodhead Subject: Re: Research on "Intelligent Nets" in the US Date: 5 Apr 91 01:15:55 GMT Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Tokyo Japan thuermel@ztivax.siemens.com (Dr Sabine Thuermel) writes: > We at Siemens, Munich are doing research on intelligent networks. I > would like to get into contact with US universities working in the > same field. I am grateful for any pointers. Have you considered the risks inherent in an intelligent network? I for one don't want to have an uppity switch tell me that it doesn't think it's a good time to call mom! And what if it gets upset with you and routes all your calls to a beachside resort in Fiji? ;^) Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp ------------------------------ From: Brian Crawford Subject: Re: MCI Around Town Followup Date: 5 Apr 91 13:16:51 GMT Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ In article , FLINTON@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Fred E.J. Linton) writes: > In response to a recent query, the ITT "Longer Distance" > service-questions 800 number *was* 1 800 221 4064 (ages ago, when they > sent me my ITT LD card). Hope that's still valid. When I picked up ITT calling card service three years ago, their rates did not include a fee (monthly or per call). In addition, their rates were the same as the direct dial 1+ people had, and those were cheaper than anyone I knew (ATT, MCI, Sprint, Western Union, etc.). The rates, if I remember for cross-country were about 12 or 13 cents/minute back then. But, alas, the firm has been caught up in a merger/buy-out fever since then: ITT was bought out by some company I can remember, kept the "New Name"-ITT. Then, Metromedia bought them out, and it was called Metromedia-ITT, now this month's bill dropped Metromedia completely. Their calling card rates are now higher than their direct dial, at 18/19 cents night rate cross-country, as opposed to 12 cents/minute 1+. Still, in comparison OK. Did someone post an even less expensive alternative to this for residential use? Please pass this on, as I can't find the old message here. Thanks. Brian Crawford INTERNET (current): crawford@enuxha.eas.asu.edu PO Box 804 (permanent): crawford@stjhmc.fidonet.org Tempe, Arizona 85280 FidoNet: 1:114/15.12 USA Amateur: KL7JDQ ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 9:09:26 EST From: Tom Coradeschi Subject: Re: End of the [Party] Line Organization: Electric Armaments Div, US Army Armament RDE Center Lars Poulsen writes: > TELECOM Digest vol 11 issue 264 msg 1 reprinted an AP wire service > story submitted by Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 > about the end of party line service in Woodbury, Connecticut. > I enjoyed the story, but would like to make a couple of technical > comments. I wish there were a way to get them back to Ms Cappiello of > AP. >> By JANET L. CAPPIELLO, Associated Press Writer [...] > problems. It disturbs me when businesses deliberately tell lies to > regulatory agencies. (It also disturbs me that we set up regulatory > agencies that aren't technically competent to see through such fibs). [...] While not explicitly telecom related, this certainly relates to those wonderful regulatory agencies we've all come to know and love. I have a good friend whose wife is a lawyer with the Texas Public Utilities Commission (or whatever they call it there). She works telecom issues, and was putting together a document relating to a case she was on. The PC she uses does not have the ability to use symbolic typefaces, and she had to use the Greek mu as a modifier to a quantity (like mu-volts). Not being able to use the symbol itself, she intended to use the word micro-, instead, which she was _pretty sure_ meant the same thing. Now, she's a lawyer, so Greek symbols are, well, Greek to her, and she really wanted to be sure that mu really meant micro-. So, she called one of the engineers on the PUC staff. He's there to provide the legal staff with technical support. His response when asked just what mu is used to signify, ran something like "Well, I'm not really sure that they've standardized that yet.". [Insert look of disbelief here.] Needless to say, this lawyer found his statement a little difficult to believe. She ended up ringing her husband (a real engineer) at work, and asking him. Makes you kind of wonder what kind of engineers work for public utilities commissions, doesn't it? For the record: I too am an engineer (ME by education, holding an EE position). Mu means micro- means 1E-6. tom coradeschi <+> tcora@pica.army.mil ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 13:26:52 CST From: Al L Varney Subject: Re: Caller ID Hearings in California Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories To block presentation of calling number, > Jim Gottlieb writes: >> Dial *67 from almost any Pacific Bell ESS-served line and you will >> hear a confirmation tone followed by dial tone. And yazz@prodnet.la.locus.com (Bob Yazz) responds: > On my DMS-100 line in San Diego, I get a CPC disconnect and the > DMS-100 "catch-all" recording -- "We're sorry, your call did not go > thru". A couple of times the equipment got confused .... But ... Jim specifically said "ESS-served" line. Strictly speaking, ESS(tm) is a Trademark of AT&T, and it is unlikely the DMS-100 can legally be called an "ESS". On the other hand, Jim probably meant an "Electronic Switch-served" line or a SPC (Stored Program Control) switch. > Could be because I'm on DMS-100 or because I'm in San Diego and the > CLID trials are planned for LA and SF. All of the above; the DMS probably doesn't have the right "BCS release" to support the feature, and you are not located in one of the two "test" areas. Even with the right software, the assignment of "*67" to a feature is office-specific. It should not confuse the equipment in any case.... Two other comments: Someone asked if No. 1 ESS(tm) could do CallerID. No. Nor does it speak SS7 (it will do CCIS6 however). Nor does it do Cancel Call Waiting. Note that SS7 (or CCIS6) is only needed to make CallerID work between switches. CLASS capabilities within a single switch are certainly possible in an "island" environment, sort of like single-switch ISDN. There are several non-SS7 single-switch CLASS offices in small single-switch communities. Al Varney, AT&T Network Systems Disclaimer: I don't speak for AT&T or any part thereof, nor am I part of the "Trademark" compliance group. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 12:51 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: 411 Will Now Connect Call Direct portal!cup.portal.com!fleming@uunet.uu.net (Stephen Fleming) writes: > Just called local information (411) in northern Virginia. Got a new > recording: "You may be connected to this number for an additional > charge of 30 cents. The number is: xxx" > Nice. Very nice. Especially when I'm in my car trying to juggle > pencil and paper. Should get some use. (Disclaimer: for all I know, > NT invented this service, but *I've* never encountered it before!) That was precisely my initial reaction when I got that identical message on my cellular phone while negotiating traffic in downtown San Francisco. While under siege from assault taxis and attack MUNI vehicles, it was very convenient to press one key and be connected to the party I was calling (in this case, a restaurant to make reservations). But there is a side effect. Remember how telcos admonished and implored DA callers to WRITE IT DOWN so that additional calls to DA would not be necessary? That was back in the days of free DA. Now that the service apparently pays its own way, why not add (at extra cost, mind you) a little convenience feature that virtually assures future inquiries for the same number? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Apr 91 20:41:39 PST From: "John R. Covert 06-Apr-1991 2334" Subject: Re: Info on Motorola "Ultra Classic" Cell Phone Needed > I just got the above mentioned phone. I'm looking for a way to outfit > it with an RJ-11 jack. When you remove the battery there are some > contacts that are obviously there for something (the battery > connections are at the other end so they are not for power). Does > anyone know what they are? Forget it; there's no way to produce an RJ-11 jack on that phone. The contacts you are referring to provide two functions: They connect the phone to the external car booster unit, and they connect the phone to test equipment. You can get options that allow you to hook up an external speaker and mike, but nothing that will simulate an RJ-11. Even when you hook Motorola phones up to the external 3 Watt unit, you still do all control functions using the buttons on the phone. The Ultra-Classic is a nice phone. Selling for $495 here in Boston. In fact, I'm planning to buy one if I can find someone in the Boston area to buy my Nokia P-30 (real cheap) and take the 4 month service contract. I'll even buy the P-30 back at the end of the contract if whoever buys it decides cellular isn't worth keeping. john ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 7:36:59 PDT From: "Ole J. Jacobsen" Subject: Re: INTEROP 91 Conference Notice The poster is correct about the extra digit after the area code, but please note that the number in error is the *FAX* number, so don't try calling it to speak to someone! Once again: 1-800-INTEROP or 1-415-941-3399 ;voice 1-415-949-1779 ;FAX Also, in case anyone cares, the conference is always in CAPS, i.e., INTEROP 91, while the company is always in mixed case, i.e., Interop, Inc. Ole J Jacobsen, Editor & Publisher ConneXions -- The Interoperability Report Interop, Inc., 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View, CA 94040, USA Phone: (415) 941-3399 FAX: (415) 949-1779 Email: ole@csli.stanford.edu Direct:(415) 917-2215 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 00:57 PST From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) "David E. Bernholdt" writes: > She reacted quite calmly when I said that I would hang up on future > calls which didn't identify the caller -- her only concern was to be > sure that I _would_ speak to a human if everything worked as it was > intended to. At the risk of sounding exceedingly arrogant (too late, Higdon, the time for that concern is long past), I usually give very short shrift to people whose SECRETARIES place calls for them. Nothing, but nothing, is more annoying than, "Mr. Higdon, please." "Speaking." "Mr. Smith is calling. Can you hold please? [thunk/elevator music]" In such cases I hang up as quickly as possible. In my work it is a fact of life that a number of very busy people on very tight schedules call me routinely and somehow manage to place the calls using their own fingers on their own dials. Sometimes they even use their own voices to leave messages. Using a secretary to waste the time of the CALLEE ranks up toward the top of the rudeness scale. I might accept such a call from the President of the United States. Short of that, my time is just as valuable as that of anyone else. And on a related note: David Lesher writes: > We got hit by the {Miami Herald's} Telesleeze dialer yesterday. > Once you're on the list, unsolicited telephone sales calls can not be > made to you except ... by a newspaper publisher or his agent or employee > in connection with his business. Since I called Pac*Bell, threatened the {San Jose Mercury} with legal action, and generally promised a stink that would not clear for a long time, there have been no more calls from Harassment Central. But you can believe that if one single call does come in, I will do everything I can think of (including a few things that may not be mentioned here) to put those people out of business. > John Hignon, I suggest that you do NOT move to Florida. While I did some communications work in Jacksonville and had a very pleasant time, there are a number of reasons I would not move to Florida. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #273 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01698; 7 Apr 91 18:10 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa14958; 7 Apr 91 16:41 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa15889; 7 Apr 91 15:31 CDT Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 14:39:23 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #274 BCC: Message-ID: <9104071439.ab14261@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Apr 91 14:39:12 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 274 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Loop Checker Lines and the Human Imagination [A. E. Mossberg] Re: Internet <-> Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions [Nigel Allen] Re: 56kbps Alternatives? [Barton F. Bruce] Re: Dealing Aggressively With Phone Harrassment [Randy Borow] Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service [Kevin Brown] Re: Eight-Party and Ten-Party Ringing in the Bell System [Nigel Allen] Return to the Land of Selective Ringing [Nigel Allen] Cellular Phones for $29 [TELECOM Moderator] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "a.e.mossberg" Subject: Re: Loop Checker Lines and the Human Imagination Reply-To: aem@mthvax.cs.miami.edu Date: Sat, 06 Apr 91 20:09:31 GMT Organization: University of Miami Department of Mathematics & Computer Science In kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > Needless to say, loop checker test lines have *NO* utility in the > detection and location of eavesdropping devices on a telephone >line. > The human imagination has no bounds, eh? :-) One time someone told me, in the strictest confidence, if I swore not to reveal the number to anyone else, that they would give me a number that I could call and it would let me know if my line was tapped. Well, I was very dubious and had a strong suspicion what it would turn out to be, but played along anyway. "Okay, here it is. Now you call and if it cycles through a bunch of frequencies your line is okay, but if the number is busy, that means your line is tapped!" This person, in Miami, had regularly been calling this number in California to check his line. No, I didn't call it, and no, I didn't tell him he was an idiot. aem@mthvax.cs.miami.edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 3 Apr 91 21:50 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Re: Internet<->Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions. Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue Forwarded from newsgroups can.general and can.uucp. Any questions should be directed to the original poster, smd@lsuc.on.ca (Sean Doran). From: smd@lsuc.on.ca (Sean Doran) Message-ID: <302039400900@lsuc.lsuc.on.ca> Subject: Re: Internet<->Envoy 100 Gateway - Instructions. Summary: Please be careful of NASAMAIL/Internet gateway usage Reply-To: smd@lsuc.on.ca Organization: Telecom Canada ICS User Group, Envoy 100/iNet 2000 In an article (Message-Id: <1991Apr1.200044.8839@eci386.uucp>), woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) wrote: Agreed, although the damage done was in can.general, and this probably also belongs there. > In article <1991Mar28.162214.25930@shl.com> phil@shl.com (Phil Trubey) writes: >> to post the following info. I've used it a couple of times and it >> seems to work. The fact that this gateway is known at all is generally my fault (I "discovered" that the NASAMAIL <-> Internet gateway could also handle Envoy 100 traffic, and brought it to the attention of the NASAMAIL people and to Telecom Canada. The latter don't care (or understand) while the former is edgy that there are so few controls on the gateway's use, and I expect that wide knowledge of the gateway could lead to overuse or misuse of it. Either of those two problems will force NASA to stop mail travelling to Telecom Canada from the gateway, just like Sprint Mail did. However, the normal variety of shortish Internet-acceptable mail (excluding mailing lists and UUENCODED anything) is generally considered OK. >> To reach someone with an Envoy account, send your message with the >> following address in the "To:" field: >> /ID=envoy_id/S=last_name/G=first_name/I=F/SITE=TELECOM.CANADA/ >> @GEMINI.ARC.NASA.GOV Neither the GivenName field nor the Initial field is necessary, and the Surname field need not always correspond to reality. For example, my signature records the ICS.TEST/ICS.BOARD/ICS.USER.GROUP account, which is my 'home' on Envoy 100. > This looks like some form of X.400 address. It is a NASAMAIL address, and NASAMAIL is a PRMD within the SprintMail/TELEMAIL ADMD. Both NASAMAIL and TELEMAIL use a mutant X.400(84) MTA, and Telecom Canada uses an old but real X.400(84) MTA. Neither Telecom nor TELEMAIL are presently reachable from COSINE, RARE or the other "Experimental" X.400 "networks" that can speak to the Internet. > We have had > mail bounce when sending to gateways into Banyan systems, because > Banyan Id's have '@'s in them (i.e. "/ID=xyz@dept@corp"). I have not > yet experimented with possible ways of quoting the mailbox field. See RFC 987 et prec, the various lists like mhsnews or talk to Steve Kille at UCL. "Quoting" of non PrintableString characters is commonplace, and can be done through the NASAMAIL gateway using standard RFC 987 encodings. >> 1) Send their Envoy message to the following address: >> [INTERNETMAIL@NASA]NASAMAIL/TELEMAIL/US No. It's [Internet Mail@NASA]NASAMAIL/TELEMAIL/US. The "Internet" part is the Given Name, and is optional. Using the one word will cause an expensive (ca. 45 cents U.S. per kilocharacter, with at least one unit) bounce to you and to the gateway's Admin. > So, does NASA pay for this gateway, or are the charges propogated back > to the Envoy user? Both. CCITT-regulated commercial X.400 traffic is billed to the originator. Therefore, sending mail outbound from Envoy via the NASAMAIL, ATTMAIL or SprintMail gateways costs only the Envoy user. Inbound traffic to Envoy from the Internet via the NASAMAIL gateway is paid for by NASA, with a grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation. All traffic must meet "acceptable purpose" guidelines set out by the NSF, and anything else is in violation of both American and Canadian Law. That means that if you send "commercial" or generally non-research- related material through the Gateway, and you are caught, you will be talked to by both Nasamail and Telecom Canada. Given the amount of money that NASA is spending on the Gateway, and given that it is generally meant to be a gateway exclusively between the Internet and the NASAMAIL PRMD, I think the restrictions are reasonable, and urge you to respect it. If you are using the gateway and want to make sure that what you are sending through it to Envoy is OK, ask postmaster@gemini.arc.nasa.gov _before_ you send it. > If this gateway was actually run by Telemail or Telecom Canada, I > would expect something smarter that could look up envoy_id's from the > user's full name, just the same as smail can with fullnames. The Gateway is run by NASA and the NSF. The gateway between SprintMail's and Telecom Canada's ADMDs does not follow CCITT specs, and has difficulty with Probe MPDUs, PN lookups and so forth. > Any other way, IMHO, is just a hack! Envoy 100 is just a hack. The gateway is certainly a hack, and an ugly one. (It is loosely based on the CMR, which is described in an RFC.) The fact that the gateway can be used to send Internet messages to and from Envoy 100 is a BUG, not a feature, and will be squashed if it causes problems. >> 2) The first line of text in their message must be: >> To: your_user_id@your_address > Ah-ha! Hand-crafting the essential part of the RFC-822 header! Exactly. The To: line is fully RFC-822, and can handle anything that the average sendmail can, including multiple recipients on multiple lines. > Greg A. Woods > woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP ECI and UniForum Canada > +1-416-443-1734 [h] +1-416-595-5425 [w] VE3TCP Toronto, Ontario CANADA Sean Doran The Law Society of Upper Canada also seand@ziebmef.mef.org Young Liberals of Canada/Parti Liberal du Canada and /C=CANADA/ADMD=TELECOM.CANADA/ID=ICS.TEST/S=TESTGROUP/@nasamail.nasa.gov ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: Re: 56kbps Alternatives? Date: 7 Apr 91 11:34:42 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , intek01!mark@uunet.uu.net (Mark McWiggins) writes: > My prospective employer is using a leased line for 56kbps service > between two remote offices. I've read the blurb for UUNET's Alternet > service, and I got an e-mail note saying that PSInet offers something > similar. > Presumably either of these is much cheaper than a leased line, but Using Alternet or PSI get you Internet connectivity, but WILL cost you enough monthly with the necessary telco lines that you can buy a coast to coast DDS-II lines for less. The DDS-II line will let you put ANYTHING ove it that fits. You can put several compressed voice channels and assorted data. You can use an Enet bridge that includes a compressor. You can bridge ALL the protocals on your Enet, but you sure can't if you use the TCP/IP only PSI or Alternet. I am not so sure PSI or Alternet do this, but NEARNET here in Boston gets you to PAY for ALL the necessary Cisco equipment, and THEY get to OWN it. Watch your local Internet peddler's contract carefully - That is ~$10k you just gave away. With two sites, go with point to point DDS-II, and play cute and order 56kb with secondary channel, get good CSU/DSUs that also do 64kb, flip the knobs to 64 kb, and use it. If you want internet connectivity, add it at ONE site, but beware of contracts that may try to prohibit you from using it elsewhere or sharing news with your UUCP dialup friends. Read the fine print in anything PSI sends you. FRAME RELAY is here, and I am about to post a note about it. I doubt that for two sites it makes any sense, buy just maybe you should check it out. ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Fri Apr 5 08:46:11 CST 1991 Subject: Re: Dealing Aggressively with Phone Harassment Mr. Riba ought not to think my comments were ageist or homophobic. As Pat remarked, I was indeed VERY surprised that a person of his age would stoop to such childish phone games. I honestly expected the perpetrators to be some immature college students; instead, it was an immature middle-aged man. And no, it wouldn't be different to me if it WAS a 20-year-old female who was behind it. The type of harassment would probably just have been slightly different. Regardless, it was perverted and annoying. The only reason that I believed it was someone of a different persuasion was primarily because down on campus, I was active in certain organizations which basically were diametrically opposed to what his type espoused. Thus there were some people who thought the best way to make their point was to harass the hell out of me. Well, it was I who had the last laugh that time. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL. ------------------------------ From: Kevin Brown Subject: Re: Bell of PA's Guardian Service Date: 6 Apr 91 14:14:37 GMT X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 247, Message 4 of 6 > Bell of Pennsylvania's Guardian Service ($2/mo for basic jack > repair) has always struck me as being a blatant attempt to take > advantage of people who just aren't aware of certain information. The I believe you are the one not aware of that "certain information". Basic jack repair is covered under the wire maintenance plan, $ .50 /month. The guardian service you're speaking of includes offering a loaner set if the problem is in your CPE. > [As a quick side note, a local television news team discovered that if > the cause for trouble is your phone, and not the line or the jack, > customers will get whacked $56 [$40 for the visit, $16 for 15 minutes > of lineman time] for the service call. No where in the ad does it > mention this.] It doesn't mention it in the add because it's not true. Under the Guardian plan there is no charge regardless of where the problem is. If it's in the jack, Bell of Pa. repairs it free of charge, If it is in your equipment, Bell will leave you a loaner set until yours is repaired. The only time the $56 charge is given is if you do not have a maintenance plan or just have wire maintenance plan and the problem is in YOUR equipment. I'm not saying the plan is a good idea, it's pretty easy to determine if the trouble is in your phone set or in the lines. Please, before you start flaming the local telco's make sure your story is accurate. Kevin Brown Box 72 Moravian College, Bethlehem PA 18018 CSNET/INTERNET: brownK@moravian.edu UUCP...!rutgers!liberty!batman!brownK ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 21:40 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Re: Eight-Party and Ten-Party Ringing in the Bell System Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto Larry Lippman writes in telecom11.257.1: > It's not at all a bit of lore. While it is indeed true that > the Bell System maintained a wide diversity of non-WECo CO > apparatus in telephone companies which they had acquired, this > has little bearing upon the present discussion. I thought that the Bell System stopped taking over independent telephone companies in 1913 or so, pursuant to something called the Kingsbury Commitment, essentially a letter from an AT&T executive or lawyer named Kingsbury to the anti-trust officials of the U.S. Justice Department. Were there exceptions to this rule that allowed the Bell System to continue to acquire independent telcos, or am I just confused? In Canada, most small telephone companies were eventually swallowed up by Bell Canada or one of the other large telephone companies, so that several provinces only have a single telephone company. Nigel Allen ndallen@contact.uucp [Moderator's Note: There have been various court cases involving AT&T over the years, and there was one case (I forget the year) which said AT&T could not buy any more independent telcos except under certain strict conditions: if the independent telco was bankrupt or otherwise unable to provide service and about to suspend operations then AT&T *had* to take over ... nice fair arrangement, eh? About twenty years ago, the Chicago City Council was trying to talk IBT into purchasing the Chicago portion of Centel, a mostly suburban telco serving only a tiny slice of Chicago on the northwest side. IBT was inclined to do so, but the earlier court ruling forbade it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Apr 91 00:10 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Return to the Land of Selective Ringing Organization: Contact Public Unix BBS. Toronto, Canada. A further note about party lines: Bell Canada offers two-party service within urban areas for somewhat less Bell Canada offers two-party residential service within urban areas for somewhat less than regular service. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) requires Bell Canada to offer two-party service as a lower-priced alternative. Anybody can get it, unlike lifeline service in some U.S. states, which is only available to specific low-income groups. However, I suspect many people would quickly get frustrated with having to share a party line with someone else. (A footnote: A while ago, someone in Toronto was running a rather juvenile BBS that he called "The Party Line". I use a different password on each BBS I call, and I try to link it in some way to the name of the BBS. So for a password on "The Party Line", I chose the acronym of the Party of Labor of Albania. I doubt that the sysop recognized it.) Nigel Allen ndallen@contact.uucp ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 14:31:59 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: Cellular Phones for $29 Has the bottom dropped out of the cellular phone market? I cannot imagine it has, yet consider these pending offers in Chicago from Ameritech and Cellular One: Cellular phones for $29 at the Ace Hardware chain. Or, should you want something a little more fancy, the Motorola bag phone, with an Ameritech label on the front of it for $49. Minimum commitment to Ameritech is six months. And what do you have to pay per month? For $29, you get 40 minutes of time to use day or night as you wish ... additional non-prime minutes are 4 (yes, four) cents each! Prime minutes are 40 cents each. Cellular One has the same offer, and in theirs you get the first thirty days of non-prime time free. All the non-prime usage you want at no charge. In both the Cellular One and Ameritech offers, the $29 also gets you two months of custom calling free. Those guys must really be scraping for new customers! PAT ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #274 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa20617; 8 Apr 91 4:16 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa24416; 8 Apr 91 2:47 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12047; 8 Apr 91 1:42 CDT Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 1:18:04 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #275 BCC: Message-ID: <9104080118.ab21746@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Mon, 8 Apr 91 01:17:53 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 275 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Caller ID Hearings in California [Jeff Sicherman] FRAME RELAY - You Can Order Today [Barton F. Bruce] Deposit Five Cents Please! Recording [Clint Fleckenstein] Residential ISDN Survey [Steve Gaarder] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 00:50:35 -0800 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Caller ID Hearings in California Organization: Cal State Long Beach April 1 at 2 PM I attended the California PUC hearing held in the Anaheim city council chambers. Another hearing was held at 7 PM which I did not attend. The official representatives at the hearing included a member of the PUC, an administrative judge (I think), representatives of the phone companies seeking authorization to provide the CLASS services (Pacific Bell, Contel of California, and GTE California), and one from TURN (Toward Utility Rate Normalization - a consumer advocacy group). The latter sat as a panel in front of the PUC officials and were there to answer questions from the public and not as advocates for the organizations they represented. [In fact, a minor disagreement erupted between the PacBell and TURN persons after an answer to a question resulted in the TURN rep addressing the PacBell rep who then complained that this was not an evidentiary hearing ... Now children :-) ] All the represented parties had material describing and defending their positions which were handed out upon entering the hearing. The contents were predictable: the phone companies wanted only per-call blocking and the consumer groups wanted free per-line blocking. The latter was based upon the already existing privacy afforded by the current arrangement of no Caller-ID. The phone companies' view was that per-call blocking guaranteed everyone's rights, including the call recipient's. PacBell presented a rather intricate argument to the effect that per-call blocking signalled to the callee that the caller is intentionally withholding his identity whereas per-line blocking only tells that the caller 'happens' to subscribe to per-line blocking and that the callee cannot discern anything about the caller's intent and must answer the call to determine if it is a party who he wishes to speak with. [ Ignoring what it does say: the caller has a strong desire for privacy ] it's really the old economic issue: prevalent call blocking lowers the value of the service to potential Caller-ID subscribers. PacBell also claimed that five years of market research showed that per-call blocking met the needs of _all_ its customers and that studies showed that per-call blocking satisfied the concerns of nine out of ten of customers and that per-line blocking only increased satisfaction by one percent. No details of the studies to gauge validity were given. They also claimed that a Rochester, NY Caller-ID trial appeared to support their contentions about the sufficiency of per-call blocking. The PUC itself has a Division of Ratepayer Advocates (DRA) whose purpose is to represent the interests of utility customers both within and before the PUC. It had its own handout describing the basic CLASS services, blocking options, proposed schedule for implementation by the companies, proposed rates, and its position on the offering of CLASS services. Briefly, though it has not issued a report or completed an evaluation, it protested the PacBell application and proposed that public participation hearing be held (hence this one) and that market trials be held for six months including the various blocking options to be followed by a survey of the services and blocking options: per-call with no charge, per-call unblocking (blocking default), per-line blocking with no unblocking, and per-call blocking with operator assistance. Note that there is a 1989 law in California requiring that callers be allowed to block the display of their numbers on an individual basis (individual subscriber, not individual call, I think). Also, the California constitution explicitly cites a right to privacy. I will not recount all the issues that were addressed since all have been advanced at one time or another during the discussions here and in the privacy group. However, it was interesting what tone and focus the speakers took. About half the individuals who spoke were senior citizens. This probably reflects the time of the meeting - early afternoon. Many did not have a firm grasp of the more technical details of Caller-ID or the other CLASS services but had well thought out views on the privacy issues and the costs involved. They also pointed out that many of the benefits of Caller-ID would not be available to the public at large, including those on fixed and small incomes who could not afford either the monthly charges or the necessary equipment. In particular, those on Lifeline service - a minimal rate, subsidized form of service for low-income subscribers - could not obtain any advanced service features, CLASS included, without losing their lifeline status. Many of the more dire possibilities were not of interest to most speakers, though there were featured in the consumer group position papers. The major objection to Caller-ID in general was that it would give telemarketers and other commercial 'consumers' and publishers of phone number information access to their phone numbers. This would be true even though many had PAID for unlisted phone numbers precisely to reduce this. Per-call blocking would require them to take extra action every call to enforce a protection they had already paid the phone company for. Many pointed out that it was impractical to expect many of the most vulnerable - children and some elderly or impaired - to remember to dial the blocking code every time. A major argument of the phone companies was that harassing phone calls had declined significantly in areas which had Caller-ID and it was widely known to the public. Speakers pointed out that the proposed Call Trace would provide many of the same protections afforded for that purpose without the liabilities. Nearly all speakers were outraged that the companies were proposing a $10 per use charge for call trace. Most pointed out that since this information is made available to law enforcement only (at customer's request only) and is not made available to the customer, it should be free as other harassment-prevention services are now. PacBell's position is that the high charge is necessary to prevent overuse [Why would someone overuse something they can't get any direct benefit from?] One speaker spoke in defense of the phone company position with a long list of statistics from studies and experience in other parts of the country that minimized most privacy concerns. At the beginning of his presentation he said that he had no connection with either the consumer groups or the companies. After he was through, the administrative judge questioned him further at which time he revealed he worked for a company that developed/marketed Caller-ID type devices (potentially?). I'm not sure whether this reflected knowledge or just suspicion on the part of the judge; at least two previous hearing were held in northern California on March 27 and 28, 1991. The issue of existing ANI-delivery to some 800 and 900 services was brought up and was a surprise to many. The PacBell rep pointed out this was a matter under the control of long distance carriers and governed by FCC Tariff. I and another individual proposed that both per-call and per-line blocking be denied to business line subscribers as a way of discouraging annoying and anonymous telemarketing; which would defeat many of the potential benefits of Caller-ID. An analogy to third class (bulk/junk) mail was made by some. [ Note that third class mail must have a return address.] Block-blocking came up only once but it was getting late (near the five o'clock end to the three-hour hearing) and was confusing to some. I would be interested in hearing about the content of other hearings. BTW: After the hearing adjourned for dinner time, I went up to talk briefly to the PacBell reps about some of the issues and the fact that bill inserts were not adequate means to inform and stimulate public discussion (perhaps they know that !) and that news media needed to be used, especially TV where everyone gets their information suited to modern attention spans. OB John Higdon type comment: In the discussion with the PacBell reps the issue of their (company, not personal) credibility and public-interest arose. I raised the example of the long delayed removal of touch-tone fees and ZUM extension LONG after the rate ruling that went in their favor in return for such changes. She at first tried to claim it was due to regulatory requirements and then backed off this when challenged and then more-or- less shrugged. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: "Barton F. Bruce" Subject: FRAME RELAY - You Can Order Today Date: 7 Apr 91 11:36:50 EST Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. At last! there is now a signigicant and different way to connect ALL your company's scattered LANs into a big WAN. Frame relay is here and you can order it. Some thought Sprint would be first later this year, but WilTel has been beta testing it with some LARGE customers, and has now announced its general availability. The actual switches are not yet in all their POPs, but they will bear the expense of back-hauling your access lines from a switch to the POP near you. What is frame relay? Think of a FAST efficient and cheap (and no packet charges) x.25 network. Your sites will all be part of a CUG (Closed Users Group) so, though you are on a public net, you traffic is on your virtual private net. You need Enet routers that can handle frame relay. Cisco's CAN today. You need an approved T1 CSU (Datalink's is today). You get to use the rest of the T1's DS0s for any other leased line type access they can sell you, since you won't be using all of it for frame relay. Note well that this is distance insensitive, and look at the pricing! They are offering two 'port connection' speeds - 256 kbps, and 1024 mbps. These are obviously four and sixteen DS0s out of the T1 access pipe. The approved CSUs let you gain access to the other DS0s on a seperate port. Their service is provided in PVCs (Permanent Virtual Circuits) between your sites. These PVC have a nominal speed, BUT can support bursts up to the Port Connection speed. The idea here is that you are paying for some average amount of transport, but can get peaks that will be carried. Many companies buy leased lines that vastly exceed their average load just to cater to the bursty needs of their WAN. This *may* solve some of these problems at lower cost. The 'Port Connection' (the ONE physical connection to your cisco box ) supports various lower speed PVCs to many remote sites. Each nominal PVC speed is also some number of DS0s (64 kb - 1 T1 time slot) of bandwidth. I am making a N x DS0 column below, because that number does figure into pricing. Port Connection PVC speed N x DS0 256 Kbps 56/64 Kbps 1 128 Kbps 2 1.024 Mbps 56/64 Kbps 1 128 Kbps 2 256 4 512 8 This is per site pricing, NO local access lines, etc included. It is based on the Port Connection speed, and the total of N x DS0s of PVC bandwidth terminating there. N.B. that you need not subscribe to PVCs between all possible nodes, and that, depending on traffic, you may implement anything between a simple star to a full mesh topology. Each PVC can be whatever speed is needed. Port Connection Size: 256 K 1.024 Mbps ----- ---------- Total DS0s of PVCs $ $ 1 635 1535 2 920 1820 3 1062 2105 4 1176 2390 5 1262 2675 6 1347 2960 7 1404 3245 8 1461 3530 As an example, three nodes A, B, C with A being the central site with very little traffic between B and C could all use 256 K Ports; A would use two 64k PVCs ($920), and the two other sites would only have a 64k PVC to A for $635 each or total for all 3 sites of $2190. If there needed to be a PVC between B and C, each site would pay $920 for $2760 total. If your sites are Boston, NYC, and Albany, these prices are terrible compared to leased 64kb DDS-II lines, but with greater distances, many more PVCs, and enjoying the benefits of the burst capability, this sort of offering could look very attractive. Remember also that each site ONLY needs one high speed serial port into their cisco, not one for each remote served by a PVC. This is a big savings in cisco hardware. This is based on my phone notes after talking to a WilTel sales critter, and could easily contain many errors, but does give some feel for the offering. I think this was officially announced last Monday. Friday I let my Sprint saleswoman go on in detail about how they were going to be first with frame relay much later this year. I then told her about WilTel ... Usual disclaimers: I have NO $ connections to any above companies (not even as a customer - yet). This is just good stuff we all will need to know soon. WilTel is at 1.800.642.2299 - tell them the price is still too high. ------------------------------ From: Clint Fleckenstein Subject: Deposit Five Cents Please! Recording Date: 8 Apr 91 00:41:34 GMT Organization: AlterNet RELAY Network I used to know this, but lost my Post-It note. Anyone know this? There is a number (I think it's in the 313 area code) that you can dial, free of charge, which connects you to the recording that instructs you to deposit five cents. If you know this number (or other such numbers) please leave me E-mail. Clint Fleckenstein fleckens@plains.nodak.edu Meyer Broadcasting Corp. uunet!plains!fleckens KFYR TV-5, Bismarck ND fleckens@PLAINS (Bitnet) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Apr 91 21:30:22 EDT From: Steve Gaarder Subject: Residential ISDN Survey This evening I got a call from Columbia Information Systems, who are, it seems, conducting a survey of interest in "new telecommunications services." As the survey person described them, it was clear that she was talking about a residential version of ISDN, though she did not recognize the term. (ISDN provides two bidirectional digital data/voice channels on one pair.) Basically, what the unknown commissioners of the survey seem to be assessing interest in are four flavors of ISDN: a basic service, which provides two voice line capability and all sorts of special features for $40 "more than you are paying now." A version with a digital data interface would be $50. There were two other versions: one which would let you control your home "energy management" (heating, lighting, etc) remotely for $50, and the same thing for a security system for $45. A version encompassing all of the above would be $60 (more than POTS). ISDN requires an interface unit at the demark; it would lease for $22/month or sell for $700. I'm not sure whether the lease price is included in the rates quoted above, but I think so. I asked her what geographical area was being surveyed; she didn't know, but said that was calling numbers all over the eastern time zone. Steve Gaarder gaarder@theory.tn.cornell.edu ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #275 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21427; 9 Apr 91 3:29 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa18113; 9 Apr 91 1:59 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa20269; 9 Apr 91 0:54 CDT Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 0:00:24 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #276 BCC: Message-ID: <9104090000.ab18265@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Apr 91 00:00:02 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 276 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [Julian Macassey] Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) [Tom Reingold] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [John Slater] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [David E. A. Wilson] Re: I Have AT&T and I Can't Call Home [Randy Borow] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Randy Borow] Re: Looking for NON-Statistical Line Multiplexers [Mike Johnston] Re: 56kbps Alternatives? [Barry Margolin] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Paul S. Sawyer] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers [H. Peter Anvin] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Julian Macassey Subject: Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) Date: 8 Apr 91 14:05:56 GMT Reply-To: Julian Macassey Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article John Higdon writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 273, Message 9 of 9 > At the risk of sounding exceedingly arrogant (too late, Higdon, the > time for that concern is long past), I usually give very short shrift > to people whose SECRETARIES place calls for them. Nothing, but nothing, > is more annoying than, "Mr. Higdon, please." "Speaking." "Mr. Smith is > calling. Can you hold please? [thunk/elevator music]" > In such cases I hang up as quickly as possible. In my work it is a fact > of life that a number of very busy people on very tight schedules call > me routinely and somehow manage to place the calls using their own > fingers on their own dials. Sometimes they even use their own voices to > leave messages. Using a secretary to waste the time of the CALLEE ranks > up toward the top of the rudeness scale. I couldn't agree more. My opinion of these people who inflate their self importance by having minions dial is way down there with pimps. I once did some work for a quadraplegic business executive. He dialled his own calls. He lays on his back and with a head set on his head, uses a "suck and piff" tube to select lines and dial numbers. But for me the final indication that people waste everyone's time by getting minions to dial was witnessed at Paramount Studios. An, "Entertainment Industry Executive", shouted from his office to the secretary's ante-room to "Call Harry Dash". The secretary dialed the call and put the poor bugger on the other end on hold. Then she told Mr. "Executive" that the call was "On line three". So what did Mr. busy, important executive do? He stopped playing with his yo-yo and picked up the phone. I could go on for days about waste, stupidity, ignorance and bad manners on the phone but won't bore anyone further. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: Tom Reingold Subject: Re: Mystery Solved (was: Strange Phone Calls) Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1991 06:50:33 GMT Here are two anecdotes, if you care to read them. I worked at Bellcore where someone had built an experimental phone switch that ran on a UNIX system and was therefore programmable in the way I know best. For outgoing calls, it could read a text file and speak through a DECTALK. I used this to deal with a bureaucracy: I needed to call the state Department of Motor Vehicles, and as is so in every state, the line was eternally busy. After 5:00 pm on the dot, there was no answer. So I had the switch retry every three minutes or so. When it got through, it said, "Hello, hello? Is this the department of motor vehicles? I have someone on the line who wants to talk with you." Then it connected me. I usually find this practice -- even with secretaries -- rude, but I feel less guilt in dealing with the DMV. Everyone in my workgroup got an automated ad, saying that if we called a certain 800 number, we would win a free vacation. It was really obnoxious. This was before 900 numbers existed, though. So I had the phone switch call the 800 number every 90 seconds for about 90 minutes. I had it say something to the effect that the purpose of the call was to make them realize how annoying automated phone calls are and that I sincerely hope that the proprietor consider another line of business. I also implied that his offer was not legitimate. After the 90 minutes, I called and got a woman's voice. She sounded tired. I asked, "Have you been getting my automated messages?" She paused silently, then said sharply, "Hold on a minute." I got a man who cursed me out in the most vile and obscene language you can imagine. He claimed that his business was legitimate and that he was having the phone company trace the calls. Wouldn't it have been funny if he had found out that the "phone company" had made the calls? He also tried to point out that I had only been called once. Of course I pointed out that the total accumulated inconvenience he had caused to many people was probably quite large, so his argument wasn't very strong. It's sort of like stealing a tenth of a penny from everyone's bank account and making millions of dollars. Can you argue that it cost no one a significant amount therefore your deed is insignificant? Anyway, nothing was resolved, and my mean streak was satisfied, for better or worse. Tom Reingold tr@samadams.princeton.edu OR ...!princeton!samadams!tr [Moderator's Note: Would it have been funny if he found out the phone company was making the calls? No, I think not. Your employer might well have gotten sued and you might well have gotten fired, especially if your employer got sued. Out the door on your ass in a manner of speaking. His individual calls to individual phone numbers might well have been obnoxious; they were most likely not illegal. Your repeated telephone calls, intended to harrass, were illegal. People who do these things always lose in court. Do you remember the case involving the very hostile fellow a few years ago who set his computer and modem to call Jerry Falwell's 800 number once a minute for about a month? Once a minute, around the clock, Falwell's automatic call distributor would hand out a call to a 'counselor standing by to speak with you' which was nothing but dead silence. Modems, after all, have nothing to say to anyone, and they don't even start squealing until they hear another of their kind on the line. Some 43,000 calls and about $12,000 - $15,000 later, when the problem was identified (the local Bell and the director of telecom for Falwell's organization both originally thought the problem was a faulty circuit in the ACD or a piece of bad equipment in the CO), they traced the calls and caught the turkey .... he got sued for $50,000 (actual plus punitive) and Falwell won the case. Telco wound up writing it off as goodwill, but they were screaming for blood also where the 'mad dialer' was concerned. I'd take care if I were you. It could get messy. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 12:44:33 BST From: John Slater Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion In article Charles Bryant writes: > It makes me wonder why British Telecom split London from 01 into 071 > and 081. Why not just add a digit? And if eight digit numbers are too > long, why not split into 017 and 018 leaving more room for expansion. > Or even split 01 DXX XXXX into ten areas 01D DXX XXXX removing the > need for the tables to convert old number to new area. And why didn't they split it several dozen other ways too? My favourite would have been north and south of the river, which would make it a lot easier to find the new number as most people know which side of the river a given address is on, from the postcode. Still, they did it and that's an end to it. Except that it isn't: there are medium-term plans to add an extra digit to every phone number in the country, and longer-term plans to rehash the entire system, with lifetime phone numbers (see an earlier thread) and other wondrous things, no doubt. I believe the reason BT didn't choose the "017 & 018" option is that they preferred to keep the entire "01..." sequence clear for as yet unspecified future use. This might well include implementation of some of the schemes mentioned above, I speculate. John Slater Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick Office My email address is John.Slater@UK.Sun.COM, despite what it might say above. ------------------------------ From: David E A Wilson Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 00:04:49 GMT ch@dce.ie (Charles Bryant) writes: > (does anywhere else have variable length local numbers?). Yes - Sydney Australia. Up until last year we had five, six and seven digit numbers in the 02 area code. For example - from the Government page of the phone book: 2 0521 Trafficking-Law Enforcement 29 2622 Bus Travel 240 2111 Boat Moorings With the closure of the old Dalley exchange (205xx) Telecom also deleted the last five digit numbers (according to a newspaper article). More usually - if the STD area code is 0xx then numbers are nx xxxx and in capital cities (STD code 0n) the numbers are nxx xxxx. David Wilson Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 8 09:49:09 CDT 1991 Subject: Re: I Have AT&T and I Can't Call Home I experienced the same problem while I was a student at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign years ago. The campus had just converted their telecommunications system to their own private network, so to speak, with PIN codes, etc. When my PIN went kaput, I called AT&T and got the same befuddled response you did Chris. I couldn't really blame them, though, since I found out that it was the University itself which controlled such things. Apparently, the school did so to enable them to be able to control their network. I would suggest you press your university's telecommunications department for assistance. They SHOULD be the ones who can help you. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 8 14:27:50 CDT 1991 Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Jim Bubler wrote that a phone number once assigned belongs to a customer. While I am on his side, his statement isn't true. Telephone numbers remain the property of telco and can be changed at their whim, etc. Sorry, Jim, but we basically have no rights, so to speak, when it comes to "our" phone numbers. Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL. [Moderator's Note: You are quite correct. Every phone book says it in these words, more or less, "Whenever, in the conduct of its business, the Company finds it desirable to change the number, etc ..." PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Johnston Subject: Re: Looking for NON-Statistical Line Multiplexers Organization: Lehman Brothers Date: 7 Apr 91 15:54:34 In article fernwood!geoff@decwrl.dec.c om (Geoff Goodfellow) writes: > I'm looking for line (two or four wire) multiplexers, that would allow > me to evenly device a 9600 bps line into to two 4800 bps lines, or a > 2400 baud line into two 1200 baud lines. I recall the good ol' Bell > 209A modem used to have this capability. > I CANNOT use Stat-MUX's because its flow control (XON/XOFF/whatever) > would make the line non-transparent to the protocol(s) going over over > it. I need to lines to appear as if they each had a dedicated circuit > of their own. You *can* use Stat-MUX's or at least Micoms. The Micombox 2's we used to use were configurable enough to where you could just disable XON/XOFF flow control along with about a zillion other parameters. We used about 20 of them to remote field locations. Each could be upgraded to 16 ports apiece and all ran up to 9600 baud. I ran into my problem when I attempted to use GNU Emacs remotely over the multiplexed lines. As you may know Emacs doesn't like XON/XOFF *at all*. Never mind that I was the only person out of 80 who used Emacs. I changed all the units over. (It's good to be the king). All of our tubes ran fine without it. These boxes where, if I recall correctly, four wire units and supported RTS/CTS flow control. Michael R. Johnston mjohnsto@shearson.com || mjohnstonn@mcimail.com System Administrator UUCP: uunet!slcpi!mjohnsto Lehman Brothers Inc. Phone: (212) 640-9116 ------------------------------ From: Barry Margolin Subject: Re: 56kbps Alternatives? Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 05:44:46 GMT In article Barton.Bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) writes: > I am not so sure PSI or Alternet do this, but NEARNET here in Boston > gets you to PAY for ALL the necessary Cisco equipment, and THEY get to > OWN it. Watch your local Internet peddler's contract carefully - That > is ~$10k you just gave away. It's not quite that bad. I believe that if you cancel your NEARnet membership the equipment you paid for is transfered to you. NEARnet retains ownership while you're a member so that they can consolidate all the maintenance and management issues. Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp. barmar@think.com {uunet,harvard}!think!barmar ------------------------------ From: "Paul S. Sawyer" Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls Organization: UNH Telecommunications and Network Services Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 16:23:27 GMT In article Our Moderator comments: > When I've received automated voice calls before, I always just hang > up, and everyone should take that approach, to end this latest phone > nuisance once and for all. PAT] I usually put them on hold, so as to waste THEIR time and money; sometimes (when things are REAL dull ...) I put them on the speaker, with the transmitter muted, with varying amusing results ... once during a party someone called and asked for the "head of the house" (whatever that is ... B-) so I said "I'll get him", and put the speakerphone on while we all told anecdotes about companies that use telemarketing while the speaker kept yelling for attention. Come to think of it, that's the only good use I've found for the speakerphone! Paul S. Sawyer {uunet,attmail}!unhtel!paul paul@unhtel.unh.edu UNH CIS - - Telecommunications and Network Services VOX: +1 603 862 3262 Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3523 FAX: +1 603 862 2030 ------------------------------ From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers Organization: Northwestern University Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1991 15:37:27 GMT In article the Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: A COCOT proprietor here in Chicago answered my > complaint one day by sending me a check for 25 cents!. PAT] That isn't something just COCOT proprietors do. I have at least two friends -- also here in Chicago (suburbs) -- that have had the same experience with Illinois Bell: a refund check for $0.25! hpa = H. Peter Anvin (in case you wondered) * Heja Sverige! INTERNET: hpa@casbah.acns.nwu.edu FIDONET: 1:115/989.4 HAM RADIO: N9ITP, SM4TKN RBBSNET: 8:970/101.4 [Moderator's Note: Well, but at least with the IBT refund coupons (I refuse to call them checks!) you can redeem them with your phone bill. They say that on the front of the piece of paper. I would be embarassed to send them a COCOT refund coupon along with my phone bill payment, although I guess I could. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #276 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23519; 9 Apr 91 4:29 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa31373; 9 Apr 91 3:04 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab18113; 9 Apr 91 1:59 CDT Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 1:05:21 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #277 BCC: Message-ID: <9104090105.ab31524@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Apr 91 01:05:07 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 277 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson "Rube Goldberg" CO Installations and Colored Telephones [Larry Lippman] Albania: Privatization Plans? [Nigel Allen] Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones [Carl Moore] My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [TELECOM Moderator] International Misdialing [David E. A. Wilson] Billed Busy Signals [Jack Rickard] Another Kind of Selective Ringing [Mike Coleman] Re: Is There a Selective Ringing Blocker? [Michael P. Deignan] Telecom Humor (Lawyers) [Douglas W. Martin] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: "Rube Goldberg" CO Installations & Colored Telephones Date: 8 Apr 91 23:30:54 EST (Mon) From: Larry Lippman In article 0004133373@mcimail.com (Donald E. Kimberlin) writes: > As to frequency-selective ringers, I came along late in the territory > of an Independent that seemed to have bought its equipment from > wherever there was some that week. You could go into one house and > find and Automatic Electric phone; a WECo in the next, and a Stromberg > in the third ... plus assorted cats and dogs from time to time. Ain't that the truth! Some of the Rube Goldberg installations I have seen in small independent operating telephone companies boggle the mind. A common source of telephones, components and wiring supplies during the 1950's was World War II surplus! In the early 1970's I did some consulting work for an independent telephone company who had a variety of troubles, not the least of which was trouble between some N1 carrier that they had installed between two of their CO's several years earlier. They had excessive transmission loss between the CO's and were unable to maintain line equalization for any period of time. It turns out that to save money, they had run some of the carrier circuit using buried "spiral-four" cable that was war surplus from 1945. The cable was rubber-insulated and its dielectric was badly deteriorated. They sure were upset when I told them it was the source of their trouble and had to be dug up and replaced with a more "state of the art" cable! One of the more memorable independent telephone companies which actually used war surplus telephone apparatus was the Germantown Telephone Company in Germantown, NY (located along the Hudson River somewhat south of Albany). The telephone company was owned by the Bohnsack family, who also owned quite a bit of Germantown (or so it seemed). :-) In all fairness, I must first point out that in 1978 they obtained REA financing, axed their old CO apparatus and installed Stromberg-Carlson electronic Crossreed apparatus. Their old CO was a sight to behold, however, put together by Walter Bohnsack over the years using an extensive amount of war surplus. The first clue that his CO was "different" was the use of grocery store-variety light bulbs as ringing lead ballast lamps! Obtaining copious quantities of war surplus was easy for Walter Bohnsack since he also ran a used telephone apparatus company called Bohnsack Equipment Company (BECO). Some readers may recognize this name from their surplus catalogs from years past. I usually don't mention on the Net the names of specific people and telephone companies I have known and dealt with, but I have made an exception here since I don't believe the Bohnsacks would mind and since some readers may have heard of their used telephone apparatus sales company. > Reminiscent of that time, when WECo built a pink Princess telephone, > AT&T was so proud, they ran an double-page color ad about how modern > they were in {Life Magazine}. One of my neighbors remarked to their > chum who worked for "the phone company" how classy that looked. ... > But then, it was a different time and a different society, wasn't it? Ah, yes, colored telephones. When one now considers the logistics and expense of maintaining stocks of appropriately colored components and cords, it does seem a little silly. I remember how disappointed I was in the early 1970's when colored 500-type sets starting arriving with "neutral" slate station cords instead of those with the matching color. Horrors! - what American tradition will they eliminate next? :-) > And, thanks Larry, for telling me what a "pole-changer" was for. I > saw old references to them, but never in a context that explained what > their function was. They must have been very archaic, for by the time > this kid came along, all the offices I saw had motor generators for > ringing current. I guess they were more maintenance free. I can only > guess pole-changers went out before WW II. In my travels with independent operating telephone companies during the early 1970's, I saw still in service a few ancient AC line operated 20 Hz ringing power plants that used pole changers. They were used with 1A key telephone systems and were manufactured by a company under the tradename "Tele-Ring". I can't remember the name of the manufacturer, though. Larry Lippman @ Recognition Research Corp. "Have you hugged your cat today?" VOICE: 716/688-1231 {boulder, rutgers, watmath}!ub!kitty!larry FAX: 716/741-9635 [note: ub=acsu.buffalo.edu] uunet!/ \aerion!larry ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 01:13 EST From: Nigel Allen Subject: Albania: Privatization Plans? Organization: 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada A two-paragraph news story from Reuters says that Albania's Communist government is planning to privatize some government-owned companies, but does not explictly mentioned telecommunications operations or telecommunications manufacturing. I expect that telecommunications will remain in government hands unless the communists lose power. Here's the story, as it appeared in {The Globe and Mail}, April 6, 1991: Albania Reveals Plan to Privatize TIRANA (Reuters) -- Albania's Communist rulers, struggling with Europe's pooest economy, said they will announce an extensive privatization plan before the end of the month and legalize joint ventures with foreign companies, the Community daily Zeri i Popullit said yesterday [April 5]. It said the move will permit the creation of co-operative enterprises, joint ventures and joint-stock companies financied either by private capital or by loans for the state. Nigel Allen ndallen@contact.uucp ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 16:26:14 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones I recently noticed a city code 836 in the UK for mobile phones. How long has this been around? In country code 1, area code 917 is proposed to serve only cellular and mobile in New York City area (at least part of such cellular and mobile are currently in area 212). Bronx had been proposed to go into 917, then that got changed to Bronx-proposed-to-go-into-718, leaving 917 with no proposed land-lines. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 14:23:50 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack Over the weekend I bought a CPS-200 Call Forwarding System from Radio Shack. At the local store here, they had one left, marked down to $29.95, and I thought that price alone made it worthwhile. This unit does require two actual phone lines; one to accept calls, and the other to forward the call. Since I have 'genuine' call forwarding from Illinois Bell, I won't need it a lot, but one good use came to mind: I'll use it to remotely turn on call forwarding on my main line! The device takes calls on (relative to it) 'line 1' and forwards the call on (relative to it) 'line 2'. You call on the device's 'line 2' to remotely make changes in the forwarded number and turn the device on or off. Device line 1/2 < = > 2/1 on my phones. So I call on device line 2 (my phone line 1) and it answers after 17 rings. I tell it to 'forward' my calls to 1172-new-number. I hang up and call back on device line 1 (my phone line 2) and my call forces the device to dial out on phone line 1 '1172-new-number'. Presto, forwarding has been established, and subsequent calls to my phone line 1 go to wherever the forwarding (1172) said to go. The only problem is I cannot change that number or cancel forwarding since after forwarding has been established, telco controls my line and I can't get near the device (via phone line 1 / device line 2) until I come home and kill it with 1173. Let me work on this scheme a little longer. PAT ------------------------------ From: David E A Wilson Subject: International Misdialing Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 23:13:55 GMT From the {Sydney Morning Herald} (Column 8), April 8: The other morning, about 4 o'clock, Philippa Holly, of Oatley, was woken by the phone. The caller, in Spain, was trying to get a company in Minneapolis, Minnesota. After persuading the caller that Oatley wasn't in Minnesota, she went back to bed, but five minutes later he came on for the same number. Philippa has since found out that the area code for Minneapolis is 612 - the caller had omitted the 1 for the United States, so 61 got him Australia, the 2 the Sydney area, and the rest the Oatley number. Column 8 can report having been continually called by someone in Boulogne trying to dial a number in Manchester, whose code on the British system is 61. As always with this sort of wrong number, the calls came in the dead of night. Are there any other area codes, when wrongly dialed, start bells ringing out here? (Then in the same column on April 9): There are more possibilities of mis-dialed calls coming to Australia than we thought. Australia's international code is 61, and a 2 after that puts the caller into the Sydney network. There are, according to Paul Gray, of Woollahra, 235 places in the US with area codes starting with 61, including all Minnesota starting with 612. Tom Hubbard, of Girraween, lists Basle, Benghazi, Brasilia, Ljubljana (Yugoslavia), Ottawa, Patrai (Greece), Posnan (Poland), Windhoek (Namibia), Limerick and Madan (Indonesia), as well as Manchester, as having local codes starting with 61. David Wilson Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au [Moderator's Note: I think the columnist meant to say 'there are 235 places in the world with area codes starting with 61' ... there certainly are not that many area codes in the USA like that. Even so, is his comment correct? ... I've not counted them all to see. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Apr 91 14:22:38 GMT From: Jack Rickard Subject: Billed Busy Signals I've had continuing problems with both Sprint and Telecom*USA over the past year regarding multiple billing entries for busy signals. I use a modem and automated mailing software to contact other systems through Fidonet. If the modem receives a busy signal, it makes another attempt a minute or so later. On the bill, I routinely find a series of calls to the same number, spaced two minutes apart, each billed for a minute. The final call of the series of course, is several minutes in duration indicating I did finally connect. I've monitored the system and it is working perfectly. But in the course of a month I accumulate forty or fifty of these one minute billed entries at twelve cents each. I recently spoke with a gentleman from Telephone Express. He avows that this is a by-product of software switching and that their use of DMS-250 switches would eliminate these billing entries. Anyone know the straight scoop on this little problem and how I can eliminate it? Jack Rickard IDIC Fan Group Net 104 UFGate: 1:104/2@FidoNet 14249 E Kansas Pl. #203 UseNet/FidoNet Gateway for Net 104 Aurora, CO 80012 AKA: z200.n5000.f400.metronet.org (303)755-1681 (data) (303)752-9060 (voice) [Moderator's Note: You can't eliminate it by yourself. Only your long distance carrier can do so. The problem you describe is common with any telecom organization unable/unwilling to obtain 'answer supervision' from the serving local telco. The 'supervision' detirmines when a call has been answered, or if it was answered. AT&T and the Bells have it, most of the others do not. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Mike Coleman Subject: Another Kind of Selective Ringing Organization: Twin Sun, Inc Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 01:16:29 GMT In alt.privacy, greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.) writes: > These already exist. You dial, then must supply a code sequence before > the phone will ring. The caller's name appears on a display so you can > decide whether or not to answer. I'm not sure when it was I saw heard of > this device, but it was long before all this talk about Caller ID. Does anyone know if these are available in any kind of affordable form (i.e., not part of a huge phone system)? This sort of thing strikes me as being considerably more useful than Caller ID. In its simplest (but still useful) form, it could just ring a bell (or something) when hearing a short touch-tone sequence. An outgoing message would be nice, too. The technology of telecommunications seems to excel at dreaming up capabilities which irritate the hell out of the little guy (Caller ID included here). How about something that works in his favor? Mike Coleman ------------------------------ From: "Michael P. Deignan" Subject: Re: Is There a Selective Ringing Blocker? Organization: Small Business Systems, Inc., Esmond, RI 02917 Date: Mon, 8 Apr 1991 23:32:26 GMT tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) writes: > This is why there is a "normal" output ... that is the one you > hook your telephone to, and it only rings when someone dials > your "normal" phone number. Maybe I'm confusing the issue here. In my area, you can have three phone numbers ring at the same locale: NET Gives Me: I use it for: -------------------- --------------- a. Short-Short ring -> fax b. Normal ring -> dial-in modem c. Long ring -> voice Of course, I can switch the [b] and [c] usage around if need be. However, Hello's device only allows you to split [a] and [b]. Now, I've also got [c] ringing ... But, since Hello only splits the line twice, I have to split the line coming from the wall ... ie: /-- fax (short-short) /----> hello direct box --- wall -- 2-in-one splitter \-- modem (normal) \----> voice phone (long) So ... regardless of which ring I'm actually getting, the phone will ring. Very annoying, especially if it is three in the morning, and it is just a fax. What I need to do is "block" the phone from ringing unless its a "long" ring. Or, I could use a three-way call director, if anyone has one of those. The above setup is tenative, so I can always play around with it more (ie: make the "voice" the short-short if I really had to.) But, that in itself makes more problems. I COULD switch the modem and the voice phone, but then the modem will "answer" the phone unless I get to the phone in time, since the modem just detects a ring and picks up as needed. That's why I've got the fax and modem on the ring detector, so the wrong device won't pick up. Clearer, or did I just make it more confusing? Michael P. Deignan Domain: mpd@anomaly.sbs.com UUCP: ...!uunet!rayssd!anomaly!mpd Telebit: +1 401 455 0347 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 15:53:41 PDT From: "Douglas W. Martin" Subject: Telecom Humor (Lawyers) After successfully passing the bar exam, a man opened his own law office. He was sitting idle at his desk when his secretary announced that a Mr. Jones had arrived to see him. "Show him right in!" our lawyer replied. As Mr. Jones was being ushered in our lawyer had an idea. He quickly picks up the phone and shouts into it "..and you tell them that we won't accept less then fifty thousand dollars, and don't even call me until you agree to that amount!" Slamming the phone down he stood up and greeted Mr. Jones; "Good Morning, Mr. Jones, what can I do for you?" "I'm from the phone company" Mr. Jones replied, "I'm here to connect your phone." Doug Martin martin@nosc.mil [Moderator's Note: Thanks for a delightful close to this issue! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #277 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01343; 10 Apr 91 13:46 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12726; 10 Apr 91 12:00 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa07864; 10 Apr 91 10:52 CDT Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 10:12:21 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #278 BCC: Message-ID: <9104101012.ab04853@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Apr 91 10:12:12 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 278 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [Michael Coleman] Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack [Tim Irvin] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Andy Jacobson] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Robert E. Zabloudil] Re: Multi-Line Ringer Sought [Julian Macassey] Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? [Mark D. Studebaker] Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 [Alex Pournelle] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Tim Oldham] Re: Cellular Phones for $29 [Randy Borow] Re: My First Month of Caller ID in Atlanta [David Gast] Re: Telephones in Taverns and Restaurants [Darren Alex Griffiths] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Michael Coleman Subject: Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department Date: 9 Apr 91 19:21:46 GMT telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) writes: > So I call on > device line 2 (my phone line 1) and it answers after 17 rings. I tell > it to 'forward' my calls to 1172-new-number. I hang up and call back So... What's your phone number, Mr. Townson? ;-) [Moderator's Note: Many people know my number -- and some say they've got my number (!) :) ... but the catch is, if anyone answers within 17 rings the deal is off, and when it does answer, you need my password. Then, it would help if you knew the number of the second line so you could dial it and activate the first line. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Tim Irvin Reply-To: irvin@northstar.dartmouth.edu Subject: Re: My New Toy: Call Forwarder From Radio Shack Date: Tue, 09 Apr 91 09:18:15 -0500 In TELECOM Digest V11 #277, Moderator writes: > The device takes calls on (relative to it) 'line 1' and forwards the > call on (relative to it) 'line 2'. You call on the device's 'line 2' > to remotely make changes in the forwarded number and turn the device > on or off. Device line 1/2 < = > 2/1 on my phones. So I call on > device line 2 (my phone line 1) and it answers after 17 rings. I tell > it to 'forward' my calls to 1172-new-number. I hang up and call back > on device line 1 (my phone line 2) and my call forces the device to > dial out on phone line 1 '1172-new-number'. Presto, forwarding has > been established, and subsequent calls to my phone line 1 go to > wherever the forwarding (1172) said to go. The only problem is I > cannot change that number or cancel forwarding since after forwarding > has been established, telco controls my line and I can't get near the > device (via phone line 1 / device line 2) until I come home and kill > it with 1173. Let me work on this scheme a little longer. I can see only one way around this, and that requires that IBT and NET have the same features. If you get a distinctive ringing feature on your "phone line 1/device line 2", and have IBT Call Forwarding activated to only work on your Main number (not your distinctive ring number). Then to cancel Call Forwarding, call your distinctive ring number, which will ring through to the Ripoff Shack box and your off and running. And since your distinctive ring number will "ring-ring", you will only have to wait nine rings (actually 8-1/2 :) -- an added bonus. Tim Irvin [Moderator's Note: Bravo! You found the solution, and yes, I do have a distinctive (short double-ring) number attached to my first line and no, it is not set to forward when the main line is forwarded. I have not yet tested to see if your theory of it 'answering in half the time' is valid. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 09 Apr 91 14:04 PDT From: Andy Jacobson Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable It would appear to me that the LEC makes no money on the distribution of white pages, as they cost nothing to the local subscriber, and contain no paid advertising. To the contrary, the LEC apparently does so as a public service to the users of their service. Perhaps initially upon the introduction of charge for DA, the LEC might have argued before the PUC that the availability of white pages would keep directory service free for those not too lazy to use them. Aside from that, and the introductory information on service ordering, etc. I don't see the LEC having a whole lot of use for them. Certainly the availability of white pages cuts DA revenue somewhat, but I doubt that much regular traffic would be lost without the directory. I know some LEC's are very stingy with the distribution of the directory, perhaps to limit publication runs, or increase DA use. (Especially GTE!!) Although I would hate to see it happen, perhaps Pat's suggestion about LEC's stopping their white pages publication might be taken seriously by some LECs facing stiff competition in the yellow/white business. The various retreads would _have_ to buy the white tapes from the LEC, providing revenue there, and the directories would still be made available through those other publishers. Here in LA we are hit with I believe at least four different yellow pages ripoffs, one of which is PacBell including white pages, covering neighborhoods that aren't their own turf. I wonder if there is some regulation requiring the LEC to publish directories. For if not, I can see some LEC's dropping the white pages as soon as someone else shows up to take up the slack. Andy Jacobson or ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Zabloudil" Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: 9 Apr 91 14:20:25 GMT Organization: Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center, Columbus I suppose what the phone company could arrange to do is copy their database as of the closing date of the directory, and then "sell" competitors copies of THOSE tapes when requested. Assuming, of course, that the price would be set to cover "postage and handling" only, in keeping with the court decision. Our newsfeed was down, so I didn't see the original posting. I imagine, though, that the above would comply with the letter of the court's ruling. Opinions, of course, strictly my own. ------------------------------ From: Julian Macassey Subject: Re: Multi-Line Ringer Sought Date: 10 Apr 91 02:16:45 GMT Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article , erickson@ingres.com (Rod Erickson, x2505) writes: > I'm looking for a ringer which can be connected to three or more phone > lines, providing distinctive ringing for each. > Does such a device exist? Yes, it does. One such device is the Viking Electronics PA-2A. It takes up to six incoming CO lines and emits an "adjustable loud Warble" Cost about $86.00 at your local telephone parts distributor. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: "Mark D. Studebaker(813" Subject: Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? Reply-To: "Mark D. Studebaker(813" Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, Florida Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 17:41:56 GMT The new "Notes on the Network" is just out from Bellcore for $395. "Over 1050 pages and 385 graphic depictions, including ... CCS, CLASS, updated numbering plan considerations, and synchronization. Over 80% of the material is presented for the first time in this issue." Order from Bellcore: 800-521-CORE or 908-699-5800. "BOC Notes on the LEC Networks - 1990" SR-TSV-002275. mark ------------------------------ From: Alex Pournelle Subject: Re: It is Now Official: 416 to be Split Into 905 Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 05:24:20 GMT dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > In article , TONY@mcgill1.bitnet (Tony > Harminc) writes: > The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten > digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no > sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls > intra-NPA. Any NXX number can then be used as an area code, and as an > exchange prefix within any area code. In the interest of user- > friendliness, Bellcore recommends not assigning the same NXX as an > area code and as a prefix within the area code. (So we won't have a > 201-201 central office in Northern NJ.) At least in Pac*Swell's southern area, this isn't QUITE true: there *IS* a 213-213 exchange; actually, a "psuedo-exchange"; the Big Book of Prefixes (Higdon will doubtless give out the real name:-) for the L.A. LATA lists 213-213 as "Pseudo-POTS for local 800 service" or something. The indication I got was that it wasn't a "public" exchange, but one for phones the Great Unwashed should never see. Yes, there was also a 213-818, an 818-818 and an 818-213 as I recall. I think they had the same kind of designations. Not a phone-weeny, just leafing through my roommate's stuff, Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others ...elroy!grian!alex; BIX: alex; voice: (818) 791-7979 fax: (818) 794-2297 bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 24/12/3 BIX: alex ------------------------------ From: Tim Oldham Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 15:35:19 BST Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Organization: BT Applied Systems, Birmingham, UK In article John Slater writes: > I believe the reason BT didn't choose the "017 & 018" option is that > they preferred to keep the entire "01..." sequence clear for as yet > unspecified future use. This might well include implementation of some > of the schemes mentioned above, I speculate. I believe (and I don't speak for my employer on this) that as 01 is already the international dialling sequence (eg the USA is 0101), 017 and 018 were out of the question, or just plain confusing. London was split as it was (Central/Outer) because Central London has a much higher growth rate of demand for numbers. For example, there is a high concentration of companies in Central London, and a lot of them are extending their fax and direct-dial facilities as they grow and/or replace their PABXs. Mercury were also demanding more numbers. While BT put forward the recommendation, paid for the advertising to make it a success, and in so doing provided more numbers for Mercury to use, Oftel (the UK Telecomms regulator) had to approve the plan. I would also dispute John's claim that most people know which London districts are North or South of the river. I don't speak for BT on any of this. Tim Oldham, BT Group Computing Services tjo@its.bt.co.uk ...uunet!ukc!its!tjo ------------------------------ From: rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com Date: Mon Apr 8 16:48:32 CDT 1991 Subject: Re: Cellular Phones for $29 Now, Pat, do you really think Cellular One and Ameritech Mobile are truly scraping for customers? On the contrary, I believe they are simply trying to rope the customers in: make great offers (short-term, they're great deals), but make subscribers commit to a time period of service (long-term, costly to customers but $$$ for the cellular companies). I've noticed here in Chicago's suburbs that within the last 12 months, I have seen more and more cars with those recognizable cellular antennas protruding from the back of their vehicles. It's obvious that mobile phones are no longer considered a luxury for the rich only, but a necessity or desired tool for the not-so-rich (like myself -- do you know how many times my old car has broken down and the phone has saved the day?). Randy Borow AT&T Communications Rolling Meadows, IL. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 21:44:06 -0700 From: David Gast Subject: Re: My First Month of Caller ID in Atlanta Robert Jacobson wrote: > The "alleged horrors" which Bill Berbenich has not yet experienced as > a result of one month of Caller ID have to do with duration and > penetration. The telcos commonly pass off one month tests of small > service populations as scientific surveys and are always relieved for > their customers when alleged horrors do not occur. The point is to > wait a couple years when a few tens of millions of more people are > forced into Caller ID and the files have started being built up. Then > let's see if the horrors happen, Bill. The Moderator moderated: > What about in places like New Jersey, where Caller*ID has been a > reality now for about a year? I was at one of the CPUC Caller ID hearings. Sure enough one of the phone companies was there spouting off information from a small test in rural Kentucky (this is LA!) that lasted about one month. Of course, when one of the people in the audience asked to see the test questions, the test results, and the like to verify that the test actually proved what the company said it did, he was told that the information is not available to the public. (It is apparently available to participants in the formal hearings, however). Mr Jacobson, of course, is correct. Most businesses do not have devices to trap the incoming phone numbers at the present time, but per other messages "Caller ID RS-232 Interface Needed" we know that they are available. Additionally, the value of the information will come as companies know not just one call, but hundreds of calls. When they can say "Oh, it's just Bill, he never buys, let's not answer the phone" or "It's Sam from redlined area Y, no need to answer," etc. Additionally, these people will not necessarily be calling you from intra-LATA phones, so if you have been ignoring out of area calls during dinner, you don't know if Radio Shack (or someone Radio Shacked disseminated the information to) has been calling you. Finally, you should not necessarily expect that these people will only call you up, they can also send junk mail, send you junk mail with different prices/specials, or adjust the prices at the store. In most respects, you cannot know how the information about you was used. David Gast gast@cs.ucla.edu [Moderator's Note: There was one thing I was mistaken about. In New Jersey, Caller-ID has not been around a year; it has been around for about three years. Still, no horror stories. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Darren Alex Griffiths Subject: Re: Telephones in Taverns and Restaurants Date: 9 Apr 91 22:01:35 GMT Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA In article kitty!larry@uunet.uu.net (Larry Lippman) writes: > I don't know if they are still in business, but during the > 1970's in Hartford, CT there was a tavern called "The Dialtone Lounge" > that had a telephone at every table and booth. While there was no > outside line access, one could call in orders and call from one table > to another. Calling from table to table was a great way to initiate > conversations with the opposite sex, and probably accounted for the > popularity of the establishment! :-) Maybe it's just me, but I don't think calling up a pretty girl who happens to be sitting across from me is a great way of picking her up. I suppose if I already knew someone and was intimidated to see her in person I might call her at home (although I've never been in that situation of-course :-) ) but other than that I think I would just walk up an say hello, buy her a drink or "accidently" spill chocalate ice-cream on her new white blouse as a way of starting a conversation. Perhaps someone could comment on why people feel more comfortable talking on the phone in establishments like that, I can certainly understand preferring to talk to someone on the phone, but when there in the same room it's wierd. There is a similar place in a central California town called King City (also known as speedo trap alley) on highway 101. An old girlfriend once called me from there (I was in Berkeley not at the bar) but it took me about a year to find it on my trips down to Santa Barbara afterwards. I haven't been there in quite awhile but the last time I visited it all the phones were GTE (ick!!) and it was designed for truckers, which means it had a four acre packing lot for all of the 18 wheelers. Darren Alex Griffiths (415) 708-3294 dag@well.sf.ca.us ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #278 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29592; 11 Apr 91 2:43 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa10442; 11 Apr 91 1:10 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa21711; 11 Apr 91 0:03 CDT Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 23:32:16 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #279 BCC: Message-ID: <9104102332.ab19373@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Apr 91 23:32:08 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 279 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones [John R. Covert] Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones [Spyros C. Bartsocas] Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing [John Higdon] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Jim Budler] Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable [Andy Jacobson] Re: Cellular Phones for $29 [ROMANSKI@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu] Re: My First Month of Caller ID in Atlanta [Scott Alexander] Re: Strange Phone Calls [Mark Walsh] Re: Billed Busy Signals [Cristobal Pedregal-Martin] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Colum Mylod] WXYZ (was Re: New FCC Modem Tax?) [Robert E. Zabloudil] Phone Audio to RCA Jack [James Blake] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 11:36:37 PDT From: "John R. Covert 09-Apr-1991 1436" Subject: Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones > I recently noticed a city code 836 in the UK for mobile phones. How > long has this been around? This is the way it has been done since the advent of cellular several years ago. 0836+6D is Vodaphone, 0860+6D is BT Cellnet. In Germany, 0161+7D is C-Netz. In Australia it's 018+6D. All cellular numbers, regardless of location in the country, are assigned numbers within the cellular prefix. Cellular phone users do not pay for incoming calls; the caller, regardless of location, pays for the call to the cellular customer. There is a special rate for calls to cellular phones from within the country; when calling cellular phones from outside the country, only the normal international rate applies. This creates the interesting situation that it is cheaper to call German cellular phones from outside Germany than from within Germany. Warning: Both Vodaphone and BT as well as Telecom Australia Mobilenet charge you for reaching the "it has not been possible to connect your call" recording. I believe this violates CCITT Recommendations, but I don't know how to get it fixed. Germany does not have this problem. john ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 14:17:03 -0400 From: "Spyros C. Bartsocas" Subject: Re: Separate "City" Code for Mobile Phones > I recently noticed a city code 836 in the UK for mobile phones. ... > In country code 1, area code 917 is proposed to serve only cellular > and mobile in New York City area (at least part of such cellular and Although Greece does not have cellular phones, there is a similar setup for beepers. All beepers are in area code 921. As until a few years ago 9 was used to call Cyprus, there no other area codes starting with 9. About this special setup between Greece and Cyprus: Until a few years ago you could call Cyprus as a long-distance call instead of an international call. The calling sequence was [long distance] - 9 - [Cyprus areacode] - [telephone number]. I do not know if there was a similar setup from their side. Now the setup is similar as to most other places in the world ([international] - [357]- ....). Spyros Bartsocas scb@cs.brown.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 20:20 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Another Kind of Selective Ringing Mike Coleman writes: > In alt.privacy, greg@hoss.unl.edu (Lig Lury Jr.) writes: > > These already exist. You dial, then must supply a code sequence before > > the phone will ring. The caller's name appears on a display so you can > > decide whether or not to answer. > Does anyone know if these are available in any kind of affordable form > (i.e., not part of a huge phone system)? > This sort of thing strikes me as being considerably more useful than > Caller ID. Oh yes, these little boxes are quite available and are relatively inexpensive, and will become more so as CLASS services become more widespread. But as to your assertion that the device is more useful than Caller ID, not only do I disagree but counterassert that the device is rude to callers. First, you insist that a caller must have a DTMF-capable phone to aspire to the higher levels of your graces. No entry of digits would, I assume, be construed as an "unknown caller" or worse, "withholding of ID". Second, this wonderful device answers your phone every time, charging the caller for all attempts, successful or not. So your [fill in the relationship of someone close to you] is stranded and calls you from a COCOT that disallows DTMF after call completion. Not only has that person been unsuccessful, but has lost coin in the process. As a person who potentially would be rejected by Call Block (tm), I can assure you that I would rather have the line not answered or a rejection recording come from the CO at no charge than face one of those Rube Goldberg boxes, knowing that I had just paid for the privledge. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Jim Budler Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Organization: Silvar-Lisco, Inc. Date: Wed, 10 Apr 1991 09:03:50 GMT In article rborow@bcm1a09.attmail.com writes: > Jim Bubler wrote that a phone number once assigned belongs to a ^_ that's a /d/ > customer. While I am on his side, his statement isn't true. Telephone > numbers remain the property of telco and can be changed at their whim, > etc. Sorry, Jim, but we basically have no rights, so to speak, when it > comes to "our" phone numbers. > [Moderator's Note: You are quite correct. Every phone book says it in > these words, more or less, "Whenever, in the conduct of its business, > the Company finds it desirable to change the number, etc ..." PAT] I agree we have no rights. 8^( But whether the phone number belong to the phone company or not, the right to associate that number to my name should not belong to the phone company. What I tried to articulate was that now that the Supreme Court has taken away their right to claim copyright on an expression of that association of name to number, they will chose to replace the income by charging people who wish their name to number association to be public. Thus everyone listed in white pages will have paid for that publication and the phone company will have made their bucks, and the copying will be an extension of their customer's desire of that name to number association being public information. And therefore my desire to be non-published will become free. jim P.S. Bubler isn't bad, I usually get Butler, of course, but I've also been called Butter, and Budder. 8^) Jim Budler jimb@silvlis.com Silvar-Lisco +1.408.991.6115 703 E. Evelyn Ave. Sunnyvale, Ca. 94086 ------------------------------ From: Andy Jacobson Subject: Re: Supreme Court: White Pages Not Copyrightable Date: 9 Apr 91 21:04:00 GMT It would appear to me that the LEC makes no money on the distribution of white pages, as they cost nothing to the local subscriber, and contain no paid advertising. To the contrary, the LEC apparently does so as a public service to the users of their service. Perhaps initially upon the introduction of charge for DA, the LEC might have argued before the PUC that the availability of white pages would keep directory service free for those not too lazy to use them. Aside from that, and the introductory information on service ordering, etc. I don't see the LEC having a whole lot of use for them. Certainly the availability of white pages cuts DA revenue somewhat, but I doubt that much regular traffic would be lost without the directory. I know some LEC's are very stingy with the distribution of the directory, perhaps to limit publication runs, or increase DA use. (Especially GTE!!) Although I would hate to see it happen, perhaps Pat's suggestion about LEC's stopping their white pages publication might be taken seriously by some LECs facing stiff competition in the yellow/white business. The various retreads would _have_ to buy the white tapes from the LEC, providing revenue there, and the directories would still be made available through those other publishers. Here in LA we are hit with I believe at least four different yellow pages ripoffs, one of which is PacBell including white pages, covering neighborhoods that aren't their own turf. I wonder if there is some regulation requiring the LEC to publish directories. For if not, I can see some LEC's dropping the white pages as soon as someone else shows up to take up the slack. Andy Jacobson or ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 14:34:10 EDT From: ROMANSKI@ucf1vm.cc.ucf.edu Subject: Re: Cellular Phones for $29 Speaking of scraping for customers; here in west central Florida, we have a price war going on between some "trunkers" for phone jack installs. I've been following this saga in our local paper for a few months now. (Abbreviated classified ads): Trunker 1: jacks= $25.00. Next day; Trunker 2 enters picture: jacks= $24.95. Two weeks later; Trunker 1: jacks=$20.00. Trunker 2: jacks= $19.95. One month later; Trunker 3 enters picture: jacks= $20.00, catv outlets= $30.00 and up. Trunkers 1 & 2: remain the same. Two days later; Trunker 1: jacks= $19.00, catv= $30.00. Trunker 2: jacks= $19.95, catv= $30.00. Trunker 3 remains the same. One week later; Trunker 1 remains the same. Trunker 2: jacks= $15.00, catv= $30.00. Trunker 3 remains the same. What are other Trunker prices like in other parts of the country? I have lots of IBM type II cable outlets to be installed here. I'm thinking of calling the $15.00 per jack guy! Or, maybe I should wait until the prices drop more? BTW, our definition of a Trunker down here is generally someone who went to a certain "un-named" electronics chain, bought their book on "HOW TO INSTALL YOUR OWN PHONES", and works out of the trunk of his bomber. This guy will on occasion try to add jacks to Key Systems and hose everything up. ** BEWARE OF THE TRUNKER, HE'S EVERYWHERE!!!! ** PS: Hope I haven't offended any of you on the net. (Disclaimer) ------------------------------ From: Scott Alexander Subject: Re: My First Month of Caller ID in Atlanta Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 11:24:12 PDT In the latest {Unix Today}, there was an article saying that HP is coming out with software for capturing Caller ID information. (Unfortunately, in a fit of insanity, I threw that issue out. Perhaps someone else can come up with more details.) Apparently they believe that the availability of Caller ID is getting to the point where they can market such a product. I would expect to start seeing other companies making similar offerings until there is a cheap turn-key system for the PC. That's when I expect the horror stories to start. Scott Alexander salex@devvax.jpl.nasa.gov ------------------------------ From: Mark Walsh Subject: Re: Strange Phone Calls Date: 9 Apr 91 17:10:27 GMT Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA From article , by paul@unhtel.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer): > sometimes (when things are REAL dull ...) I put them on the speaker, > with the transmitter muted, with varying amusing results ... once > during a party someone called and asked for the "head of the house" > (whatever that is ... B-) so I said "I'll get him", and put the > speakerphone on while we all told anecdotes about companies that use > telemarketing while the speaker kept yelling for attention. Which brings up an interesting question that I have had. Yes, I too find these most annoying. When the automated solicitors prompt you to leave information on their machine, I leave a message consisting of an incoherent diatribe of grotesque words and concepts. (The last one had something to do with sexual activity.) Anyway, I know that obscene phone calls are illegal, but what if you are not the originator of the phone call? Mark Walsh, KC6RKZ ------------------------------ From: Cristobal Pedregal-Martin Subject: Re: Billed Busy Signals Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 10:50:41 EDT Reply-To: Pedregal@cs.umass.edu In Article 15305 in comp.dcom.telecom, Jack.Rickard@f555.n104.z1.fidonet.org (Jack Rickard) writes: > I've had continuing problems with both Sprint and Telecom*USA over the > past year regarding multiple billing entries for busy signals. And our esteemed Moderator remarks: > [Moderator's Note: You can't eliminate it by yourself. Only your long > distance carrier can do so. The problem you describe is common with > any telecom organization unable/unwilling to obtain 'answer supervision' > from the serving local telco. I have noticed a similar phenomenon calling Spain this last month: I get a busy signal and soon thereafter the characteristic high-pitch short tone (forgive my ignorance of the technical terms here) which one usually hears when international calls are answered. I do a bit of international calling, and this never happened to me before; plus, I remembered seeing a sign in a German PTT cautioning customers that "calls to Spain - due to equipment in Spain - start being billed after a few seconds regardless of whether there is an answer there". I remember it distinctly (this was about two years ago) because it annoyed me :-) So I called AT&T (my LD company) and described (in my layman's terms) the phenomenon. They assured I won't be billed for these "calls". I'll keep an eye on my next bill, and report what happens. Has anyone had a similar experience? And, what are the appropriate terms here (for the synch tone, etc.)? Cristobal Pedregal Martin internet: pedregal@cs.umass.edu || phone: +1-413-549-5137 (home) postal: LGRC - COINS Dept. --- UMass/Amherst, MA 01003 --- USA ------------------------------ From: Colum Mylod Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Date: 10 Apr 91 09:00:55 GMT Reply-To: Colum Mylod Organization: Oracle Europe In article ch@dce.ie (Charles Bryant) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 266, Message 3 of 16 > With our bills Telecom Eireann customers have got a leaflet giving > the first stages of the 01 area number expansion plan. [...] > From April 8th all numbers starting with 69, 8 will have a 2 added > to make them 269 XXXX and 28X XXXX. Lucky you getting some info, even if they stick in a bill too! Those of us dialling from overseas (where publicity on the changes is zilch) are just getting tri-tone for the numbers that changed on 8 April. Can Telecom Eireann not afford some message machines to tell us what has changed, instead of playing do-da-de and putting more work on enquiries services? Does any other telco not put out a message on changed numbers? London is still doing so for calls to 1 or for incorrect 71/81 numbers, as is the Dutch PTT. Colum Mylod cmylod@nl.oracle.com Above is IMHO ------------------------------ From: "Robert E. Zabloudil" Subject: WXYZ (was Re: New FCC Modem Tax?) Date: 10 Apr 91 14:11:05 GMT Organization: Defense Logistics Agency Systems Automation Center, Columbus In article kabra437@pallas.athenanet. com (Ken Abrams) writes: > radio station WXYZ in Los Angeles yesterday.....". Yes, I know what he meant, but there really is a WXYZ in Detroit, isn't there? ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 18:36:20 PDT From: James Blake Subject: Phone Audio to RCA Jack Has anyone ever come across a device which would allow one to take the line level out from an RCA jack to a telephone line and to take the audio from a phone to a RCA jack? james ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #279 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01708; 11 Apr 91 3:46 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa15730; 11 Apr 91 2:16 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab10442; 11 Apr 91 1:10 CDT Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 0:22:43 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #280 BCC: Message-ID: <9104110022.ab10247@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Apr 91 00:22:21 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 280 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Caller*ID Specifications Needed [Al L. Varney] Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers [Scott Hinckley] Re: Apple Data-PCS Petition for Rulemaking [Donald E. Kimberlin] Re: International Tariff Expertise Sought [Donald E. Kimberlin] Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? [John Higdon] Re: Dublin Number Expansion [Bob Goudreau] Per Line Blocking? [John Higdon] RS-232C to Commodore 64 User Port [Alain St-Denis] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 09:06:45 CDT From: Al L Varney Subject: Re: Caller*ID Specifications Needed Organization: AT&T Network Systems In article @comspec.uucp (David Berman) writes: > Northern Telecom has had their Maestro phones out a while, I think. > And I also believe that the Caller*ID transmissions from the phone > company are kind of standardized. I think. Depends on who/what you mean by the "phone company". Bellcore client companies have a standard. Canada may have another. Independents could have a third. PBX vendors can do all kinds of "secret" transmissions, etc. > Question: Does anyone reading know what is sent out? How the phone > number or alpha information is encoded on the ring cycle? Has it been > done in a reasonable way so that decoding is sensible? (etc) Addresses > the future? Yes. Yes. Yes, it's expansible. It's in there. > Or: Does anyone know where such information is published for > reference? OK ... One more time, with feeling: The information is published FOR PROFIT by Bellcore, and is periodically updated by them. The interface specification for the actual Customer Premises interface for analog telephone lines is in: TR-TSY-000030, "SPCS Customer Premises Equipment Data Interface", Issue 1, November 1988 + Bulletin 1, April 1989 {may be at Issue 2 by now.} This is the electrical interface, at about the level of describing how to build a 1200-baud modem with FSK signaling. The actual messages sent to the interface are in ASCII, detailed in each speification that describes a particular feature using the interface. Refer to: TR-TSY-000031, "CLASS(sm) Feature: Calling Number Delivery", Issue 2, June 1988, + Revision 1, January 1990 TA-NWT-001188, "CLASS(sm) Calling Name Delivery and Related Features", Issue 1, March 1991 {Waiting for Industry Comments} These are two relevant documents, but there are no real limits imposed by TR-30 on the usage of the interface. Use of the interface during Call Waiting is under study. The requirements for ISDN interfaces are documented in other TR's (many). Bellcore documents can be ordered by calling (201) 699-5800, (Mon.-Fri. 8 am to 6 pm) Visa, Mastercard, American Express FAX orders: (201) 699-0936 Telex orders: (201) 275-2090 Mail (with payment in U.S. funds, or credit card information): Bellcore Customer Service 60 New England Avenue Piscataway, NJ 08854-4196 All this and more is available as SR-TSY-000264, "Catalog of Technical Information" and updates/etc are detailed in the monthly periodical, "Bellcore's Digest of Technical Information." Prices (in an old catalog): TR-TSY-000030, $25 (includes Bulletin) TR-TSY-000031, $23 Revision 1 $12 (may be included in new orders?) SR-TSY-000264, No Price stated! Bellcore Digest $60/year, includes the SR-TSY-000264 yearly catalog! (Prices do not include sales tax, Canadian/Mexican or Foreign surcharges, multi-year discounts, etc.) > Further: Will Toronto (416)'s Caller ID transmissions be compatible > with the ones in the United States, say, in AT&T territory? Or will > they be similar, but different, so that Maestro phones in Atlanta, GA, > won't work in Toronto, even though they have fixed the design flaw down > there? Who knows? Depends on Canadian requirements. > (I have even more questions, but hope that I will be able to follow > the thread as others ask in response to your answers ...) [thanks] Well, ask away, but don't expect to be able to construct an interface of understand the messages from the Net, any more than you could construct a real telephone from information only from the Net. Al Varney, AT&T Network Systems ------------------------------ From: Scott Hinckley Subject: Re: Invasion of the Phone Snatchers Date: 10 Apr 91 17:01:58 GMT Reply-To: scott@hsvaic.boeing.com > [Moderator's Note: Well, but at least with the IBT refund coupons (I > refuse to call them checks!) you can redeem them with your phone bill. > They say that on the front of the piece of paper. I would be > embarassed to send them a COCOT refund coupon along with my phone bill > payment, although I guess I could. PAT] When I was in Atlanta (back in the days of the $.10 pay phone) I was connected to a wrong number by one of the bandits. When I called the operator to try and get through to the correct number (I did not have another dime) she would not connect me, but took my name and address. A couple of weeks later I recieved a check (not coupon, real honest-to-goodness check) for $.10 ... which was sent in an envelope with a $.22 stamp on it! That seems like a pretty expensive way to deal with it (operator's time + envelope handler's time + envelope cost + check cost + stamp cost + amount of check.) Internet:scott@hsvaic.boeing.com|UUCP:...!uunet!uw-beaver!bcsaic!hsvaic!scott DISCLAIMER: All contained herein are my opinions, they do not|+1 205 461 2073 represent the opinions or feelings of Boeing or its management| BTN:461-2073 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 03:01 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: Apple Data-PCS Petition for Rulemaking Continuing a thread about Apple Computer applying to operate a radio LAN product with the FCC [last commented in Digest v11, iss153], there was rather expectable news reported in this week's trade press. The following is from {CommunicationsWEEK} for April 10: "TELCOS OPPOSE APPLE SPECTRUM" "By Kathleen Killette" "WASHINGTON - In comments submitted to the FCC, telcos, utilities and others have said Apple Computer, Inc. has not justified a separate spectrum allocation in its petition for personal communications services." "In addition, Apple's critics say the company's petition should be folded into the FCC's broader PCS inquiry, which has been under way since June." (1990, of course.) "This week, the agency will receive more comments on a petition submitted in January by Apple" ... "for data-only PCS. The computer industry's growing interest in wireless technologies is pressuring the FCC to carve out spectrum fpr over-the-air local area data networks." .......... "Apple asked the FCC to allocate 40 megahertz of spectrum in the 1,850-MHz to 1,990-MHz radiofrequency band for `Data-PCS.' Data-PCS would let PC users `access files, peripherals and the gateways of wired and wireless data networks,' within a local area of between 50 and 150 meters, Apple stated." "Data-PCS would use a maximum of 1 Watt of output power and directional antennae, which would let different antennae use the same frequency simultaneously for transmitting and receiving packetized data." "But AT&T opposed Apple's petition, stating that PCS spectrum allocations should not be limited to data-only applications." "Southwestern Bell Corp., St. Louis, agreed, and added that, `Apple's request should be considered, if at all, solely within the context of' the FCC's current PCS inquiry. Apple also wants too much spectrum for Data-PCS and has not proposed and compensation for the existing users of the 1,850-1,990 MHz band, stated Southwestern." "That spectrum currently is allocated to commercial, fixed microwave users that operate private network, such as utiliteis and large corporations. Many of these users are licensed as Operational Fixed Service users and providers." "The Utilities Telecommunications Council" "also objected to Apple's petition, noting that water, gas and electric utilities have invested more than $360 million in radio equipment to operate in the 1,850-1,990 MHz band." "That investment - which supports roughly 2,000 licenses" "-could be stranded if private microwave users are relocated to other frequencies, resulting severe economic hardships, according to the council." (end quote) So, it looks like Apple is getting the typical treatment: Overstated tales of woe from the poor, beleagured utility companies -- who for the most part still enjoy just sticking more capital in their rate bases the way Telcos did for decades. If any argument makes more sense, that put forward by AT&T does...simply to say that PCS should be for both voice and data. But to cry the blues about what is a rather insignificant portion of the total investment of the utility industry just doesn't seem to fit. What could possibly motivate the utilities, who want all the excuses they can find to stick more capital in their rate bases, to jump into this fray? ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 02:18 GMT From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com> Subject: Re: International Tariff Expertise Sought In Digest V11, Iss269, Carl Wright asks: > I am seeking individuals who can discuss how the revenues from > international calls are distributed and determined. Any names are > appreciated. Anywhere in the world. When the story that follows appeared, it brought to mind the the thought that international telecommunications settlements have many participants, but NO experts. Shrouded in a cloud of apparent sophistication, rates are bargained between the telecomm operators of nations, then converted to an artificial unit of currency called a "gold franc." Then, settlements are _supposed_ to be made. However, as the following article suggests, it's "get the rich capitalists" time when it comes to negotiating a split for circuits from the US. But, it gets worse than AT&T would have you know in the article. The other side then sets their outgoing price sky high, which discourages outgoing traffic from their end, thus they have even less to pay. Meantime, your outbound originations go way up, and you owe them most all the time. But to top it all, when they do owe you, they never do pay, just running up the tab for years and years. The "book" way it works is all in the CCITT's Recommendations, but the CCITT carefully avoids any rules about what constitutes a fair division of revenue and how often the bill _will_ get settled. That in mind, see AT&T's latest story about what has been another foreign trade drain on the US economy for decades: "AT&T NEWSBRIEFS "Friday, April 5, 1991 "FOREIGN TRADE - According to the FCC, out of every $1 that U.S. phone customers pay to make international calls, American phone companies keep an average of 25 cents for their share of the connection. The rest - 75 cents - is paid to the foreign phone company in the country where the call is received. At the same time, some foreign countries keep international calling rates for their own residents high to encourage their citizens and businesses to keep out-going calls to a minimum - since the country makes more money from incoming calls. ... In the topsy-turvy world of international phone calling, AT&T gets to keep only 8 cents per minute during peak calls, and it actually loses 14 cents a minute in off-peak calling. ... Today direct dialing is the standard way to phone most countries and the cost of international voice circuits has decreased as much as a hundredfold - but accounting rates have not fallen proportionately. ... "I don't think there's still enough critical mass [of concern] to be able to make a fundamental reform yet," said AT&T's [Tom] Luciano [of international setlements]. Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Hidgon an Expert on 2600 Hz? "Mark D. Studebaker(813" writes: > The new "Notes on the Network" is just out from Bellcore for $395. Be sure to save your receipt in case someone busts into your house accusing you of stealing it! According to the formula apparently used by SBT and the Federal Government, you might be charged with a crime involving $2,400,000. I believe this is in conformity with the prosecution's standard markup of Bellcore documents, no? :-) John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 17:33:03 edt From: Bob Goudreau Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion In article , tjo@fulcrum.bt.co.uk (Tim Oldham) writes: > > I believe the reason BT didn't choose the "017 & 018" option is that > > they preferred to keep the entire "01..." sequence clear for as yet > > unspecified future use. > I believe (and I don't speak for my employer on this) that as 01 is > already the international dialling sequence (eg the USA is 0101), 017 > and 018 were out of the question, or just plain confusing. Beg your pardon? I thought (and your own example seems to prove) that the international prefix was "010", not "01". So where's the ambiguity for 017, 018, or indeed any 01x (as long as x != 0)? Bob Goudreau +1 919 248 6231 Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 20:34 PDT From: John Higdon Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Per Line Blocking? There has been much talk of the hearings concerning CLASS features in California. A widely debated issue at each hearing so far has been the matter of per line vs per call blocking. Many, including some on this forum seem to prefer per line blocking. To me, the term 'per line blocking' would be synonymous with 'no Caller ID'. Why? A customer calls the telco business office to establish service. After the vitals are exchanged, the rep asks, "And which long distance carrier do you want? Measured or unmeasured? Listed or unlisted? Any Custom Calling features? Blocked or unblocked?" "What?", you say. "Do you want your line to always reveal your number to any person you call that subscribes to Caller ID, or do you want it to never reveal it?" Now realistically, what do you think 99.999% of all telephone customers are going to answer at this point? Now as a customer, you order Caller ID. However, the rep becomes uncharacteristically candid with you and points out that ten people in your area have "unblocked" lines and suggests reconsidering your order. So come on now, all you per line blocking advocates. Isn't per line blocking just the new code for "no Caller ID"? John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 10:49:07 -0400 From: Alain St-Denis Subject: RS-232C to Commodore 64 User Port Organization: Environment Canada I would like to interface an IBM compatible with a Commodore 64 through serial ports. Anybody out there know the pin layout of the Commodore 64 user port? Please e-mail. Thank you. Alain St-Denis Centre informatique de Dorval Environnement Canada astdenis@cid.aes.doe.CA (514) 421-4697 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V11 #280 ******************************   Received: from hub.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03328; 11 Apr 91 4:57 EDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id aa12256; 11 Apr 91 3:22 CDT Received: from mailinglists.eecs.nwu.edu by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id ab15730; 11 Apr 91 2:16 CDT Date: Thu, 11 Apr 91 1:50:12 CDT From: TELECOM Moderator [To]: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V11 #281 BCC: Message-ID: <9104110150.ab13342@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Apr 91 01:50:07 CDT Volume 11 : Issue 281 Inside This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Major U.S. Telecom Manufacturer For Sale [Jim Blocker] New Bellcore Area Code Directory [Subodh Bapat] Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? [Leryo Malbito] Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted [Leryo Malbito] Request For Information on Hard Network Problems [Marc Riese] Performing a Party Line Identification Test in the CO [Larry Lippman] Pacific Bell "Airport" Credit Phones [Steve Forrette] Sprintmail's Gateway [Robert Ashmore] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 91 22:17:08 CDT From: Jim Blocker Subject: Major U.S. Telecom Manufacturer For Sale On April 5, Rockwell International Corporation announced that its Network Transmission Systems Division is for sale. The full text of the press release follows: EL SEGUNDO, California (April 5, 1991) -- Rockwell international Corporation announced today that it intends to sell its Network Transmission Systems Division (NTSD), an industry leader in communication transmission equipment. "The Network Transmission Systems Division has achieved a well deserved reputation for innovative, high quality products that have earned it a leadership position in the telephone lightwave and microwave transmission products markets it serves," said Donald R. Beall, Rockwell Chairman and chief executive officer. Beall added "For many years NTSD has been a significant participant in both domestic and international telecommunications. The significant investments we have made in NTSD position this business well to sustain and grow its long-term value." "The sale of NTSD, which we expect to consummate by the end of this calendar year, will help us to achieve our goals for long-term growth in earnings per share and return on equity by allowing us to focus further resources on continued strengthening and growth in our businesses and other actions to enhance shareholder value," Beall noted. The Corporation has retained Dillon, Read & Co., of New York City as its advisor in selling the Network Transmission Systems Division. The Network Transmission Systems Division, with annual sales near $500 million, supplies leading edge products for telephone communication networks including fiber optic transmission systems, microwave transmission systems, digital multiplex products, and digital cross-connect systems. Its customers include both domestic and international long distance carriers, local exchange carriers, and cellular telephone companies. The Division has approximately 3,600 employees, primarily at its principal offices in Richardson, Texas. Other operating locations are in Longview and El Paso, Texas; San Jose, California; Nogales, Mexico; and Georgetown, Ontario. Beall also commented on current fiscal year earnings, stating, "We will be reporting our second quarter earnings about mid-month. As we anticipated earlier this year, we expect earnings will be somewhat below 1990's strong second quarter of 70 cents per share. Even with the uncertainties of the current economic environment, we continue to believe our 1991 earnings per share will be somewhat higher than in fiscal 1990." "Looking further ahead," Beall noted, "our preliminary assessment is that we may see 1992 earnings per share from our on-going operations being similar to the current fiscal year. Our longer term goals for improved earnings per share and return on equity remain unchanged." Rockwell International is a $12 billion, multi-industry company applying advanced technology to a wide range of products in its electronics, aerospace, automotive and graphics businesses. END OF PRESS RELEASE And that's all that I really know at this point, folks. Rumors have it that at least one European company has shown an interest in acquiring NTSD. I have no facts to back this up, though. Jim Blocker KF5IW rwsys.lonestar.org!kf5iw!jim ------------------------------ From: Subodh Bapat Subject: New Bellcore Area Code Directory Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 17:23:25 EDT For those interested in NPA administration, the latest Bellcore catalog has a listing for Technical Report TR-EOP-000093, the 1990 Telephone Area Code Directory. Thus spaketh the blurb: " ... provides all customer-dialable locations in the North American Numbering Plan and their Numbering Plan Area Codes. All major NPA splits are included. {Ed. comment: Not sure if there is any such thing as a minor NPA split.} ... Features ... Alphabetical Listing of Carrier Identification Codes, Numerical Listing of Carrier Identification Codes, Maps showing NPAs with codes, Alphabetical Listings of states with Corresponding Codes, Numerical Listing of codes with Corresponding States, Listing of localities within a state and corresponding codes." This may be ordered for $25.00 from 1-800-521-CORE. This is for information only - I have no affiliation with Bellcore. Subodh Bapat bapat@rm1.uu.net OR ...uunet!rm1!bapat Racal-Milgo, Ft Lauderdale ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 02:02:13 -0400 From: Leryo Malbito Subject: Is a Data Conference Using Three-Way Calling Possible? Would anyone know how one could set up a data conference using three-way calling? This seems like an idea that would be not too difficult to implement, although a friend and I have unsuccessfully tried several times. The most logical way is for him and I to be on the phone, then I go off-hook and dial the bbs (or whatever), then once we come back we somehow connect. Since the bbs will always return an Answer tone, the only variables we have control of are my modem and his ... and the possibilities for both are only originate and answer. One of us two MUST do an originate. It's very confusing and we haven't had much success at all ... although it seems we have exhausted all of our options. The best we got was the first line of the intro screen, then six or seven pages of trash. Oh well, if anyone can help please respond. In addition to fun possibilities this would present the option of remote telecommunications tutoring. [Moderator's Note: You cannot do what you want. The modem has only two conditions: originate and answer. It cannot talk to another modem set in the same mode. Any two of the three can communicate if one is set to receive and the other to transmit. The third one will be (possibly) able to talk to one or the other, but not both. What usually happens is the third modem, in generating its own originate or answer carrier makes the connection so cluttered with noise that none of the three can communicate, as you have found out. I said modems have only two modes: this is not entirely true. My US Robotics Courier 2400 has a third mode called 'transmitter off', allowing it to sit there and silently monitor what is happening otherwise. So with such a modem, you could bring a three-way data connection up successfully provided the third party sat there silently and did not throw carrier at the other two. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 91 02:02:13 -0400 From: Leryo Malbito Subject: Source For Special Screwdriver Wanted A totally unrelated topic: Does anyone have ANY idea where to get those strange screwdrivers that fit screws with two holes in them? I assume the screwdriver looks like some sort of fork with two prongs in it. Does anyone know if they sell these screwdrivers to the general public? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Apr 1991 13:36:00 +0000 From: "(Marc Riese)" Subject: Request For Information on Hard Network Problems I am a student working on network diagnosis and I am looking for descriptions of difficult network problems whose diagnosis involved some degree of reasoning about time and/or space. That is, in order to solve the problem, the dia