Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02614; 6 Jun 92 21:49 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20637 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 6 Jun 1992 19:34:08 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30130 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 6 Jun 1992 19:34:00 -0500 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 19:34:00 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206070034.AA30130@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #451 TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Jun 92 19:34:05 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 451 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Pacbell Data Access Lines (Floyd Davidson) Re: The Phone System Did What? (was Lottery Poses Threat) (Robert Woodhead) Re: Multi-Ring Detection (Jack Adams) Re: Caller ID and DID (Jack Adams) Re: Video Conference Information Wanted (Kath Mullholand) Re: LATAs Crossing State Lines (David Esan) Re: Ground Plane Cell Antenna (Tad Cook) Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Corinna Polk) Re: Atlanta vs. Los Angeles Cellular Carriers (John Higdon) Re: Atlanta vs. Los Angeles Cellular Carriers (Ronald Oakes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) Subject: Re: Pacbell Data Access Lines Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 06:53:27 GMT In article HOLDREGE+_MP%A1%PacifiCare@ mcimail.com (Matthew Holdrege) writes: > DATA ACCESS LINES TESTS AND REQUIREMENTS > All of the tests listed below must be performed during the initial > channel installation. Central Office should be checked prior to the > turn-up date (PTD). > 1) Does the circuit match the customer's needs? > 2) Continuity to the DMARC - and - pair integrity > 3) Circuit needs to be designed if loop has greater than 5DB loss > 4) Check attenuation distortion > 5) Check C-message noise > 6) Check C-notched noise (if SLC-96 is in circuit) > 7) Check impulse noise > 8) Have installer pull dial tone, dial and check for ringing cycle > 9) Insure RJ11 (voice) or RJ45 (data) is installed in the field > 10) Document all readings on benchmark and scratchpad > 11) Have customer perform acceptance test or exercise call-back program Zowieee ... no signal to noise measurement. That probably is the single most critical parameter for normal voice band dial up modems. Basic voice grade circuits are usually spec'd at 24 dB signal to C-notched noise. Data grade circuits usually are 28 dB. > 3 tone slope (Referenced at 1000hz) > Frequency range Allowable variance > 400 to 2800hz -1 to +3db (1db hot to 3db long) This may be confusing. It is correct. The specification is for *loss*, not *gain*, and therefore negative numbers mean "hot" and positive numbers mean "cold". > Impulse noise (15 minutes) Less than 15 hits/15 min. Just in case the significance is missed, this can be translated to one hit caused by a noise burst every minute, and it meets specs ... that is precisely the same specification on every circuit tariffed in the country by every provider, local or long distance. Floyd ------------------------------ From: trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead) Subject: Re: The Phone System Did What? (was Lottery Poses Threat) Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 10:45:18 GMT rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) writes: > Specifically, if the computer controlling > your fuel injection system fails, has your car crashed? Your car's computer has crashed. The car may well crash soon thereafter. Happy motoring... ;^) Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26546-adams) Subject: Re: Multi-Ring Detection Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 11:59:03 GMT In article , Midwest Laser Products <0004104492@mcimail.com> writes: > Illinois Bell offers a service called Multi-Ring. It allows one > telephone line to have several different phone numbers. Incoming calls > placed to the primary number have the standard ring cycle, while those > to a secondary number have a double ring. {stuff deleted}.. Anyway I > have heard that there is a device available that detect the double > ring and routes those calls to a seperate device, such as a FAX > machine. Does anyone know where such a device can be purchased? Your best bet for these devices (marketed under such cute names as "Ring Leader, etc.) would be your local Radio Shack or similar outlet. I purchased mine from the fully separate subsidiary of Bell Atlantic which deals with all these neat toys. It works as advertised and does decode the varying ring cadences associated with the multiple directory numbers on a single line. Jack (John) Adams Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26546-adams) Subject: Re: Caller ID and DID Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 12:26:09 GMT In article , Steve Forrette writes: > Is there currently any provision for delivering Caller ID data to a > DID trunk, either analog or over a T1 (T1 to the LEC, not IXC)? How > widely is it available? Is it being worked on, or at least thought > about by someone? BCLID, or Bulk Calling Line IDentification, allows a Centrex, Mulitline Hunt Group (MLHG), or Private Branch Exchange (PBX) customer to receive call-related information, such as calling-party number, called-party number, time of call, etc., on calls received from outside the Centrex, MLHG or PBX. The information is received from the central office over a dedicated data link to Customer Premises Equipment (CPE). Activation and deactivation codes (Associated with Residential CLASS services) are not required. For more information consult Bellcore TR-TSY-000032, "CLASS(SM) Feature: Bulk Calling Line Identification". Jack (John) Adams Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 8:42:18 -0400 (EDT) From: K_MULLHOLAND@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Kath Mullholand, UNH Telecom, 862-1031) Subject: Re: Video Conference Information Wanted Dick Rickert posts: > Soon to be at an AT&T PhoneCenter near you, the VideoPhone 2500. > Suitable for small group conferencing over ordinary phone lines. > Demonstrated most recently at the CES show in Chicago. Stay tuned for > updated availability dates. (Yes, I do have a vested interest in this > product, it not only puts the butter on my bread, it first buys and > then slices the bread for me). I don't know how many of you are familiar with the Dilbert comic strip, but this past week Dilbert bought a video-phone. He brought it home, showed it to his dog, and said, "Now all I have to do is wait for someone else to buy one and call me!" His dog commented, "The scary thing is that without people like you there would be no technological progress." These are not exact quotes as I neglected to cut the cartoon out and bring it to work, so I apologize in advance to those detail-oriented folks who object to my paraphrasing. kath mullholand university of new hampshire durham, nh ------------------------------ From: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Subject: Re: LATAs Crossing State Lines Date: 6 Jun 92 18:46:14 GMT Reply-To: de@moscom.com (David Esan) Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford, NY In article TONY@VM1.MCGILL.CA (Tony Harminc) writes: > What does it mean to say that the above Canadian NPAs are in LATAs? > My understanding is that LATA is a political concept unique to the > USA, relating to long distance competition there. Who assigns them? > And what sense is there in a grouping like #858 above: 519 to 418 > covers about a third of the width of the entire country, yet two of > the same NPAs appear in grouping #854. I don't know how these were chosen. I can hazard a good guess, that there is a field that must be entered in the V&H tape and these were assigned. Each LATA is assigned to an operating company/province pair. Thus 858 is Bell Canada in Quebec, 854 is Bell Canada in Ontario. The overlap between the two LATAs seem to be typo problems with the source of my tape. (The 858 LATA in the 416 NPA is Brampton, ONT. The other 30 Bramptons are in the 854 LATA.) There is some overlap of the two latas in the 613 and 514 NPAs, around Ottawa, one of the very few places that NPAs cross state or provincial lines. David Esan de@moscom.com ------------------------------ From: hpubvwa!tad@ssc.wa.com (Tad Cook) Subject: Re: Ground Plane Cell Antenna Organization: very little Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 20:32:41 GMT hayward@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Peter Hayward) writes: >>> I wish to turn an unused trunk mount cell antenna into a permanently >>> mounted ground plane antenna to use on my house in rural Maine for the >>> (quite often) times that the phone lines go out. What is the proper >>> length for the radials? pturner@eng.auburn.edu (Patton M. Turner) writes: >> The correct length for 1/4 wave radials would be 3.5 inches. An >> easier solution would be to mount the antenna in the middle of a foot >> square peice of sheet metal. This will make a better ground plane >> anyway. The same size plate will work for a VHF Marti antenna, and allbery@ncoast.org (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH) writes: > ... but will have the wrong impedance (about 72 ohms; I'm fairly > certain cellular uses 50 ohm impedance), so you want a 45-degree angle > downward. Why would the impedance be wrong? If the antenna is a typical sleeve design made for trunk mounting, we can assume that it was built to exhibit approximately 50 ohms at cellular frequencies when mounted on a car trunk. Why would sloping the ground plane downward at 45 degrees make this impedance match better? Brandon may be confusing this cellular antenna with a 1/4 wave ground plane he has read about in his ham radio books, which this antenna is not. Just mount it on an old tub or a pie tin and forget about it. If there is really that much concern about having the best performance at the rural site, buy one of those little cellular Yagis and aim it at the nearest cell site. >> If your cable run is an appreciable length run 1/2" hardline or Belden >> 9913 with appropriate connectors (not UHF connectors). Although 1/2" >> hardline will cost more, it's lower loss and you don't have to worry >> about water intrusion like you would with 9913. > A very good idea. I have doubts about even the short runs of RG58/U > used with many cellular antennas. > 1/2" or 3/4" hardline is often available for free from cable companies > (the tail ends of their cable runs; it's not worth anything to them > unless it's fairly long, which I've heard quoted as being at least > 3000 feet). But this is 75 ohm hardline. The usual way to solve this > is a quarter wavelength (3 1/2", as noted above) of 66-ohm cable > placed between the 75-ohm section and the 50-ohm section. This would > also let you use the simpler flat ground plane solution at the > antenna, if the impedance-matching section is placed on the cellphone > end of the feedline. Which leaves only the problem that hardline > connectors are quite expensive. A bad idea, especially for the non-professional or non-ham who asked the original question. At 50 feet of line length, the hardline will only yield a one HALF decibel improvement over 9913 coax at cellular frequencies. Without test equipment or experience, the non-ham is likely to introduce serious losses when trying to construct his own matching sections. 9913 is high quality flexible coaxial cable, but at cellular frequencies it is very important that the connectors be attached exactly right. This is no small task for the uninitiated. Tad Cook | Phone: 206-527-4089 (home) | MCI Mail: 3288544 Seattle, WA | Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA | 3288544@mcimail.com | USENET: tad@ssc.wa.com or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad ------------------------------ From: polk@girtab.usc.edu (Corinna Polk) Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted Date: 6 Jun 1992 15:36:03 -0700 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA In article rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) writes: > Javier Henderson writes: >> In GTE areas in So. Cal, you can dial your own number, and hang up, >> and your phone will ring. > Last time I checked, this was dependent on whether you have call > waiting active. If you don't have it or turn it off (prepend 70# to > your phone number), this 'service' doesn't work. Nope, it doesn't matter if you have call waiting or not. I've got call waiting, and I routinely dial my own number by mistake when calling Personal Secretary for my messages, resulting in the 'beep', and then a ringback when I hang up. The only way to keep your phone from ringing after doing this is to flash your line a few times after you hear the beep, let it sit on silence for a few seconds, and then hang up. I've found this out after mistakenly dialing my own number at 1:00am and doing what I could to keep my phone from waking my roommates. [Moderator's Note: Interesting that you mention this, because Illinois Bell does not work the same way. Dialing your own number always results in a busy signal, call-waiting not withstanding. To get a 'true' busy (and thus force the call to roll to a second line or voice mail or whatever) prepending *70 before dialing your number will work. You'll never get the call-waiting tone when dialing your own number here, even with *70 on the front, since prevention of call-waiting is the very reason *70 was added! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 02:01 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Atlanta vs. Los Angeles Cellular Carriers bill%wabwrld.UUCP@mathcs.emory.edu (Bill Berbenich) writes: > I haven't asked about it yet, but I'll bet that the roaming > agreements are unique for Atlantans roaming in LA and LA folks roaming > in Atlanta. In essence, it seems at first glance that one would end > up roaming on the competition. It may be that to roam, one would have > to switch their phone from A to B or from B to A, as appropriate. > That's my guess as to how it's done in this situation. I'll bet not. In San Francisco the B carrier is GTE Mobilnet; the A carrier is "Cellular One" (in this case a McCaw/PacTel partnership). Actually, the company is frequently referred to as "PacTel Cellular". As you point out, the LA B carrier is PacTel and the A carrier is LA Cellular. This would present a similar condition that you describe in Atlanta. The reality is that the roaming agreements between SF and LA do not cross carrier allocation lines. I have GTE Mobilnet and roam when in LA on PacTel (I cannot even place calls on LA Cellular -- I am rejected as having no roaming agreement). Likewise, SF Cellular One (PacTel, et al) customers roam on LA cellular. The B (wireline) A (RCC) distinction seems a bit bogus. GTE's largest concentration of landline operations as an LEC is in the greater Los Angeles area, while the San Francisco area is overwhelmingly served by Pacific Bell. Yet in San Francisco GTE is the B carrier and in LA PacTel is the B carrier. Cellular companies seem to go out of their way to keep roaming agreements within the same band, even if it means dealing with "the competition". John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 09:18:23 CDT From: oakes@maize.rtsg.mot.com (Ronald Oakes) Subject: Re: Atlanta vs. Los Angles Cellular Carriers In article , bill%wabwrld.UUCP@ mathcs.emory.edu (Bill Berbenich) writes: > I just happened across an interesting little bit of information that I > thought I'd share with the readers here. I was just reading through > _The_Cellular_Telephone_Directory_ (ISBN 0-945592-03-5), published by > Communications Publishing Service of Mercer Island, Washington. A > very worthwhile book for me. > Since I am a cellular subscriber and informed consumer in Atlanta, I > know that the A carrier here is PacTel Cellular and the B carrier is > BellSouth Mobility. So far, so good. As I was looking at the entry > for Los Angeles, I noticed in fine print that LA Cellular (the A > carrier there) is owned by American Cellular, which is a subsidiary of > BellSouth Enterprises. Of course, the B or wireline carrier is PacTel > Cellular in Los Angeles. Actually it can be quite common for the A band (non-wireline) carrier in an area to be owned by the RBOC for another reigon. Cellular One in Chicago is owned by S.W. Bell. More interestingly, in northern California the B band carrier in the San Fransico area is GTE Mobilenet, but in the Sacremento area it is Pac*Tel. However, from what I have read here, Pac*Tel has the A band cellular system in San Fransico. Since Sacramento and San Francisco are ajacent systems, the Pac*Tel systmes are probably networked to their compeitors in the two markets. Ronald B. Oakes ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #451 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03754; 6 Jun 92 22:15 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27504 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 6 Jun 1992 20:23:08 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31306 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 6 Jun 1992 20:23:00 -0500 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 20:23:00 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206070123.AA31306@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #452 TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Jun 92 20:23:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 452 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Switched 56k (was Modems on POTS w/ comp. vs. raw ISDN) (Vance Shipley) Re: Switched 56k (was Modems on POTS w/ comp. vs. raw ISDN) (Barton Bruce) Re: Does *67 Really Work? (David G. Lewis) Re: Does *67 Really Work? (Steven S. Brack) Re: Does *67 Really Work? (Patton M. Turner) Re: Does *67 Really Work? (Dave Levenson) Re: *67 and Related Topics (Peter Sleggs) Re: *69 Results in a Beating (S. Spencer Sun) Re: *69 Results in a Beating (Jay Ashworth) Re: 950-1ATT and 950-DOMINOS (Alan L. Varney) Re: 950-1ATT and 950-DOMINOS (Monty Solomon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Switched 56k (was Modems on POTS w/ comp. vs. raw ISDN) Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1992 05:20:33 GMT In article emory!tridom!mwr@gatech.edu (Mark Reardon) writes: > How common is switched 56k and how expensive is it? In Bell Canada land Switched 56k is available as Datapath, a centrex service. The central offices must be DMS-100 and you must be within 18,000 feet of the CO. The cost varies with area but an example would be Toronto (one of the most expensive areas) at about $70/month. The local usage is free as are local voice calls. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ From: bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) Subject: Re: Switched 56k (was Modems on POTS w/ comp. vs. raw ISDN) Date: 6 Jun 92 03:15:46 EDT Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article , emory!tridom!mwr@gatech.edu (Mark Reardon) writes: > How common is switched 56k and how expensive is it? It is widely available but seldom used. I am sure it has gained some more users in recent times for videoconferencing, but few enough sites have it and it costs a lot per minute -- even locally. If your connection is directly to an IXC other than AT&T (which charges more than voice calls for it), and especially to Sprint that makes a point of saying it costs the same as voice, it may make sense for some applications such as limited duration branch office data transfers. It does make sense as backup for critical connections, but be sure you have alternate paths to the CO and preferably two COs to be really safe. Telco here in MA tried to price ISDN on the SW56 per minute rate, and had they succeeded, would have killed any chance ISDN has of being popular just as surely as they have kept SW56 a very limited service. There are two standard interfaces, and you MUST buy a CSU/DSU to match what telco offers. The two wire NTI one is less common, and the four wire one (ATT, etc) is more common. Some of the sw56 CSU/DSUs are up near $1200, but something like an ADTRAN CSU/DSU II AR is not only a leased line CSU/DSU that does anything you want in that space, but also features sw56 dial backup capability that can be used all alone if that is what you need. It lists for ~$729 and probably can be had at typical comm gear discounts. -- good unit -- unlike MANY others, and it receives down to -45db when most stop at -34. RBOCs are now jumping on the frame relay wagon, and if they want any such business via them rather than be bypassed directly to the IXCs, just maybe they will have learned how to price attractively. If so, for LAN bridging applications, this may be better than sw56, and many sites can be served simultaneously via one connection. ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: Does *67 Really Work? Organization: AT&T Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 13:58:34 GMT In article Bob_Frankston@frankston.com writes: > Hmm. Does this [always delivering the ID to your local CO] mean that > an organization like MIT, which runs its own ISDN CO can, at its whim, > defeat Caller-ID? The phrase "an organization ... which runs its own ISDN CO ..." is not exactly precise enough to give a good answer ... By definition, the only "organizations that run COs" are telephone companies which are licensed common carriers subject to government regulation. Any other organization that "runs" a switch is running either a PBX or a Shared Tenant Service switch. (Unless, of course, it's served by a very large Centrex group and has certain management capabilities provided as a service by the telephone company, but I don't view that as "running a switch".) So an organization other than a telco which runs its own switch is, from the viewpoint of the serving telco, a customer. The services it receives are provided by the telco under pertinent tariffs, and if the serving telco honors the presentation restriction indicator, the CPN will not be delivered to the customer's switch -- even if, as in MIT's case, the customer's switch is 5ESS(R) switch operating as a PBX and serving ISDN BRI lines. In addition, as far as I'm aware, no local telcos have tariffed SS7 interfaces to customer premises, so the CPN is not delivered in the same manner as it would be to a CO. Disclaimer: This is verging a little bit out of my area of expertise and into tariff and regulatory-type issues; I do not claim to be speaking for AT&T or even, necessarily, claim that this is the most accurate description of the situation. Just trying to help. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: 06 Jun 1992 12:34:00 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: Re: Does *67 Really Work? In article bill@hacktic.nl (Bill Squire) writes: > I have talked to a lot of friends in the States about CLID and the *67 > option and have this nagging question I can't get a real answer for. > I know that when you use *67, the callback option still works and so > does call trace, which can mean only one thing: CLID always delivers > if you say so or not! Not quite. Your local CO knows what number you're calling from, and passes it on to the remote CO you're calling, along with your CLID status. > Since your local CO always gets the info if it is available, does > it indeed put it to the customer and tell his/her device not to > display the number? If the data is flagged not to send, it is not sent. The called CO does make a record of the calling number, enabling CallTrace and CallReturn to work. Depending on how blocking was implemented, *67 might also circumvent Call*Trace, but I don't think so. > If so homebrew CLID receivers should have a nice market! If the > info is not delivered to the customer, it should then still be a > relative simple to "talk" your CO into giving you the caller's number > dispite the caller's wishes. Anyone checked this out? Let us know. According to the specs I've seen, CLID info is only sent from the called CO to the called party if both of these conditions are met: 1) CLID blocking is not requested by the calling party or calling CO, and 2) The called party has CLID enabled on his/her line. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 21:28:12 CDT From: Patton M. Turner Subject: Re: Does *67 Really Work? > Hmm. Does this [always delivering the ID to your local CO] mean that > an organization like MIT, which runs its own ISDN CO can, at its whim, > defeat Caller-ID? MIT doesn't own it's own CO, but instead a PBX which may be the same switch as used in CO, such as a DMS/SL-100, 5ESS, or ESWD. This is fairly common as universities have large telecommunications demands. For example, AU uses a SL-100 for its PBX. Anyway this switch is served by trunks from the local CO (ISDN or POTS). It is the settings in this switch that determine wheather or not the ID is passed over the ISDN trunks to MIT. MIT may do whatever thay want at that point, including internal caller ID. This does not require ISDN or conventional CLID as the data can be passed digitally to feature sets connected to the PBX. The above will remain the case until SS7 trunks to subscribers are available. CLID in the other direction may show one of several numbers such as the billing number, lead number in the huntgroup, etc., but not the actual extension unless AIOD (automatic indentification of outward dialing) is used. Pat Turner KB4GRZ Until July 1 => pturner@eng.auburn.edu ------------------------------ From: dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) Subject: Re: Does *67 Really Work? Organization: Westmark, Inc. Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 18:58:07 GMT In article , bill@hacktic.nl (Bill Squire) writes: > If the info is not delivered to the customer, it should then still > be a relative simple to "talk" your CO into giving you the callers > number dispite the callers wishes. Anyone checked this out? Let us > know. The data link on which Caller*ID is delivered is not duplex. It is simplex. The CO transmits a data message, but does not listen for any ACK or anything else from the customer's equipment. How, exactly, does one 'talk' a CO that isn't listening into divulging information it has been programmed not to? Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: *67 and Related Topics From: peters@beltrix.guild.org (Peter Sleggs) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 13:47:08 -0400 Organization: Bellatrix Systems Corp., Mississauga, ONT Canada Bob_Frankston@frankston.com writes: > Remember that what you THINK the Caller-ID setting is on your line and > what it ACTUALLY is are not necessarily the same thing. > [Moderator's Note: Then that is your problem. Either you are in > control of your phone or you are not. Are you suggesting that in a > call to the Business Office to review your service they would mislead > you in order to get you to make an ID'ed call accidentally? :) PAT] Sorry Pat, I have to jump in here, forget that it a phone for a moment ... (I know I know it is the _Telecom_ Digest :) Consider the situation of ANY toggle, a light switch is a fair example. Convention is that when the lever is UP the light is ON (code requirement in some places). Now when the light is not immediately visible you know that when it UP it is supposed to be on. What would happen if these were randomly changed throughout your house and place of work. Or if the circuit breaker in your electrical panel didnt have an indicator to show if it was off of on. Or if the hot and cold taps were randomly assigned in the shower. Its just good human interface design to have a positive indication of state, or a means of forcing it to a known state. peter Bellatrix Systems Corp. Mississauga, Ontario Canada peters@beltrix.guild.org or beltrix!peters ------------------------------ From: spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun) Subject: Re: *69 Results in a Beating Reply-To: spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun) Organization: Live Organ Transplants Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 06:03:18 GMT I agree with PAT here (uh-oh, should I start worrying? :^) ) ... all *69 did is facilitate the call-back. Much like an auto-dial button. And it had nothing to do with the beating. The very fact that the person ended up getting beaten indicates that the *69-user already knew where he lived, so how is the fact that he used *69 relevant? Not at all, IMHO, but this is the part I really wanted to addres: In article , niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) writes: > While listening to my scanner last night, I heard a conversation between > several cops concerning the beating of a drug buyer. It seems that > person one (buyer) called person two (seller) and complained about the > quality of the junk (isn't that a shame). Yes, it *IS* a shame. If you seriously want to discuss this then you should start reading talk.politics.drugs and alt.drugs. If you already read and/or post on those groups, you should confine discussions about drugs to those groups. Comments like the one above, IMHO (again) are cheap shots, given that they are completely unsubstantiated, and are dropped in a conversation in a group that has nothing to do with drugs. If you really have a concern, read the drugs groups. Otherwise, please exercise some self control. Sorry for the digression, Pat. The opinions expressed in this article are solely mine. sss/PU'94 Dept of CS (spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu)/JvNCnet (spencer@jvnc.net) [Moderator's Note: Well, his was an article which in my opinion could be legitimatly cross-posted. Despite my disagreement with the stated conclusion, the fact is modern phone technology has changed the ways in which people commit crimes, thus it becomes fair for discussion here up to a point. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jra@psycho.fidonet.org (Jay Ashworth) Subject: *69 Results in a Beating Date: Fri, 05 Jun 92 16:35:44 EDT Organization: Psycho: The Usenet<->Fidonet Gateway of St. Pete Florida > [Moderator's Note: Great. Something new to blame on telco. The only > thing wrong with your story is that *69 merely reconnects the parties; > unlike Caller-ID it does not say WHO is being connected. If the party > of the second part in your story also had Caller-ID, then the number > of the caller may or may not have been available, but it doesn't even Long week, this week, Pat? GTEFL: +1 813 446 -- I believe it's a GTD-5. *69 (Calling Number Redial) reads you the number, then asks you if you wish to dial it. I gather it works this way in other places too. Bellcore calls this Automatic Recall, and covers it in TR-NWT-000227. Anybody got a copy? Cheers, Jay R. Ashworth jra@pro-scat.cts.com Ashworth & Associates Jay_Ashworth@{psycho.fidonet.org, An Interdisciplinary Consultancy f160.n3603.z1.fidonet.org, in Advanced Technology petexch.relay.net} [Moderator's Note: I gather it does NOT work the same way in many or most places. It does not work that way here. But since you raise the point, let's assume it does read the number back: What has that told you about the person's name and/or address? Nothing. In 312/708 there exists a not-to-common public service provided by Illinois Bell called "Customer Name and Address Bureau" (312-796-9600) which provides a reverse listing of phone numbers ==> name and address of *published* subscribers. Not many (any?) other telcos offer that service. In any event, you won't find me listed there. So I repeat that whether or not the number is read back, the person returning the call needs a bit more information acquired elsewhere than just via *69. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 22:28:33 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: 950-1ATT and 950-DOMINOS Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > In article varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L > Varney) writes: >> Note that the caller's charge for calling a 950 number is up to the >> 950-provider -- just like 900 numbers. If the provider wants to eat >> the cost as part of its service, that's fine. But some other >> 950-provider might just hit you with $120/call, just like a 900/976 >> number. > Are you sure about the possibility of the caller being charged for > certain 950 numbers? I know that in California at least, COCOTs are > required to allow free calling to ANY 950 number, just like to calls > to 800 numbers. Is this the next place to look for the next "mystic" > scam? It's unlikely that non-free 950 calls will rely on ANI delivery to provide a billing number. But who knows? If 950 calls are really "free", maybe I'll start using Sprint's 950 number to place all my calls ... Right now, 950 calls don't have ANI delivery for all calls, if the trunking is FG-B. FG-D with 950 would have a high probability. But there are still some SXS switches that deliver nothing with 950 calls; until that changes, 950 calls that are not free will require some other form of ID. Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 02:46:34 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Re: 950-1ATT and 950-DOMINOS Are there any regulations covering access to, or charges for, calls to 950 numbers for making long distance calls from hotel rooms? Thanks. Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405 monty%roscom@think.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #452 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06455; 6 Jun 92 23:25 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19145 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 6 Jun 1992 21:24:04 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25757 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 6 Jun 1992 21:23:47 -0500 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 21:23:47 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206070223.AA25757@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #453 TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Jun 92 21:23:49 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 453 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: FBI Wiretap Standard: Mag Article; Phone Conversation (Steven Brack) Re: FBI Wiretap Standard: Mag Article; Phone Conversation (Susan Huntsman) Re: Business Office Hours (Michael Cohen) Re: Business Office Hours (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Business Office Hours (Charles Stephens) Re: Caller ID and DID (Vance Shipley) Re: Multi-Phone Line Protection (Barton F. Bruce) Re: HDTV Information Required (Martin McCormick) Re: How to Get Netnews From Home? (Paul W. Schleck) Re: How to Get Netnews From Home? (David McIntyre) Re: An Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake (Jim Haynes) Re: An Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake (Garrett Wollman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 04 Jun 1992 15:01:58 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: Re: FBI Wiretap Standard: Mag Article; Phone Conversation Follow-up In article mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin) writes: > In article joseph@biocad.com writes: >> He indicated that the proposal was a clarification, >> affirmation, and modernization of the Omnibus Crime and Safe Streets >> Act of 1968, which orders the telecom provider to "assist in >> intercept" and gives the FBI the right to tap particular conversations >> as long as they have "probable cause" of criminal activity and a >> court-ordered warrant. Since it's easier to "tap" a digital transmission, by simply copying the bitstream at any convenient point, such as the CO, going digital should make intercepts much easier for the telco to implement. >> Or is it too general and invasive to be acceptable? > This depends on whether you think the Bells should be operating merely > a phone system or phone system/surveillance system. The nice thing about going digital is that the inability to tap a line on an ad hoc basis severely limits the government's ability to make taps without warrants. Since unwarranted wiretaps are fairly illegal, I fail to see where that's a bad thing, except in the minds of people who don't want to obey the law. Those people are called "criminals," not "FBI agents." Note, however, that the two groups aren't mutually exclusive. 8) >> Should I/we be particularly concerned? Write letters of protest to >> Congress, and all that? If so, what are the most effective points and >> methods of rebuttal? If not, why? > At this point, several people of both liberal and conservative stripe > have written to oppose the initiative. I've editorialized about it > myself in EFF's online newsletter (available by ftp from eff.org), and > William Safire recently wrote about it on the {New York Times} op-ed > page. In this case, privacy issues aside, it should be opposed merely because it's unnecessary. Digital taps are clean, cheap, and completely undetectable from the sub's point of view. The only disadvantage is that for minimum difficulty, the governmnet needs to go through the telco to emplace the tap. If desired, that can be worked around. A PC-box storing packets from a specific subscriber is technically feasable, and ahouldn't be outrageously expensive. Are there other advantages, disadvantages, interesting side effects? Steve Brack ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 13:34:03 -0600 From: nha2308@dsachg1.dsac.dla.mil (Susan B Huntsman) Subject: Re: FBI Wiretap Standard: Mag Article; Phone Conversation Follow-Up > FBI: Hi, John, uh, it seems that you're using an encryption method that > we can't seem to decipher in a reasonable period of time, and since > we're wiretapping all of your communications, we'd sure appreciate > it if you would just let us know the decryption keys you're using so > that we can get on with the business of keeping the streets safe and > fighting the war on drugs ... This is not so far fetched. I seem to recall reading a book (Crystal Castles) with a similar theme. A man invented a cellular phone, and to keep all the neighbors from listing in he developed his own encryption method. When he tried to patent the phone, take a wild guess at who came a knocking on his door. The FBI confiscated all his work, told him not to build another phone, and even told him not to reveal the details of his work. S Huntsman ------------------------------ From: mcohen@attmail.com Date: Fri Jun 5 03:11:28 EDT 1992 Subject: Re: Business Office Hours In response to the question raised recently: > Has anyone noticed a trend with business office hours? As a service representative for New Jersey Bell, I can tell you -- they're getting longer. New Jersey Bell was open only from 9:00 to 5:00 Monday through Friday until this year. We are now rolling out extended hours and some offices (like mine in Parsippany) are open Saturdays. Don't be surprised to see us open 24 hours sometime soon. Part of the reason for the extension of hours for our company is to meet our new service provisioning goal of "when do you want it?" service. Residential customers in many parts of the state may add any features or services, including new POTS lines, the same or next day. This is a change from the former three to four day due dates we were offering. Hope this information is helpful. Michael Cohen mcohen@attmail.com h +1 201 402-7766 w +1 201 631-3444 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 02:03:41 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Business Office Hours Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article John Higdon writes: > Anyone notice Pac*Bell's business office hours these days? Monday > through Friday, 6:30AM to 10:00PM; Saturday, 7:00AM to 7:00PM ... > Is this a trend? But John, I thought you said that GTE would give you the business anytime. :-) Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Business Office Hours From: cfs@cowpas.waffle.atl.ga.us (Charles Stephens) Date: Fri, 05 Jun 92 04:39:50 EDT Organization: COW Pastures john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > Anyone notice Pac*Bell's business office hours these days? Monday > through Friday, 6:30AM to 10:00PM; Saturday, 7:00AM to 7:00PM ... > Is this a trend? Southern Bell hours are M-F 8-5. That's it. It's a real pain, when you want to make orders or have questions about your bill. > [Moderator's Note: Illlinois Bell now operates 24 hours per day, with > a single number for business and residential customers. PAT] Southern Bell has two 24 hour services. The first is RightTouch(tm) that allows you to use a touch tone phone to place simple orders (ie disconnect line, order Prestige(r), etc.). They also have a 611 repair service. I don't know why I am submitting this, but hopefully it will give non-SB customers know what other telco's are doing. Charles Stephens, SysOp, COW Pastures BBS, Kennesaw, GA +1 404 421 0764 Internet: cfs@cowpas.waffle.atl.ga.us Compuserve: >INTERNET: cfs@cowpas.waffle.atl.ga.us Prodigy: NOT! IVCNTWPAHR: +1 404 425 7599 ICBM: ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Caller ID and DID Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1992 05:04:06 GMT In article Marcus (M.D.) Leech writes: > For ACD groups, NT also offers CompuCall -- a *very* comprehensive > call-detail delivery system designed for call-center applications. If > your LEC has DMS equipment, you might start bugging them about > CompuCall. CompuCall is available on both DMS-100 and SL-100 switches. > NT announced CompuCall last year. Many of the operating companies are > now starting to offer it. CompuCall is an interesting animal indeed. Calling it a "call-detail delivery system" doesn't do it justice. Really it is a full fledged SCAI (Switch Computer Application Interface). As Marcus points out though it is used exclusively for control of calls to ACD groups. One of the neat things about CompuCall is that it can deliver ANI and CLID for each call, in separate fields. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ From: bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) Subject: Re: Multi-Phone line protection Date: 6 Jun 92 08:25:38 GMT Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. In article <1992May24.082720.29257@beach.csulb.edu>, sichermn@beach. csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes: > Having been underwhelmed by the response to my question on the > availability of surge protectors for multiple phone lines and not Siemon ones cost about twice per pair what the PortaSystem modules do, but then the PortaSystem ones do need to plug into a special block unlike the 66 block the Siemon ones go into. PortaSystem makes a proprietary design that is quite compact and has modules that range from the older style protectors to the latest three electrode gas with heat coils and diodes and they even have the 'electronic' units. They also make the 'standard' industry shape ones that fit blocks made by ATT, NTI/Cook, Reliable, etc. The main advantage for a CO to use the Porta Systems one is they are VERY compact and with 10s of thousands of lines in a big CO, this helps. The typical voltage is 230, which is above normal ringing superimposed on 48 volt CO battery. There are lower voltage units such as 75 volt that are for data lines with NO ringing, but that may have sealing current or simplex powering. And of course Greybar has the PortaSystems units as well as several of the others. I personally like the PortaSystems ones, and they have 6, 10, 25 pair blocks for PBX and Key system use as well as monster blocks for COs. Get their "DELTA" series protectors that are three electrode gas + heat coils + diodes. Cost more than lesser units, but they work. The six and ten pair are punch in and out. The 25 pair are punch or 25 pair connector in and out in various combinations. One popular one is punch in to RJ21x out. Another good one is RJ21x in and out (easy to stick after a telco RJ21x). The 50, 100 or larger pair assemblies have other options including a 25' stub cable in. The other vendors all make similar units. NTI/Cook even has a tiny block that mounts on 1a2 rails and does maybe six or ten pair but is wrap in and out I think. So there is LOTS of stuff out there, but NOT as readily available to end users as it should be. Porta also makes a 'six-pack plus' that does six pair plus a normal power cord. There is real advantage to sharing a ground for both power and phone line protection. Neither ground will be that good in a typical installation, but having them common limits the voltage differences seen inside the equipment. It is too bad some of the better power protection for small systems like the IsoBar stuff does not offer serious phone line protection for several pairs built in. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: HDTV Information Required Date: Sat, 06 Jun 92 13:40:39 -0500 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu Although there are several countries and many electronics companies working on HDTV, the battle narrows down to two major, incompatible strategies. The system that is already in limited use in Japan is a variation on present-day broadcast television. The picture simply has more scan lines in it and the aspect ratio, (horizontal VS vertical screen dimension), is more like that of 35MM movie film. A HDTV picture is not viewable on a standard NTSC, PAL, or SECAM television and the channels occupy _lots_ of bandwidth. The picture quality is said to be stunningly good, but the big question is, "Where can we put those channels?" The other idea for HDTV will be familiar to any readers who have worked with teleconferencing using compressed video over T1 or ISDN lines. It is a digital compression scheme that capitalizes on the large amount of redundancy in the picture to send a HDTV signal in the same bandwidth as a standard NTSC television channel, 6Mhz. The FCC is expected to decide which system is adopted in the U.S. in 1993, but the commission has already said that HDTV channels may not occupy any greater bandwidth than 6Mhz. When a digital system is chosen, it should have four channels of digital sound. The FCC is expecting to allocate one UHF channel for each VHF channel now in use. Owners of HDTV's will watch the HDTV version of their local VHF station on that UHF channel while conventional NTSC sets may live out their useful lives tuned to the original VHF channels. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ From: pschleck@odin.unomaha.edu (Paul W Schleck KD3FU) Subject: Re: How to Get Netnews From Home? Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 16:40:20 GMT KBRAMHIL@ESOC.bitnet writes: > I'm leaving this place in a week's time and would like to continue to > get netnews. I have a PC and realise I need a modem and a phone point > but what do I need to do then? I couldn't afford to dial USA from the > UK to read netnews. I would think it is possible to get the service > via some local place to where I'll be in England. If you know how to > get the service and how much it'd cost please E-mail me before 8th > May. Thanks. > [Moderator's Note: You'll have to subscribe to some public access Unix > site in your locality. Perhaps someone can help you locate one. Good > luck in your search -- we hope you can stick around. PAT] And a reasonably complete list of so-called "*Nix-Pub" sites are available from rtfm.mit.edu (18.172.1.27) under subdirectory /pub/usenet/alt.bbs. Those without FTP can try mailserver@rtfm.mit.edu with the word "HELP" in the message. It is an archive of the regular post on the subject to alt.bbs. Realize also that this newsgroup is a Fidonet echo, and may be available from a Fidonet BBS. Hope you can stay on with us. Paul W. Schleck pschleck@unomaha.edu ------------------------------ From: mcintyre@cs.rpi.edu (David McIntyre) Subject: Re: How to Get Netnews From Home? Organization: Rensselaer Instipoly Technitute Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 17:39:12 GMT KBRAMHIL@ESOC.bitnet writes: > I'm leaving this place in a week's time and would like to continue to > get netnews. I have a PC and realise I need a modem and a phone point > but what do I need to do then? > [Moderator's Note: You'll have to subscribe to some public access Unix > site in your locality. Perhaps someone can help you locate one. Good > luck in your search -- we hope you can stick around. PAT] Not necessarily. There are several ways to do it, as outlined in the "How to become a USENET site" which is posted monthly in the news.answers group. Dave "mr question" McIntyre mcintyre@cs.rpi.edu office : 518-276-8633 [Moderator's Note: Your suggestion is the ideal one, but bear in mind not everyone is technically proficient to do this, nor do they always have the time or financial resources required. Thus, the public site alternative is a practical solution for many folks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Jim Haynes Subject: Re: An Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake Date: 6 Jun 92 21:23:20 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz Gee, I was just thinking about how Herb Caen, columnist for the {San Francisco Chronicle}, used to wax lyrical about the charm of the fog horns sounding there. Can't you (or Mike Royko) come up with something equally lyrical about how charming Chicago is with the sounds of burglar alarms screaming in the night? haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet [Moderator's Note: Actually most nights here we listen to shots fired and gangbangers yelling at one another. By comparison, burglar alarms are an assault only on the ears, not on the mind and body as well, and at least the gangs run and hide when they go off. Our neighborhood has become worse than ever before this year. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 20:54:37 -0500 From: Garrett.Wollman@UVM.EDU (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: An Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility In article PAT notes: > [Moderator's Note: Does it? ... perhaps you'll share your new wisdom > with all of us! :) PAT] Well, clearly, on the days when you let through a lot of Higdon's flames against GTE, you have gotten close to the end of ``G{\"o}tterd{\"a}mmerung''... (I always preferred ``Die Valk{\"u}re'' myself, but lots of people think I'm strange anyway ...) -GAWollman ^^^^^^^^^^^ ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #453 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09966; 7 Jun 92 1:07 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA32413 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 6 Jun 1992 23:16:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22061 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 6 Jun 1992 23:15:58 -0500 Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 23:15:58 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206070415.AA22061@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #454 TELECOM Digest Sat, 6 Jun 92 23:16:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 454 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone (R. Kevin Oberman) Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone (James Borynec) Re: Payphone Xenophobia (Bud Couch) Re: Payphone Xenophobia (Andrew C. Green) Re: Payphone Xenophobia (Peter da Silva) Re: Payphone Xenophobia (Steve Gaarder) Re: Volunteering for Interop (Craig R. Watkins) Re: How Bell Labs Selects Ringers (Michael J. Graven) Re: Area Code 200?? in Pac*Bell Land (Steven S. Brack) Re: Ringing Sound When Calling a PBX's DID (Martin McCormick) Re: Passive Repeater? (Barry Ornitz) Re: News Flash! The Phone is Not a Toy! (Jeff Sicherman) Re: News Flash! The Phone is Not a Toy! (Bill Everts) Re: News Flash! The Phone is Not a Toy! (Roger B.A. Klorese) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone Date: 5 Jun 92 15:35:18 GMT > This is unsurprising to those of us served by NYT; I've been asked on > more than one occasion when reporting a dead phone line whether I was > in fact calling from that very line to report the problem ... While the question seems silly, I suspect that there are a lot of customers even dumber than the operators. Even though I'm sure that the question is on a standard script for trouble calls (not one specific to dead phones), I'd bet that more than once the answer has been "yes". The IQ requirement for being an operator may be pretty low, but the required IQ for placing a call is just about vegetable level. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: oberman1@llnl.gov (510) 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: james@cs.ualberta.ca (James Borynec; AGT Researcher) Subject: Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1992 08:56:57 -0600 sbb@panix.com (Steve Baumgarten) writes: > This is unsurprising to those of us served by NYT; I've been asked on > more than one occasion when reporting a dead phone line whether I was > in fact calling from that very line to report the problem ... The problem cuts both ways. When I was working on a project with our 611 answer clerks I witnessed a number of occasions where the subscriber was unable or unwilling to distinguish between a broken phone and a broken line. It was only after dispatching a craft to the location that we would find out that (for example) the bedroom phone didn't work while the kitchen phone did. Being an answer clerk is a VERY tough job because you have NO idea of how technically sophis- ticated the person at the other end of line is. j.borynec james@cs.ualberta.ca ------------------------------ From: kentrox!bud@uunet.UU.NET (Bud Couch) Subject: Re: Payphone Xenophobia Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1992 18:49:34 GMT In article cmoore@BRL.MIL (VLD/VMB) writes: > I wonder how the U.S. "sandwich" dimes and quarters, originally > introduced in 1965, worked in comparison to the older coins of those > denominations. The "sandwich" coins were designed as a "sandwich" for the exact purpose of assuring operation in vending machines. I have been away from it for years (telephony related: I was evaluating the voice performance of a particular payphone in 1966 when I learned all this stuff), but a coin accepter measures three qualities of a coin: its size, its weight, and its _magnetic_ characteristics. It sorts the coins by size and weight fairly straightforwardly (differing size holes and lifting them against specific spring tensions), but I was really fascinated by the magnetic sort. The coins were rolled down a trough (on edge) and passed through a magnetic field. At the end of the trough, they sailed into space. If they were of the "correct" composition, they would fall into a tube placed below the trough. If they were not, the magnetic field would have either slowed them up too much or not enough and they would miss, which directed them to the "reject" slot. The "sandwich" coins were developed to have the same size, weight, and magnetic characteristics as the silver coins of the same denominations. If one rejected a silver coin, it's probably because something in the mechanism is out of exact adjustment, and the coin accepter unit is no longer tested with silver. I doubt if many people complain; you didn't. Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew... standard BS applies ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 05 Jun 1992 17:03:13 CDT From: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Re: Payphone Xenophobia leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) writes: > I speak from experience. I was treasurer for a local branch of a group > with branches in both the US and Canada. At one event, some Canadians > paid the site fee with Canadian currency. We finally had to go to the > local branch of a Canadian bank and convert it to US currency at the > current exchange rate. None of *our* banks would touch it. The rule as explained to me by my bank in Chicago was: paper currency yes; coins no. The simple reasoning was that it was a royal pain to lug coins around, store them somewhere and eventually ship them back to the issuing countries, whereas paper currency could be handled easily, and mailed back to Upper Slobbovia or wherever at a reasonable cost. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Payphone Xenophobia Organization: Taronga Park BBS Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1992 11:21:20 GMT Down here in the southern U.S. (not "the South"... "the South" starts at the Equator) there is rarely any problem with businesses and machines accepting Canadian coins. I guess there just aren't enough to make it worth their trouble. Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX +1 713 568 0480/1032 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 00:20:13 EDT From: gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us Subject: Re: Payphone Xenophobia cmoore@BRL.MIL (VLD/VMB) writes: > I wonder how the U.S. "sandwich" dimes and quarters, originally > introduced in 1965, worked in comparison to the older coins of those > denominations. I once read an article in the {Bell System Technical Journal} on the subject. It seems that the government actually consulted with AT&T to come up with a coin composition that would work in pay phones. Steve Gaarder gaarder@anarres.ithaca.ny.us ------------------------------ From: "Craig R. Watkins" Subject: Re: Volunteering for Interop Date: 5 Jun 92 23:38:45 EST Organization: HRB Systems, Inc. In article , allyn@netcom.com (Mark Allyn) writes: > I am interested in getting involved with the volunteer work parties > for next fall's Interop. Interop is the big computer networking show > that takes place in the bay area near San Francisco each fall. Get in touch with Nan Dorio , Volunteers Liaison at Interop. > I would like to know if you know of anyone who has personally > participated in any of these work parties because I would like to talk > with someone personally about their experiences and how much they got > out of it. > I am in a paculiar situation. My company will not send me to Interop > on their nickle because of cost reductions. If I go, I would have to > take vacation time and make my own travel arrangements. I've worked the last two shows (San Jose & DC). I spent my own nickel both times. It's something to experience. Craig R. Watkins crw@icf.hrb.com HRB Systems, Inc. +1 814 238-4311 ------------------------------ From: mjg@nwu.edu (Michael J Graven) Subject: Re: How Bell Labs Selects Ringers Reply-To: mjg@nwu.edu (Michael J Graven) Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1992 05:08:02 GMT martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu writes: > The solution seems to be [to] allow the user to select which > notes are played. This means that everybody's phone plays its own > little tune when it rings, making it possible to pick an individual > phone out of the surrounding racket. Users like this. When my building in Murray Hill was cut over to ISDN, we came into work the next day to find 7506's on our desks. Many of us spent the rest of the morning running through the user-selectable ring cadences to see which one we thought would work best for us. The caco-phony of rings in the hall was tremendous. Michael mjg@nwu.edu ------------------------------ Date: 06 Jun 1992 14:49:54 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: Re: Area Code 200?? in Pac*Bell Land In article cmoore@BRL.MIL writes: > The Bellcore document about the NANP referred to 200,300,400,500 and > 600 as a last resort if area codes of the form N10 are all used up > before the 1995 "time T". 610 and 710 have been cited in the Digest > as not available for geographic area codes; 310,410,510 are in use > (410 still being permissive), 210 has been announced (not in use yet), > and (relying on what I saw in the Digest) either 810 or 910 will be > used in a split of 313 in Michigan. Could someone give me some more information on: a) What 610 & 710 are used for. (Is 610 still TWX ?) b) Who came up with the NANP? Under what authority? c) Has anything more been said about the day when we'll switch to 8 (or more) digit telephone numbers? Steve Brack [Moderator's Note: 610 is Canadian TWX service. 710 is US Government Special Services (someone else can explain that in detail.) PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Ringing Sound When Calling a PBX's DID Date: Fri, 05 Jun 92 12:33:49 -0500 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu The ringing sound you hear is definitely the ringing tone from the PBX. It can sound like anything the PBX manufacturer desires. In a previous posting, when I described the strange behavior of the first electronic PBX that Oklahoma State University got, there were occasions when one would hear both the standard ringing tone as heard on the #5 Xbar system mixed with the campus's PBX ring. When someone answered, both rings disappeared. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ Reply-To: ornitz@kodak.com From: ornitz@kodak.kodak.com (Barry Ornitz) Subject: Re: Passive Repeater? Organization: Eastman Kodak Company, Eastman Chemical Company Research Labs Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 17:32:21 GMT In article srm@dimacs.rutgers.edu (Scott R. Myers) writes: > I have read briefly in a recent {Mobile Magazine} and also saw in the > store window a camera store that sells Cellular a device called a > passive repeater. It looks like a standard through the glass mount > antenna with some type of 3x3x3in box with coax connectors on two > sides. I am not familiar with this device, but we use something quite similar with our plant trunking radio system. We have a number of metal buildings at this plant site that have poor radio coverage with our trunking system. To alleviate the problems, we have installed "passive repeaters" on many of them. These are nothing more than two antennas connected toegether; one antenna is on the inside of the building and the other is on the outside. The antenna on the inside picks up a small amount of a user's handheld signal and re-radiates it using the outside antenna. During reception, the inside antenna re-radiates the signal picked up by the outside antenna. The two antennas do not have to be mounted near each other; they can be connected together via any conveneient length of transmission line (coaxial cable usually). Thus a basement antenna can connect to one on the roof. As one can imagine, the performance of such a system will be poor. There will be considerable loss in the system, especially if a significant run of transmission line is used. However the effective path loss from handheld to the base station will usually be far less than that without the passive repeater. In the case of several of our containment buildings, the passive repeater allows radio communication that would have been impossible without it. A pickup antenna within the car located near the handheld connected to an outside antenna just might decrease path loss enough to permit cellular communications in fringe locations. Whether a "passive repeater" will help or not depends highly on how many problems you currently have with your system. > BTW the wrapping on the one I saw displayed said something like "Works > through proven Microwave technology." Sounds like marketing hype It sure does! Barry L. Ornitz ornitz@kodak.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 02:16:52 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: News Flash! The Phone is Not a Toy! Organization: Cal State Long Beach PAT, the all-purpose social, technical, and literary critic comments: > [Moderator's Note: Mrs. Lederer has never been one of the reasons I > buy the {Chicago Tribune}. Ann Slanders and her twin-sister Scabby > Van Buren need to be put out to pasture. Both offer a sort of > pop-philosophy lesson each day which was better suited for the 1950's > when they each got started. Sometimes they are mildly amusing to read > when our office has tea-break each afternoon. PAT] So, PAT, when are you starting the deeply-thoughtful, up-to-the-90's advice column for the TELECOM Digest? Jeff Sicherman [Moderator's Note: Do you think there should be a "Dear Scabby" news group on the net, based on the cultural and social mores of the nineties? Maybe someone will take the hint and start it as an alt group, with a companion mailing list. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bill@phoenix.az.stratus.com (Bill Everts) Subject: Re: News Flash! The Phone is Not a Toy! Date: 5 Jun 92 18:26:18 GMT > phone IS a toy, and has only enjoyed the vast popularity it has > because the general public regards it as an essential toy. This > Michigan Reader should be thankful that those she is calling spent > their hard-earned dollars to even put an answering machine on the line > -- or perhaps she's rather listen to ring-no-answers all day? I agree that ring-no-answer is worse than an answering machine. However, what some businesses are doing to automate their phone systems is criminal! Two different companies (one an airline and another a resort campground reservation company) have automatic attendants with the typical menu on the front end. After wading through the four or five layers of menus to get what I wanted, they forwarded my call to a recording telling me that I was calling them out of regular business hours. When I called during business hours I waded through the menus again (a little faster now because I knew most of the options I wanted) only to get forwarded to a busy number. YECH!!! I can see why some people get frustrated with technology when it is so horribly implemented sometimes. -everts- bill@az.stratus.com ------------------------------ From: rogerk@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) Subject: Re: News Flash! The Phone is Not a Toy! Organization: QueerNet Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 15:48:18 GMT In article Our Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: Mrs. Lederer has never been one of the reasons I > buy the {Chicago Tribune}. Ann Slanders and her twin-sister Scabby > Van Buren need to be put out to pasture. Both offer a sort of > pop-philosophy lesson each day which was better suited for the 1950's > when they each got started. Sometimes they are mildly amusing to read > when our office has tea-break each afternoon. PAT] What does this have to do with Moderation? ROGER B.A. KLORESE +1 415 ALL-ARFF rogerk@unpc.QueerNet.ORG {ames,decwrl,pyramid}!mips!unpc!rogerk [Moderator's Note: Nothing. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #454 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14385; 7 Jun 92 2:46 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18465 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 00:34:01 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06434 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 00:33:50 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 00:33:50 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206070533.AA06434@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #455 TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Jun 92 00:33:33 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 455 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Panasonic Key Systems: WARNING and FIX (John Rice) Re: Panasonic Key Systems: WARNING and FIX (Leonard Erickson) Re: Influencing PUCs (Scott Colbath) Re: 800 Number With "Routing Error" (R. Kevin Oberman) Re: Wisconsin Bell Monitors 1 in 1000 Phone Calls? (Hoyt A. Stearns, Jr.) Re: Atlanta vs. Los Angeles Cellular Carriers (Garrett Wollman) Re: Business Office Hours (David Lesher) Re: Pacbell Data Access Lines (Malcolm Slaney) Re: Good Service From GTE in L.A. Area (Rob Schultz) Re: On The Other Hand ... (Marc Wiz) Re: An Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake (Dave Platt) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Panasonic Key Systems: WARNING and FIX Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Sat, 06 Jun 92 19:47:17 GMT In article , dmr@medicated.Corp.Sun.COM (Daniel M. Rosenberg) writes: > I had to wrest this information from Panasonic tech support in New ------------ > to do some serious cajoling. I'm posting this here so Panasonic users > Jersey. Their old phone number changed, the new one's unlisted, and ------------------------------------------------ > they won't talk to you anyway unless you're in their database. I had Now that's unique. Wonder if this is a trend in the industry -- an unlisted customer support phone number. I'll have to tell my boss, we won't want to be left behind. John Rice K9IJ | "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was rice@ttd.teradyne.com | MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially (708)-940-9000 - (work) | Not my Employer's.... (708)-438-7011 - (home) ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Panasonic Key Systems: WARNING and FIX Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 03:22:15 GMT dmr@medicated.Corp.Sun.COM (Daniel M. Rosenberg) writes: > Some phones, and *most* modems and credit card readers have active > A/A1 leads which short when they go off hook, to indicate to 1A2 key > systems that they're using the line. Unfortunately, this hoses the > station cards, and after a while, they'll stop outputting dialing > signals on the trunks in response to dialing the phone. In other > words, you can get dial tone, but you won't be able to dial out on the > trunks. > FIX: if your station cards are already displaying this problem, note > that the bad ports should still work fine for electronic phones. The > new station cards are supposedly redesigned to avoid this problem, but > I wouldn't bet on it. Disconnect the A/A1 leads (that's pair 2, or > black/yellow, or white-orange/orange-white, depending on how youw ired > it) for single line phones, modems, and credit card dialers. This is also a problem for anyone using such devices with an RJ-14 phone jack (two lines on one "normal" jack"). Shorting the A/A1 pair shorts the second line. This tends to upset anyone on the other line! I use a "splitter jack" from Radio Shack to handle this, it plugs into the wall jack and provides three jacks: 1 RJ14 1 RJ-11 for line 1 1 RJ-11 for line two The RJ-11s only have *two* wires connected so they'll totally insulate the wiring from the A/A1 lines on the device. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/56 Leonard.Erickson@f56.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS address is checked daily. The others infrequently) ------------------------------ From: scol@scottsdale.az.stratus.com (Scott Colbath) Subject: Re: Influencing PUCs Date: 5 Jun 92 13:38:23 GMT In article jessea@homecare.com (Jesse W. Asher) writes: > Our local carrier is in the process of tariffing ISDN and I would > like to know how much influence the public has over this process. I'd > like to see ISDN come in reach of home users (BRI) and I was curious > if there was someway to influence the process so that this would > happen. I've heard other RBOCs pricing BRI ISDN out of the home > consumer's reach and I don't want that to happen here. So I'm > starting by asking where to start! :-) Thanks for any advice on this. Not related to ISDN, but when USWEST bounced up the price for a third line to my house from $150 last year to $1030 this year I got mad enough to call the ACC (Arizona's PUC) and complain about the price. Apparently, so did many others. Enough that the ACC is now asking USWEST to show cause for the price increase. I guess what I saying here is that you should call the PUC and bug them like me and many others did regarding the tariff for third line costs. It may help. Scott Colbath Stratus Computer Phoenix, Az. (602) 852-3106 Internet: scott_colbath@az.stratus.com ------------------------------ From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: 800 Number With "Routing Error" Date: 5 Jun 92 15:23:45 GMT In article , slonim@iil.intel.com (Slonim Edwin) writes: > The MCI number from Israel is 177-150-2727 > By the way, is AT&T charging you for access to these 800 numbers? Do > other carriers have the same policy for international calls? > Sometimes I would have been willing to pay to access 800 numbers, but > thought it impossible from overseas. USA Direct (and it's MCI counterpart) is a method getting a connection to the US phone system from abroad. The call is "free" for the phone you are calling from, and, if it's a toll free number (800), there is no charge for the US end of the call. But you still will be billed for the international part of the call at the curent rate. This is usually MUCH cheaper than the PTT charge with the added plus of being able to dial 800 numbers that would otherwise be unreachable. I have no idea if AT&T will allow a call to an 800 number that is not theirs, but the advertizing for USA Direct impies that you may call any number just like you were on a pay phone in the us. It might aslso be worth mentioning that last month while I was in Germany the DBP (German Federal Post) lowered the rates on calls to the US by a huge amount because they had lost so much business to USA Direct. Now a short call from Germany to the US cost less vis the DBP for a short call, but USA Direct is still cheaper for longer ones. I don't rember where the crossover point was. R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: oberman1@llnl.gov (510) 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: isus!hoyt@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Hoyt A. Stearns jr.) Subject: Re: Wisconsin Bell Monitors 1 in 1000 Phone Calls? Organization: International Society of Unified Science Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 17:55:27 GMT In article manley@optilink.com (Dave Manley) writes: >> Actually, they do. In Wisconsin MaBell records one out of every 1000 phone >> calls placed. They have employees listen to ALL these phone converstions, > [Moderator's Note: See the previous message. All telcos do this, and .... > amounts on certain unnamed Usenet news groups) would dictate that if a > few hundred million phone calls are made in the USA each day, it would > be impossible to have employees listen to 'ALL these phone conversations' > or even some infintesimal fraction of them for other than a few > seconds each. > monitoring is a non-issue. PAT] You mean it's not portrayed correctly in the movie "The President's Analyst", where "every line in the country is tapped"? :-) Hoyt A. Stearns jr.|uunet.uu.net 4131 E. Cannon Dr. |!telesys.com Phoenix, AZ. 85028 |!isus!hoyt voice_602_996_1717_|____________ ------------------------------ From: wollman@UVM.EDU (Garrett Wollman) Subject: Re: Atlanta vs. Los Angeles Cellular Carriers Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 01:47:57 GMT In article John Higdon writes: > [B cellular carriers are often relatively minor land-line players in > their territories] > Cellular companies seem to go out of their way to keep roaming > agreements within the same band, even if it means dealing with "the > competition". It almost seems as if this was intentional. The B carrier here in Northern Vermont is Contel Cellular (A is Cell One), even though New England Tel serves more customers *by far* than Contel wireline. (Gee, does the acquisition of Contel by GTE mean that Contel's service will get even worse than it already was? I'm glad I don't live in Contel territory now.) (In other news, Adelphia Cable Communications is now delivering Digital Cable Radio. I wonder how long it will be before they petition the PSB to compete in telephone service?) Garrett A. Wollman = wollman@uvm.edu = UVM is welcome to my opinions = uvm-gen!wollman = ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: Business Office Hours Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 23:44:00 EDT Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Lakeside Terrace > Southern Bell has two 24 hour services. The first is > RightTouch(tm) that allows you to use a touch tone phone to place > simple orders (ie disconnect line, order Prestige(r), etc.). They > also have a 611 repair service. Note that using the WrongTouch mentioned above has steep charges for its use. I seem to recall you used to be able to have service disconnected for n-months, such as when your winter house is closed up, for next to nothing. Now you get big ads from BS plugging WrongTouch, and a fee in the tens of dollars for using it. As for Repair, when I left Miami and moved back to the United States, a *LARGE* fraud case was building against BS of Florida. It seems as if, if your line was out more than 24 hours, you were due a rebate and BS had to report it to the PSC. Well somebody spilled the beans after being fired. ALL troubles got fixed after 23 hours. Must be magic! This was found to be state-wide, and I think the fraud total was in the many millions over the years. The Attorney General had a major case underway. I went this route many times on my noisy pair. "It must be your interior wiring {CRASH, CRACKLE, HISS} as there is nothing wrong with OUR cable." "But I'm plugged into your protector with my butt set." {silence followed..} wb8foz@skybridge.cwru.edu ------------------------------ From: malcolm@Apple.COM (Malcolm Slaney) Subject: Re: Pacbell Data Access Lines Date: 7 Jun 92 03:46:43 GMT Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) writes: > Zowieee ... no signal to noise measurement. That probably is the > single most critical parameter for normal voice band dial up modems. > Basic voice grade circuits are usually spec'd at 24 dB signal to > C-notched noise. Data grade circuits usually are 28 dB. Perhaps data lines are covered by the voice spec? When we moved into our new house the main line was awfully noisy. We had an installer out to install a modem line and he listened to the line and agreed it was noisy. He didn't seem to concerned about it so I casually asked him if there was a specification for noise on the line. He got a bright look in the eyes, got his nifty noise meter, found it above spec, entered a trouble report on the line, and spent the new hour or two tracking down a short in one of the pairs coming down our pole. Gotta love those craft people! Never could have explained that to the people answering the phone. Malcolm ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 08:38:11 -0500 From: rms@miles.miles.com (Rob Schultz) Subject: Re: Good Service From GTE in L.A. Area Organization: Miles Inc., Diagnostics Division, Elkhart, IN In article is written: >> [Moderator's Note: And isn't it true Lauren that the generic term >> 'GTE' does not mean a lot in and of itself. There are many, many GTE >> telephone operating companies just as there are lots of Bell >> companies, and the GTE company here in Illinois might be (probably is) >> managed entirely differently. Readers here have been speaking poorly >> of the California operation, but they might be quite content with the >> same parent company under subsidiaries in other areas of the USA. PAT] > Actually, some time ago (some years), many had spoken ill of the > Indiana GTE operation as well ... I wonder if things have changed > much. Actually, my experience (lines not actually hooked up) was with GTE North in Elkhart, Indiana. Of course, much of my problem may be due to the fact that Elkhart is not exactly the technological center of the world, but ... Rob Schultz At work: +1 219 262 7206 rms@andria.miles.com rms@miles.com {uunet|iuvax}!nstar!miles!andria!rms {uunet|iuvax}!nstar!miles!rms ------------------------------ From: mwiz@devnull.mpd.tandem.com (Marc Wiz) Subject: Re: On The Other Hand ... Date: 6 Jun 92 17:20:56 GMT Organization: Tandem Computers (MPD) Austin, TX In article John Higdon writes: > I will probably get a progress report on Wednesday. Now, can anyone > imagine this sort of attention to a residence customer in the land of > GTE? And even when Pac*Bell found my internal marginal pairs (how > embarassing!), no one called me an idiot. Hell, the GTE front line > person would have taken care of that job! I have a different story to tell about GTE. This incident took place in Duarte, Ca. (which is a suburb of L.A.) in 1987-1988. Duarte is served by GTE. Anyway I had a dead line on a Saturday or Sunday. I did not know what the problem was. After my roommate and I verified that it was indeed the "phone company" and not the key system in the house I used my roommate's line to call repair and reported the problem. They told me that the problem would be fixed by Monday due to the fact that it was the weekend. Lo and behold within three hours I had dialtone! What little telecom technical knowledge I have has been obtained from my friends and the Digest. Speaking as a customer of GTE I was impressed. Especially since I had had GTE service several times previously and was not impressed by the service. Back then I got the distinct impression that GTE was working hard to change their image. Just another data point. Marc Wiz Yes that really is my last name. MaBell: (512) 244-8780 Internet: mwiz@mpd.tandem.com The views expressed are my own. Mine all mine! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 10:13:47 PDT From: dplatt@ntg.com (Dave Platt) Subject: Re: An Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake Organization: New Technologies Group, Inc. Palo Alto CA > Hmm, THAT explains a lot ... > Jeff Sicherman > [Moderator's Note: Does it? ... perhaps you'll share your new wisdom > with all of us! :) PAT] Well, I can't speak for Jeff ... but I'll fess up to an image which popped into my mind when I read PAT's note ... ... PAT, waking up at the crack of dawn, starting a pot of strong coffee, cueing up his favorite portion of The Ring Cycle, opening the window, staring out as the sun rises and his terminal displays the log of messages-to-be-moderated ... ... and saying happily "God, I love the smell of napalm in the morning!" And then, later in the day, after struggling with eight different finger-pointing telecom vendors for nine hours just to try to get dial-tone on his classic 2500 set, sighing to himself "Deregulation. Modified Final Judgment. The horror... the horror..." Dave Platt VOICE: (415) 813-8917 Domain: dplatt@ntg.com UUCP: ...netcomsv!ntg!dplatt USNAIL: New Technologies Group Inc. 2468 Embarcardero Way, Palo Alto CA 94303 [Moderator's Note: Lovely ... just lovely. Actually, people who know me personally say the role of Brunhilda better suits me. :) And with the Pilgrim's Chorus playing in the background I must say goodnight. This Digest starts to get on my nerves after awhile. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #455 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28346; 7 Jun 92 10:38 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07483 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 08:57:30 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06782 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 08:57:20 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 08:57:20 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206071357.AA06782@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #456 TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Jun 92 08:57:20 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 456 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Some History of GTE-Florida (Don Kimberlin, FIDO via Jack Decker) Switches in AT&Ts Network (John Butz) Help on TV Remote History Needed (Bruce Klopfenstein) Voice Messaging User Interface Forum Standard (Norm Aleks) The Economist 5/30/92 (Bob Anderson) Crossed-Pairs (was GTE Stories) Martin McCormick) More on Avoiding Telco-Generated Junk Mail (John Nagle) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 16:32:58 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Some History of GTE-Florida More on GTE-Florida from the Fidonet FCC echomail conference: * From : Don Kimberlin, 1:379/37 (30 May 92 08:56) * To : Tony Pelliccio * Subj : Phoneco slime continu TP> We get that here as standard GTE operating policy. Their > computers seem to cough and die periodically, taking out whole chunks > of the city. TP> Whew ... glad I don't have GTE as my local company! Phone service > here is a little outrageous but not like what you've got. And system > service is VERY good lately... last time a phone system went down > was when 20,000 lines got knocked out in Providence due to a > software bug about three years ago. Of course there's the occasional > glitch where the system just dumps every call (mostly on the East > Providence exchanges), but nothing like what you seem to be talking > about. GTE of Florida has its own unique personality, phoneco-wise. The history is unique, in that Tampa, FL was on the telephone fringe of the U.S. back in the WW I - era times of the first anti-trust suit against the original Bell System robber barons. (Those who don't want to believe this should read some of the history books about Theodore Vail, the "hero-president" of the Bell System of that era, and how he was a private student of the Vanderbilts, Morgans and such who gave him direct instructions.) Tampa was reported to have had as many as SIX competing local phone companies, and all, including Southern Bell, wound up selling out to a couple of local meat market owners, the Brorein Brothers, who proceeded for the next half-century to run Peninsular Telephone Company throughout the territory from Sarasota and Bradenton through Tampa/St. Pete/Clearwater up to New Port Richey. By the late 1950's, Peninsular Telephone was still another one of those humble, hard-working local totally independent phonecos, and the pressures of explosive population growth were more than the aging Brorein Brothers wanted to handle. They offered their company to Southern Bell, which took a couple of years to decide that it was still too near to 1913 for a Bell company to try to buy another phoneco (which AT&T had agreed to never again do as part of the 1913 anti-trust settlement). GTE was just waking up to the notion of expanding by acquiring independents around the country, and they bought the Broreins out. Now, with their GTE-variety Bell-shaped heads, they thought they had purchased a metropolitan-area phoneco, not an oversized country store. With the best sort of big-corporation "poor-think," GTE hired itself the absolutely worst sort of "best kind of president." They hired the president of Ohio Bell (those who understand the inner workings of the Bell System of that era know that Ohio Bell at that time was one of the "punishment tours" of the 1950's Bell monolith; a place they sent the poorer performers to shape up about how to be a Bell executive.). Anyhow, he moved in and like any good circus boss, brought all his Ohio Bell cronies with him. They had no understanding of how to evolve a country-store phoneco into a metropolitan area one, and made every kind of plant, engineering and business mistake one could make in the phoneco business. The old Peninsular plant just crashed, but that did not stop them from seeking an enormous rate increase, using the old song, "Our investors will withdraw if we don't get an increase." Well, in short form without a ton of war stories, GTE of Florida caused the telephone industry a number of losses. For the _first_ time ever in the history of American telephony, a PUC was forced by public outrage to come out of camera and hold hearings in the territory of the company so the public could vent its wrath. Telling what the public had to say about GTE Florida at that time would fill books. The outcome was that for the _first_time_ever_ in the history of American telephony, a phoneco rate increase request was denied, but going beyond that, the PUC was forced to dig deeply enough into GTE- Florida's books to find that their intercity short-haul toll charges were all wrong, and GTE-Florida was the _first_ phonecp forced to implement rather large "Extended Area Service" flat-rate service offerings. Yes, the rates went up, but the calling areas expanded a lot. That was the early 1960's, but even to this day, the last of the old Peninsular loyals is finally fading out of GTE-Florida, still doing battle with the Ohio Bell implants. Meantime, neither faction has ever been terribly competent, and neither faction really ever understood what running a "real Bell phone company" was like. So, a parody of a phoneco continues to grow and entangle itself throughout the Suncoast of Florida, absolutely certain in their own way that they "must be running a big business phoneco." Sad thing is, it is a _huge_ business phoneco, still full of country-store notions about how to go about the job. Sadder yet is a public in that area that's grown up with it and thinks it's normal to be that way ... [Moderator's Note: Then in a subsequent message, Kimberlin replied to comments by John Desmond: JD> More likely the problem is that the Telco switches have run out of > resources (trunks, etc) to handle the load. The CPU's are sitting there > running along fine, it is jus that they do not have any trunks available > due to the heavy demand for resources to complete the calls. The > Telephone networks are designed to handle an average peak load of > traffic. GTE of Florida is a particularly stubborn example of a lot of bad things, though. You see, they bought into a burgeoning metro area (still growing and beyond a million subscriber lines) and they like to play "poor little country phone company," which that area hasn`t been for 35 years. They wound up with Home Shopping Network located in their territory, and talk about a phoneco gold mine! Their piece of the jillions of INWATS (800) calls to Home Shopping was about eight cents a minute for a blue zillion minutes a day. But did they react and build plant to handle it? Nope. Not for two years, while the HSN people griped and hollered and fussed, GTE of Florida blithely let the general public get no connections, either. Well, it was AT&T that put the onus on GTE Florida. They got so sick of failed call attempts into that area code (and the GTE people EVEN tried the old Farmer Jones Phoneco Trick from 1955, "tromboning" the incoming calls -- that means if all your trunks are busy, you dial the call BACK into the long distance company, and let them handle it once again. Maybe, just MAYBE, if that call comes back ten seconds later, it will hit one of your trunks that released, and complete ... but it ties up the long distance company's trunks all to heck ... not a nice thing to do at all!!!) So, an AT&T salesman showed HSN some printouts that showed clearly that GTE was blocking half of HSN's INWATS with clogged plant, and two things happened: First, HSN and AT&T got together and made a deal with, of all places, MCI. MCI was placing fiber across Tampa Bay and agreed to put a fiber terminal right in the HSN premises -- ten feet from HSN's ACD, while AT&T set up a deal to steer the IMWATS to MCI for completion. What happened? GTE - Florida cost itself all those eight cents' and MCI got it! Then, HSN sued GTE for huge sums -- had them dead cold, and only through HSN's own executive arrogance (the chairman is one of those "lawyers who didn't pass the bar exam"), fired an excellent law firm and ruined their own prosecution of the case. GTE hired a really good, really expensive NYC lawyer, and got the case decided in their favor. (Guess who wound up paying for that, as if we all don't know.) The point is, GTE of Florida runs a particularly stubborn, cheap style of operating a phone plant; some things that would curl a Bell mind's hair. That leads into the incredibly sloppy operation of their plant. Downright protracted failures and outages are a way of life with them. They routinely blow CPU's down with incompetent software loads. There have been cases in GTE-Florida territory clearly caught where they loaded new software revs and when they blew it, couldn't get the backup to work -- for 2, 4 even 14 hours! Numerous other cases involve installation activity with the famous "wrench that fell on the battery bus" or "cut the wrong cable in the office" stuff. Nope, the sort of things you might expect of a competent phoneco don't even apply to GTE-Florida. They give a whole definition to the meaning of incompentent and unreliable as far as phonecos go. Of course, that doesn't mean the Florida PUC ever gets around to catching them at it. But, all the hijinks of the Florida commission- ers and the paybacks they take from the entities they are supposed to "regulate" is an entire book. I guess you can see what the result for the public there is ... WM v2.01 [Eval]/91-2722 * Origin: BORDERLINE!BBS Kannapolis,N.C. (704)938-6207 (1:379/37) -------- Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ From: jbutz@homxa.att.com Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 08:51 EDT Subject: Switches in AT&Ts Network jadams@vixen.bellcore.com writes: > In article , capek@watson.ibm.com > writes: >> When AT&T announced its 700 service about a month ago, the coverage in >> the {New York Times} said that the service was made possible by new >> software in its number 5 ESS switches. Was that an error? ... >> Is that true? > No, AT&T at last count had around 400 4Es running its domestic LD net. ^^^ 400?!? Have you been smoking something?! John jbutz@homxa.att.com ------------------------------ From: klopfens@andy.bgsu.edu (Bruce Klopfenstein) Subject: Help on TV Remote History Needed Date: 6 Jun 92 13:16:28 GMT Organization: Bowling Green State University B.G., Oh. I am in the process of writing a book chapter for James Walker's upcoming book, The Remote Control Device in the New Age of Television. My chapter is on the historical growth of television remote control devices up to the present, and the factors that both stimulated and retarded the growth of TV remotes. Data on remote control growth (whether via television set sales, VCRs or cable television) is difficult to uncover. I need the help of anyone who may have been involved in the television, VCR and/or cable TV equipment industries. If you read this and are not the right person but can lead me to others at, for example, RCA, Zenith, etc., please pass along any names to me. I am also interested in interviewing any pioneers at (or retired from) any of these companies who may have helpful insights into the history and growth of TV remote control devices. Thanks, in advance, for any leads, remote control growth statistics, or any other help you might be able to offer. Bruce C. Klopfenstein | klopfens@andy.bgsu.edu Department of Telecommunications | klopfenstein@bgsuopie.bitnet 322 West Hall | klopfens@bgsuvax.UUCP Bowling Green State University | (419) 372-2138; 372-2224 Bowling Green, OH 43403-0235 | fax (419) 372-8600 ------------------------------ From: naleks@world.std.com (Norm Aleks) Subject: Voice Messaging User Interface Forum Standard Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 13:57:13 GMT I read fairly recently that this multi-vendor standards agreement, which is meant to assure that a basic set of voice-mail functions can be implemented consistently across all platforms (for telephone company use, I assume), has been released. Does anyone have a copy? Could someone post or email to me a description of the basic keys? Finally, could you post the address I could write to, to get a copy of my own? These are the ones I think I know so far, because New England Tel is using them on its Call Answering service: Replay Save Delete 1 2 3 4 5 6 Backspace Pause Fast-forward 7 8 9 Stop Help Enter * 0 # Norm Aleks naleks@world.std.com +1 617 266 1826 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 06 Jun 92 09:27:23 MDT From: Bob Anderson Div Gov Res 73305 Subject: The Economist 5/30/92 The {Economist} of 5/30/92 pages 19-22 has an article on Mobile telephones. Subtitle "The fast-spreading mobile telephone is challenging its wire-linked ancestor. It will change society in rich countries and poor alike." From page 22 FIXED-LINK FIGHT-BACK: "Will mobile telephones replace fixed-link ones? In places starting almost from scratch, they are already doing so. In the poor countries of Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe, existing networks are so small and bad that those who can afford it buy mobile telephones just to make calls at all. ..." "In poor countries, radio networks are also easier to safeguard against theft ( no attractive copper wires) and to repair (no need to send linemen out into the bush)." An interesting article. Bob Anderson (Boba@taurid.unm.edu) ------------------------------ Subject: Crossed-Pairs (was GTE Stories) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 92 13:49:53 -0500 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu When I worked as a technician at the Oklahoma Radio Reading Service for the Blind in the mid seventies, we had a 5KHZ equalized loop from our studios in an older part of Oklahoma City to the FM broadcast station whose subcarrier we leased. Our loop was silent during the night hours and we once had our pair confused with a data pair going to one of the local hospitals. While that problem got cleared up within a few minutes, we did acquire a problem which just about drove both us and Southwestern Bell personnel crazy. Every week or so, our audio level as heard over the air would slowly drop to nothing or almost nothing. There was plenty of stuff to hear, however. We could usually hear all kinds of crosstalk from dial-up lines. I don't remember hearing conversation, due to the level of voice, but it wasn't hard to hear ringing and dialing. We would call Southwestern Bell, after first checking with the broadcast station, and give them the pair number. Their technicians would test it and the problem would go away for another week. One afternoon, after the umpteenth outage, I didn't even check with our broadcast cite to see if they were having trouble. I just called SWBT and reported the pair. When they asked whether we had checked with the engineer at the transmitter and I said that we hadn't, this time, a very annoyed technician called back to yell at me about the amount of time being tied up. I did some yelling right back and explained that for the last six weeks, we had been losing this loop and each time it was in the same office. Fortunately for me, The problem was where I said it was, but the SWBT folks must have studied it a little more closely because, what they found, was that our pair was probably almost corroded through, somewhere between our studio and the office in question. Fifty or so years had taken their toll on the available cables and we had one of those oldies, but baddies for the loop. Each time the SWBT technicians connected their test set and toned the line, they broke down the metal-oxide junction that was forming at the corrosion point. It made it appear that they had found a bad terminal block or a bad heat carbon, or anything but a bad line. As the conductors failed, the balanced condition of the line was lost and that's why we could hear all the crosstalk. This was a fine example of how even though nobody was lazy or incompetent, a problem could continue for a very long time. An ancient cable stretch had outsmarted all of us. We got another pair and never had any more of that particular problem, again. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) Subject: More on Avoiding Telco-Generated Junk Mail Date: Sat, 06 Jun 92 23:58:50 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) After complaining to Pacific Bell about some junk mail sent from them, I was told that "no junk mail" was an orderable feature. So I ordered it. And sure enough, an acknowledgement of a service order showed up. It reads: Activity ADD Quantity 1 Description Cust Req: No Sales Calls/Media Monthly Rate 0.00 No USOC code, though. John Nagle ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #456 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29375; 7 Jun 92 11:09 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21748 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 09:27:39 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00355 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 09:27:31 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 09:27:31 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206071427.AA00355@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #457 TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Jun 92 09:27:23 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 457 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Billing Nightmare (John Higdon) NYTel's Incorrect Billing (Dave Niebuhr) Billing Algorithm Wanted (Rodney Todt) CDMA Overview Document Available by Anonymous FTP (Phil Karn) Sharing of IXC CPNI (David Gast) Local Telco Experiences (Phillip Dampier) 1200 Baud Modems Wanted in Latvia (Harry Bush) Switches Used by Cellular Carriers in MSA's (Gregory Youngblood) PABX/PBX Documentation Request (Scott Marshall) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 00:14 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: AT&T Billing Nightmare I have the makings for a real nightmare here. As I was paying bills, I noticed three calls to the UK on three separate days a week apart. The total cost of the calls came to $32.98. I reached for the phone and called AT&T to have them removed, since I made no such calls. I was firmly told by the rep that unless I called Pac*Bell and had "my lines checked" and some reason for those calls found, they could not be removed. I was given the usual third-degree about someone else in the house making the calls (not possible), or having made them without remembering (not possible). In any event, I was told that no credit could be given. I asked for a supervisor. While I was waiting, I three-wayed the Pac*Bell rep in. It boils down to this: Pac*Bell cannot issue a credit for AT&T. AT&T will not issue a credit, period, unless trouble can be proven (translation: someone found who was bridged on the line) and then Pac*Bell will be stuck for the cost of the calls anyway. In essence, AT&T NEVER eats the cost of a call. I accused both of passing the buck to each other AND strongly stated that I felt greatly put upon for something that was not any of my doing. Pac*Bell told me to deduct the cost of the calls, but told me that this was being done as a courtesy and that Pac*Bell would still have to pay AT&T for the calls. Naturally, this would be a one-time event. Since these calls were made a week apart and the problem could still be happening, what happens next month? I will refuse to pay for calls that I do not make and I will not have my veracity questioned by company clerks. My KX-T1232 has an SMDR output that is continuously captured by my UNIX computer. Logs of the times and dates in question obviously do not indicate any such calls. To launch a pre-emptive stike, I called 611 and filed a report for the four possible lines that could be involved. The interesting thing is that this group is never used for outgoing calls, local or long distance. These UK calls stuck out on the bill like a sore thumb. But what is more distressing is AT&T's attitude. It seems to be willing to lose my business over $32.02. This is unacceptable. Unfortunately, AT&T offers for my requirements the best service at the best price. But I have never had a situation where I have spent so much money with a company and had such little cooperation when there appeared to be an accounting problem. You can bet there will be more on this one! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 09:23:14 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: NYTel's Incorrect Billing In my nine-month battle with NYTel over incorrect billing, I have just found out that the software (I think) is incorrect for all exchanges in the Eastern Suffolk Region of the 516 area code. It seems that when three new exchanges were given to the county so that it could consolidate most phones into these new ones, one exchange was supposed to be set up to charge as local calls those coming from residents in the above area. Instead, they are charged at a higher rate. Many complaints were made to both NYTel and the County and I kept getting a complete runaround and complained to the NY Public Service Commission. Now I'm starting to get results such as a refund for those that I make to the incorrect (billing purposes only) exchange as are many others in my region. After three months of hearing "hopefully next month the problem will be fixed; it's at the corporate level", I complained again and forced the NYTel rep to go higher in the chain of command (ten or so levels which I doubt). One thing mentioned was that it would be an expensive fix (guess who's going to pay) and would take time which I somehow believe could be done a lot faster for some reason. My switch is a 5ESS so I would tend to suspect all of those switches in my region have that same problem (I don't know about the DMSs). My question is: Am I correct in assuming the software is a fault or or is it the hardware? Just another example of NYTel and Suffolk County, New York's ineptness when it comes to "doing something better for the rate/taxpayers." Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: rtodt@relay.nswc.navy.mil (Rodney Todt - E41) Subject: Billing Algorithm Wanted Organization: NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 14:51:13 GMT I am interested in obtaining information from network admin. types regarding billing or chargeback algorithms. The Center I work for has established Service Costs Centers which are required to re- cover cost of operations and maintenance. In this case, I am dealing with a SCC that involves a TCP/IP Ethernet network. The potential number of nodes for this network could reach 3000+ and the associated cost for O&M could become very large. There is some network management development efforts currently being attempted using mostly SUN products. If anyone has a usable algorithm that they feel confident in sharing its information; design, development, and operation, please e-mail the same. Any information, sources, would be greatly appreciated. Rodney Todt rtodt@nswc.navy.mil NSWCDD (703) 663-4146 Dahlgren, Va. ------------------------------ From: karn@chicago.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn) Subject: CDMA Overview Document Available by Anonymous FTP Organization: Qualcomm, Inc Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1992 07:31:00 GMT A new CDMA document is now available by anonymous FTP from lorien.qualcomm.com. The title is "An Overview of the Application of Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA) to Digital Cellular Systems and Personal Cellular Networks". The file name is /pub/cdma/Overview.ps.Z and is in compressed Postscript format. The 64-page document provides a comprehensive technical overview of the basic design principles behind Qualcomm's CDMA system. Some of the material was originally in our internal version of the CAI, but being tutorial in nature it was removed from the official version released to the TIA standards process. Considerable new material has also been added to reflect actual results from the field tests in San Diego. When logging into lorien.qualcomm.com, use "anonymous" as your user name, and give your actual name as the password. Be sure to specify image (binary) mode when retrieving this file. You will need the UNIX "uncompress" command (or equivalent) and a Postscript printer or interpreter to print or display this document. As before, we encourage other sites to pick up this document and make it available to others by anonymous FTP to help limit the load on Qualcomm's 56k connection to the Internet. Enjoy! Phil Karn Qualcomm, Inc ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 00:53:19 -0700 From: gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) Subject: Sharing of IXC CPNI Someone wrote: > AT&T, SPRINT, MCI all share information about long distance > calling patterns of customers. Andy Sherman of AT&T replied: > ... let me ask, where did you get such a bizarre idea as this one? I don't know where he got the idea, but I posted something a couple months ago from the Privacy Journal which even quoted the Federal Register Number. The FCC requires that the IXCs share this transactional information under the reasoning that it promotes the lowest prices. (Clearly, sharing information results in higher, not lower prices). The FCC may exempt large corporations from the requirement in the future because they have lobbying power and they don't want their calling patterns, specifically the numbers they call, to be released. The FCC has no plans to protect the privacy of individuals. > I believe that customer calling patterns come under the heading of > Customer Proprietary Network Information (CPNI) which is not to be > divulged to third parties by an interexchange carrier. Why is it not to be divulged? The ECPA specifically permits transfering transactional information, as opposed to the contents of calls, to any non-governmental organization. > Sitting at AT&T, I would have to say that MCI and Sprint are third > parties to us, as we must be to them. Such sharing of information as > you describe is against FCC regulations. Better check those FCC regulations because unless something recently changed, you are wrong. > It would also be skating on real thin anti-trust ice, too, since > some might take it as evidence of cartel-like behavior. I see it that way, but the nitwits that Bushie-tail appointed don't. They think that consumers will get lower prices if the suppliers share information. > It would also be real stupid for any of the big interexchange carriers to > give away marketing information like that to the competition. Except that it allows higher prices. David Gast ------------------------------ From: Phillip.Dampier@f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier) Reply-To: phil@rochgte.fidonet.org Date: Sat, 06 Jun 1992 21:00:59 -0500 Subject: Local Telco Experiences Since John Higdon mentioned some bad experiences on his side of the country, let me relate my own personal experiences this week with a different sort of telco: Rochester Telephone here in Rochester, New York. In 1978, our home was built on top of what is best compared to a rock quarry. The builder scraped away the precious topsoil and sold it, giving the utilities one helluva time digging in their lines. The local power company did the right thing with specially constructed cables to endure the mass o' rocks, but Rochester Telephone and the local cable monopoly relied on the standard methods of installation. As soon as the rocks and bit 'o soil were thrown back in the whole, the phone line was cut and the cable television coax was damaged. In the time since then, Rochester Telephone has installed no less than eight new telephone cables in here, which last for an average of two years before a settling boulder or other problem makes the cable unusable. Rochester Telephone has been good to me however, and they finally installed four 20+ pair cables for the six lines in this house, all at no charge whatsoever to me. The idea was "we don't want to have to make you suffer while we arrange to get another cable buried, so this should keep you going for awhile." Another big plus with Rochester Tel is the availability of data conditioned lines (up to 4800 bps on standard dial up circuits) for a one time fee of $39.00, payable over six months interest free. This past week, one of the pairs on one of the cables went bad, and when I called Rochester Telephone repair, a truck was out here with a three man crew in 30 minutes. Not only did they quickly identify the problem, they also found a few others waiting to happen and corrected them as well. We now have consistently excellent service from Rochester Telephone. The special services repair people even make it a point to try and get to know the customer and over the years, the people at the local switch near here recognize my name and are already familiar with the peculiarities of this site when it comes to problem solving. Unlike Mr. Higdon's experiences with his local telco, Roch Tel repair people generally are listeners, especially with people who seem to grasp some understanding of telephony, and encourage you to give them some ideas and assistance in quickly locating the trouble. I've had Roch Tel repair people at all hours, and on many cases where real trouble crops up (crosstalk with multiple lines), they'll fix it 24 hours a day. I wouldn't trade this local telco for a Baby Bell in a billion years. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 05:24:21 +0300 (EED) From: Harry%castle.riga.lv@ussr.eu.net (Harry Bush) Subject: 1200 Baud Modems Wanted in Latvia Organization: Bank of Latvia ------ Original Message ------- This request comes from an official of the Bank of Latvia. As you may know, Latvia, along with Estonia and Lithuania, recvoered its indepen- dence in August, 1991 after the Soviet coup. The country was virtually cut off from the world while part of the Soviet Union. Latvia is now trying to once again reestablish contact with the rest of the world. Richard Budd - - - - - - - - - - - - - - THE CYBERSPACE FOR LATVIAN STUDENTS After long years in closed society, Latvia is now rejoining free world and free communications. An amateur community using computer telecommunications has appeared there represented mostly by young people below age of 24. They have already formed a Fido network 2:495, part of a global Fido network, described in official Fido nodelist. Unfortunately prices of modems are still very high there compared to average income of a student, even on SysOp's price, and that is the main obstacle to growth of amateur network. You can help to extend the Cyberspace to Free Latvia. If you have a Hayes modem -- possibly slow and not in use anymore -- send it to the address mentioned below. (Hayes-compatible modems are also accept- able. - RB) Modems should be Hayes compatible internal or external 1200 or 2400 baud devices, with or without MNP, for IBM PC XT or AT compatible personal computers. Any second hand device will suit if still able to work. Any donation will be registered, and information about the user will be passed back to the donator (possibly using the same modem, if net address available). Contributions may be sent to: Mr. Harry Bush, Adviser to President of Bank of Latvia, 2-a K.Valdemara street, Riga, LATVIA. (Please avoid mentioning SU, USSR, Russia or previous postal indexes in any form because it can imply mail routing via Moscow and cause significant delays in delivery). DHL international express mail service is also operating in Latvia. But the best way still is to ask somebody visiting Latvia simply to take the device with him. Mr. Bush (FidoNet 2:495/21.13) has taken a responsibility to distribute the contributions among the people who would be happy to use them. Any further questions and suggestions are welcome. E-mail (via Internet): Harry%castle.riga.lv@ussr.eu.net , phone no. (Riga) 323863. (Country Code is still 7. I can not find the city code for Riga in my AT&T International guide. If anyone has an up-to-date guide with the Baltic States in it, please post. RB) - - - - - - - - - - - - - Letters and packages posted for Latvia, can now be sent directly there. Before last month, mail for Latvia was delivered via Moscow. If you have Riga's Soviet zip code, make sure you drop the first two digits. That will give you the zip code for independent Latvian communities. RB [Moderator's Note: Although this seems a valid charitable endeavor, readers are encouraged to verify the facts before sending anything of value via the mail or a delivery service to an unknown person. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Switches Used by Cellular Carriers in MSA's From: zeta@yngbld.gwinnett.COM (Gregory Youngblood) Date: Sat, 06 Jun 92 18:42:04 EST Organization: TCS Consulting Services, Peachtree City, GA I've got information that lists the switches used by MSA carriers as of August 1991. I'm working on getting a more up to date listing that also includes RSA carriers. If there is enough interest, I'll post it here for everyone. If your interested, please send me a message at: SWITCH@YNGBLD.GWINNETT.COM Thanks, Greg ------------------------------ From: tmarshall01@cc.curtin.edu.au Subject: PABX/PBX Documentation Request Organization: Curtin University of Technology Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 08:39:18 GMT Hi people, I am currently doing some research on PABX/PBX systems. I was wondering whether any persons had any sorts of PABX/PBX documents avialable to mail me/make available for FTP for me. It is important I get some sort of feedback. Maybe if you know a contact address where as I could pay and get a copy of various systems documentation. Thanks in advance for any help supplied. Scott ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #457 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01056; 7 Jun 92 11:54 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA03354 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 10:11:26 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08562 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 10:11:16 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 10:11:16 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206071511.AA08562@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #458 TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Jun 92 10:11:19 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 458 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson GTE of S.California and Intralata Calls (Paul Robinson) MCI No Longer Bills Adult 900-Calls (Sean E. Williams) Leased Line versus Satellite (Matthew Holdrege) Software For Microwawe Link (Jean-Benoit Gauthier) Presidential 'Poll' via Telephone Information Service (Michael Nolan) Union Involvement in McCormick Place Events (Bill Nickless) 4,000 Person CWA Conference Call (Dave Weitzel) Information Needed on Racal-Vadic (James G. Speth) Directory Assistance Costs For One Unnamed Federal Agency (Paul Robinson) 703-527 : Alexandria/Arlington (Carl Moore) Where is 617-422? (Carl Moore) Caller-ID Block-Block (Paul Robinson) AT&T System 75 PBX (Tom Downs) Help Needed Selecting New PBX (Lynn Gale) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson, Contractor Date: Fri, 05 Jun 92 19:48:59 EDT Subject: GTE of S.California and Intralata Calls In a message <12-448#6> from Andy Gellens: > I live in a GTE island surrounded by PacBell. For those of you who live within GTE of California territory, if you ever get to Southern California, a place to drive past is a nondescript telephone switch building at the corner of 6th & Almond in Long Beach. This building contains the computer used for ALL 911 calls made from any GTE exchange anywhere in Southern California. They have direct lines from all GTE switching areas to this building. I'm not telling anything secret; this was published in the paper. I used to live in Long Beach. > 60 miles away is Los Angles [sic] which is within my LATA > ...If I call someone in LA who has GTE, does my call stay > on GTE facilities all the way? Does my CO hand off the call > to a GTE toll switch which routes it to a GTE switch in LA? > Or does it travel part of the way on Pacbell lines? The LATA rules simply indicate that a dial tone supplier can only connect intra-lata calls as toll; once it crosses a LATA you have to use an interexchange carrier (unless the call is non-toll as I've been informed). GTE is only going to route your call as far as it has the facilities. Since it has lines running all the way back to Long Beach, I can assume it has its own routing lines for its calls; in any case, whether it is at the next switch, or 40 miles away, sooner or later it will hand the call off to Pacific Bell since only they provide the local dial tone to callers in that part of Los Angeles. Just as PacBell hands off calls to Generally Terriblephone of Callforever when someone calls into a GTE exchange. For example, Long Beach is GTE territory, and San Pedro is a part of the City of Los Angeles, both are next to each other, San Pedro is a local call to and from Long Beach, yet numbers in San Pedro are issued by Pacbell. Which brings up another point I wanted to raise. GTE is the wire company for at least 1/4 of Southern California. I note it is the non-wire Cellular carrier in San Francisco; I also note that GTE does have an old Radiotelephone facility in Long Beach, to service the people still using them. What I am wondering is why Pacific Bell ONLY is the wireline carrier for Southern California. I am surprised that GTE didn't make a stink about it. Same thing for Continental Telephone (CENTEL) of California which operates in some rural areas like Big Bear Mountain. Anyone know why only Pacific Bell is operating the wire company cellular facility in all of Southern California? ------------------------------ Date: 05 Jun 1992 10:56:00 -0400 (EDT) From: "Sean E. Williams" Subject: MCI No Longer Bills Adult 900-Calls I received a note about this in the mail this morning, and thought I'd pass it along. I don't believe it has been previously covered in the Digest: MCI Communications Corporation will no longer handle billing for so-called "adult" 900-calls, even though it is required to carry such programming on its telephone network. Companies will have to find other ways to bill 900-calls that use MCI's long-distance lines. MCI wants to ensure that its 900-transmission service is used responsibly to provide useful information services to businesses and consumers. sean e. williams, (sew7490@ritvax.isc.rit.edu), is a student of imaging and photographic technology in the school of photographic arts & sciences at the rochester institute of technology in beautiful rochester, new york. (he's also taking a few telecommunications courses...) You can call him at 716-475-3570. [Moderator's Note: I wonder if an MCI employee has the job of sitting there calling up those numbers and deciding which is billable and which is not ... whatta task ... but someone has to do it! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 17:00 GMT From: Matthew Holdrege Subject: Leased Line versus Satellite I have a need to connect some users in Hawaii to our data center in Southern California. They will be using TCP/IP for data inquiry. I've never set up any satellite links. Can you buy satellite bandwidth in the 56k range? Is it more expensive than a 56k leased line? Are the startup hardware costs prohibitive. We have an extensive 56K and T1 network in the western US so adding another bridge would be easy. What are some good Satellite vendors (hardware and bandwidth)? Thanks, Matt Holdrege Pacificare Health Systems 5156065@mcimail.com 714-229-2518 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 14:06:46 EDT From: gauthier@fresnel.telecom.hydro.qc.ca (Jean-Benoit Gauthier) Subject: Software For Microwawe Link I'm looking for information on software relating to microwawe link. I'm looking for a software package that would calculate the parameters involves in frequency coordination of microwave links (analog and digital). Price is not a concern (for now ...). If you have ANY (BOLD) information regarding any kind of software that help in the process of planning a microwawe link, please i would like to hear from you. Hydro-Quebec is the electric utility for the province of Quebec in Canada. It is a 25,000 people company. The telecommunications department (~800 people) is responsable, among many other things, of the planning, construction and exploitation of a microwawe network of approx. 225 links spanning the entire province. Thanks in advance. Jean-Benoit Gauthier Hydro-Quebec Ingenieur Direction telecommunications 2, Complexe Desjardins, 15e etage Tel : 514-289-3571 C.P. 10000 Fax : 514-289-4446 Montreal (Quebec) Canada H5B-1H7 gauthier@fresnel.telecom.hydro.qc.ca ------------------------------ From: nolan@tssi.com (Michael Nolan) Subject: Presidential 'Poll' via Telephone Information Service Reply-To: nolan@tssi.com Organization: Tailored Software Services, Inc. Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1992 17:46:56 GMT Lincoln Telephone has a recorded information service called 'Fingertips', which gives news, weather, etc. Wednesday they conducted a Presidential poll, publicized on one of the local radio stations. The results: Ross Perot 367 (73.1%) George Bush 100 (19.9%) Bill Clinton 35 ( 7.0%) Well, I guess one wouldn't have expected Clinton to do well in a Republican state like Nebraska. The usual precautions on this being an 'unscientific' survey obviously apply. Mike Nolan ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 14:43:15 -0400 From: nickless@edmund.cs.andrews.edu (Bill Nickless) Subject: Union Involvement in McCormick Place Events This summer, Chicago's McCormick Place will be hosting the 1992 SIGGRAPH conference. This is a big yearly get-together for the computer graphics industry. The organizers are bringing in an NSFNET T-3 connection so that remote supercomputers can drive displays in Chicago. If you've been to the Interop or Supercomputing conference, you know they set up a "shownet" for all the vendors. There are typically a dozen or so (often volunteer) networking types with walkie-talkies and T-shirts running around fixing connectors and kicking routers when necessary. An agreement was finally reached with the Chicago unions that the networking types running around didn't have to be union members. In exchange, the organizers agreed that a union member would accompany each technician at normal union rates. The organizers received the concession that the SIGGRAPH volunteers could rewire connectors and string cables and that the union worker would observe without interfering. The SIGGRAPH organizers wish to run fiber around McCormick Place -- with all that compute power Ethernet just isn't going to do the trick. Three Chicago unions are fighting for that work -- filing grievances, the whole bit. The telephone workers of course feel that it's their bailiwick. The electricians say it's wiring, goes through conduit, etc. But the plumbers claim that they should do it, because fiber optic cable is a "light pipe." Disclaimer: I think Pat accidently posted some line noise. [Moderator's Note: McCormick Place has been heavily unionized since its beginning. No one does *anything* there without the blessings of one or more unions. I mean *anything*. You do not plug a cord into an electrical outlet. You do not move a telephone from one desk to another. The heavy-handed union tactics there have been the reason many former shows no longer return. You cannot set up or take down your booth. You can do *nothing*. A union person must do it at union scale wages. PAT] ------------------------------ From: M19249@mwvm.mitre.org Subject: 4,000 Person CWA Conference Call Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102 Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1992 19:28:31 GMT In article Phillip.Dampier@f228.n260. z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier) writes: > On a nationwide conference call with 4,000 union stewards, > Communications Workers of America President Morton Bahr expressed his > extreme dissatisfaction with the lack of progress in negotiations with > AT&T today. Strike aside, I wan't to hear about the logistics of setting up a 4,000 person nationwide conference call! Seriously, what is the call set up time, moderation scheme, ...? Dave Weitzel "Standard disclaimer here" ------------------------------ From: James G. Speth Subject: Info Needed on Racal-Vadic Date: 5 Jun 92 21:07:54 GMT Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz I just bought a telephone/magnetic strip reader made by Racal-Vadic. It's called the Verus, and I'd like to get more info on it. Does anyone know how I could get in touch with Racal-Vadic? Are they still around? (This thing looks pretty old.) Also, I opened it up to take a look at the electronics, and saw something that looked promising ... inside, there is a separate circuit board that is connected to the mag. strip reading head. Connecting this board to the phone's main board are five lines, labeled GND, DATA, RDY, CLR, and +V. Is it possible that this sends out regular serial data? How should I go about testing this? Thanks. Jim Speth speth@cats.ucsc.edu ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson, Contractor Date: Fri, 05 Jun 92 17:46:12 EDT Subject: Directory Assistance Costs For One Unnamed Federal Agency As a result of doing some research for a government agency, I thought this might be worth reporting and I got permission to do so. I was asked by a government agency my company contracts with to find out the costs for Directory Assistance calls. The rates vary depending on where and with whom you get them from. In the Maryland suburbs of Washington, DC, C&P Telephone Company allocates three free calls to 411 for a phone line used by a business (homes get twelve free calls a month per line). After the third call on a business line, the charge is 26c per local call. (This agency has over 1,000 Centrex lines; I don't know if that means they get 3,000 free calls before being charged!) Note that this userid is issued by NIH, that is NOT the agency that I am referring to; NIH is just where they purchase computer time from. For directory assistance placed via AT&T or Sprint, the charge is 65c per call. For Directory Assistance placed via MCI, the charge is 64c per call. However, here's something interesting: Government telephones use the FTS-2000 system, a special telephone service akin to an IXC (Interexchange Carrier, i.e. a long distance company) which is operated by AT&T and Sprint under a joint arrangement. The agency in question is on the AT&T "A" network as opposed to the Sprint "B" network. The interesting thing is that if a caller dials out over FTS to get directory assistance, the call is charged as an ordinary long distance call instead of as a directory assistance call. The charge for calls placed on FTS is currently 13c per minute. In theory it might be cheaper to call directory assistance as a long-distance call over FTS than to dial 411, in such a case. Paul Robinson Opinion not necessarily that of the owner of this account. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 18:27:57 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: 703-527 : Alexandria/Arlington I made a call from a pay phone in Arlington (Rosslyn area exchanges) on 703-527 via C&P, and I got 703-527 ALEX (short for Alexandria) on my May 1992 phone bill for the From part of that call. I realize that the DC area call guides show Arlington/Alexandria for the Arlington and Alexandria exchanges in Virginia, but little noises like this make it more difficult to map an exchange to a more specific area (in this case, Arlington/Rosslyn). ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 5 Jun 92 18:24:27 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Where is 617-422? I have previously noted 617-422 as Sterling, Mass., which should have moved in 1988 to area 508. But my May 1992 bill showed 617-422 Sterling. I don't know what's going on. I thought there was now 617-422 in Boston. I figure Sterling maps to the post office of that name (zip code 01564, and located in Worcester County). ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson, Contractor Date: Fri, 05 Jun 92 19:54:31 EDT Subject: Caller-ID Block-Block For those who want to use the Caller-ID block feature there is a new wrinkle. Caller-Id Block-Block! Where you can dial *67 In Maryland or DC to block transmission of your phone number to a caller here in the DC area (Virginia callers CANNOT block their number), the user of Caller-ID has another feature: dial *77 and the user is routed to an intercept recording telling them that the caller does not want to talk to those blocking their number, and to call back without blocking your number if you want to be connected. ------------------------------ From: shadmas@sdf.lonestar.org (Tom Downs) Subject: AT&T System 75 PBX Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access Date: Fri, 5 Jun 1992 00:28:03 GMT My company is interested in buying a PBX system for a new building that is being built. While in a meeting today, one of my co-workers mentioned the AT&T System 75 PBX. Our company's needs are: 1) Capable of 600 extensions 2) Central switchboard 3) Easily configurable 4) Voice Mail 5) CLID (especially for the outdial) 6) Able to handle 5 ISDN lines 7) Outdialing for travelling business persons Would AT&T's PBX be able to handle this? Thanks in advance for your help. Tom Downs ------------------------------ Subject: Help Needed Selecting New PBX Date: Sat, 06 Jun 92 09:59:19 -0700 From: Lynn Gale We're in the market for a new phone system: hybrid or PBX and would appreciate comments and suggestions. Currently we're looking at AT&T's Merlin Legend and NT's Norstar and Meridian Option 11. Is there an obvious alternative we shouldn't miss checking out? Are there published unbiased reviews of such products anybody knows about? What about surveys of customer satisfaction and service records, etc? Looking at the glossies, it's pretty clear that feature matrices are only going to muddle the scene. Our size is 50 stations and 15 lines now. Increasing potentially to a maximum of 75 stations and ?? lines. We'd like to keep this system for ten or more years. We're not the typical `business' environment that needs ACD and the like, rather we're an academic research institution with an average of only 20 incoming calls an hour (40 during the busiest hour), all of which will go through a receptionist during weekday hours. I don't have the number of outgoing calls, but it's probably about the same as incoming. We're considering the possibility of voice mail since more and more callers are requesting it, plus the receptionist gets bogged down taking 60-70 messages per day, some pretty detailed and long-winded. Thanks in advance for any observations. Email to: lynn@casbs.stanford.edu (Internet) -or- lynn%casbs@stanford (Bitnet) ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #458 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25619; 7 Jun 92 23:01 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07822 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 21:13:18 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01045 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 21:13:10 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 21:13:10 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206080213.AA01045@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #459 TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Jun 92 21:13:07 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 459 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson 10XXX With MCI Friends & Family / Sprint The Most (William R. Mark) Cellular Coax (was Ground Plane Cell Antenna) (Patton M. Turner) Glitch in PBX? (Jim Carnahan) Email Service Experiences (Jeff Sicherman) Com Key 416 (Scott Dorsey) CLASS Comes to California (Maybe, Finally) (John Higdon) Digital Mixing (Martin McCormick) NET Uses NAP16 (Randy Gellens) Bell Canada, MT&T and Automated Voting (Paul Gauthier) Wireless Experience and Wants (Michael Scott Baldwin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 01:36:39 CDT From: William R. Mark Subject: 10XXX With MCI Friends and Family / Sprint The Most I saw the ads on TV for US Sprint's new plan, The MOST, which is apparently Sprint's response to Friends and Family, and I decided to do some research. The plan gives 20% off calls to other US Sprint customers. It also gives 20% off of calls to your most frequently called number (based on number of minutes -- NOT dollar amount. I checked with Sprint customer service). The two discounts can be combined, giving a 36% discount (multiply .8x.8). Since it's annoying to have to convince all of your Friends/Family/whoever to subscribe to the same dial 1 carrier, I called MCI and Sprint to determine if calls made using 10XXX can take advantage of these plans. The table below assumes that you have established an account with the 10XXX carrier -- you tell them that you want to use them as a secondary carrier. You also have to sign up for the appropriate plan on both primary and secondary carriers. It may take some complaining/talking- with-supervisor to get a plan on a secondary carrier account. Person A calls person B. Person A || Person B Discount Dial 1 | Secondary | Dials || Dial 1 | Secondary || Carrier | Carrier | Using || Carrier | Carrier || Sprint | X | 1+ || Sprint | X || The Most Sprint | X | 1+ || X | Sprint || The Most ! X | Sprint | 10333 || Sprint | X || The Most ! X | Sprint | 10333 || X | Sprint || ? - Didn't Check MCI | X | 1+ || MCI | X || Fr & Fam MCI | X | 1+ || X | MCI || None X | MCI | 10222 || MCI | X || Fr & Fam ! X | MCI | 10222 || X | MCI || ? - Didn't Check The information above was obtained after several conversations with both MCI and Sprint customer service reps (and their supervisors). MCI and Sprint both tended to give conflicting answers to the questions I asked, but I think that I finally got correct answers. Other people are welcome to ask the same questions and post if I got it wrong. The important effect of all of this is that if you have accounts with both Sprint and MCI (one is obviously a secondary carrier), then you can get the best discount no matter which carrier the callee has (unless they have AT&T -- but you could still be OK if they have a Sprint secondary account and you have 1+ Sprint). If you decided to take advantage of any of this, have fun talking to the customer service reps. They don't really seem to get it when you make requests this complicated -- it doesn't matter whether it's MCI or Sprint. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 14:59:47 CDT From: Patton M. Turner Subject: Cellular Coax (was Ground Plane Cell Antenna) I've seen a lot of different suggestions for cellular feedline runs in cdt lately, so I thought I'd post the facts, followed by my opinion. This is for quality cable at 850 Mhz: Power loss Cable Dielectric Loss/100 ft 10' run 30' run RG58 solid 20 dB 37% 75% RG8 solid 8.6 dB 18% 45% RG8 foam 5.2 dB 11% 30% 9913 * 3.8 dB 8% 23% .5" hardline 2.5 dB 6% 16% * see below I can't find data for RG8X at 850 Mhz, or more that one data point to interpolate (coax losses (in dB) vary in dB/decade), but it should be an improvement over RG58. Foam RG58 is an improvement over solid also. Tad Cook writes: > A bad idea, especially for the non-professional or non-ham who asked > the original question. At 50 feet of line length, the hardline will > only yield a one HALF decibel improvement over 9913 coax at cellular > frequencies. Without test equipment or experience, the non-ham is > likely to introduce serious losses when trying to construct his own > matching sections. > 9913 is high quality flexible coaxial cable, but at cellular > frequencies it is very important that the connectors be attached > exactly right. This is no small task for the uninitiated. Belden 9913 is very difficult to install UHF connectors on as they rely on soldering to the braid. N connectors and BNC/TNC connectors are much easier as they rely on a ferrule and a compression nut to bond to the shield. Only the center pin need be soldered. 9913 BNC/TNC connectors may not be available due to the large size of the center conductor (9.5 awg) which also makes the cable less flexable, though other manufactures make a Belden equilivent with stranded center conductor. In the past I have trimed the center conductor on RG8 foam cables to fit N connectors, with reasonable results. The other problem with 9913 is that it uses air and a PE spiral as dielectric, allowing the cable to use a large center conductor and stay the same dia. as RG8 while maintaining a 50 ohm nominal impeadence. The coax is much more subject to moisture problems due to pressure differentials created by temperature changes. I sure John Higdon could comment on running air line w/o a tank of N2. Anyway, if you use 9913, pay close attention to your splices. As a minimum tape them with a good electrical tape (ie. Scotch 33) and use Scotchkote on top of this. 1/2 inch hardline is more expensive, but is easier to install and is virtually maintainance free. All of the flexable cables will run under $0.40/foot, hardline will run a few dollars a foot. Good connectors will run $5-10 for the flex cable and a good deal more for the hardline. If you don't know a whole lot about coax stick to the better grades of Belden. Pat Turner KB4GRZ Until July 1 => pturner@eng.auburn.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 14:31:19 -0700 From: ehs@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (Jim Carnahan) Subject: Glitch in PBX? San Francisco State University has an NEC NEAX 2400 PBX. I work for SFSU part time, and have been noticing some unusual things happening with the phone system. For the past several months, we have been receiving quite a few calls for other departments. (I work in the Environmental Health office.) One caller asked for the English department. Another caller asked "is this the Psychology office?" I offered to look up the number and he said "can you give me the Sociology department's number, too?" The last caller asked if this was the Personnel office. This was the last straw. I programmed the Campus Operator's extension into my telephone and now all I say is "PLEASE HOLD FOR THE CAMPUS ATTENDANT" and transfer them. I thought maybe they were getting the wrong number from the phone book; however, our number is nowhere near any of those office's phone numbers I mentioned above. I knew something was really wrong when I called another office from my home and after one ring was connected into someone else's conversation about graduation requirements! I listened to it for a minute and then said "hello" to see if they could hear me. They could and they were quite shocked to say the least. Does this sound like a problem that is worth reporting or should I just try to ignore things like this? May be I should answer the telephone "University Operator" from now on ... Jim Carnahan ehs@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu [Moderator's Note: This definitly should be reported. There is some problem in the switch; perhaps a card which has gone bad. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 16:41:57 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Email Service Experiences Would appreciate hearing good/bad experiences, especially billing and delivery about email services, particularly AT&T and MCI and the associated alternate delivery methods (besides electronic) such as Snail Mail and FAX. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey) Subject: Com Key 416 Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 16:47:18 GMT I seem to be the new owner of an AT&T Com key 416 set, which I bought with the intention of attaching it to my home key system. Unfortunately I am not sure how some of the features (such as the speakerphone and the very odd intercom facility) work. If someone out there has a schematic on these beasts, I would greatly appreciate it. scott ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 01:51 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: CLASS Comes to California (Maybe, Finally) Discussions with insiders has led me to believe that CLASS may be here soon. Approval is expected any moment from the CPUC that would launch the usual array of CLASS services in areas so equipped in California. Included will be Caller-ID with per-line and per-call blocking. I was originally against per-line blocking, but if it will grease the wheels and get SOMETHING going I'll take it. Besides, since I will not accept calls from people who are blocking, the design purpose of screening out garbage and automatically routing the people who normally call me will be met. This could all happen within sixty days. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Subject: Digital Mixing Date: Sat, 06 Jun 92 07:51:41 -0500 From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu What method is used to digitally mix the audio from several sources such as on a conference call carried on a digital PBX? Simply adding the signed values of the digital samples at any given time could result in illegal values such as when both samples happened to be at their maximum value. When there is a conference call on our Ericsson PBX, and multiple voices occur, they sound quite natural with no particular distortion. Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 06 JUN 92 14:58 Subject: NET Uses NAP16 I saw this in a recent internal company newsletter. Posted with permission: UNISYS NEWS NETWORK, JUNE 2, 1992 NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE ACTIVATES UNISYS GEAR: EXPANDS AVAILABILITY OF VOICE MESSAGING BY 1.2 MILLION LINES New England Telephone has expanded from 600,000 to 1.8 million the number of residential and small business customers who can have access to Voice Messaging services. The company announced last December an agreement with Unisys Corporation to use the Unisys Network Application Platform 16 (NAP16) to provide Voice Messaging services to telephone customers in Massachusetts' 508 and 617 area codes. That system, installed in Cambridge, Mass., uses remote switching components and centralized large-scale processors rather than dedicated processors in every telephone central office. This design allows NET to provide messaging services with greater efficiency. Although NET and Unisys agreed to keep terms of their contract confidential, the companies are working together to further reduce the costs of providing Voice Messaging Services using Unisys equipment. NET began offering call answering services to residential and small business customers in parts of eastern Massachusetts in July 1898. "We're serving our customers more efficiently and controlling expenses using the Unisys system," said Vern Nelson, product manager -- Voice Messaging services for New England Telephone. Michael Beaton, vice president, Unisys Communications Industry Systems Division, said, "This is an exciting new venture for Unisys and New England Telephone. We expect significant benefits for both companies." The Unisys NAP16 was introduced in April 1989. It is currently installed at customer locations in the United States, Latin America, Europe and Asia. New England Telephone is a wholly owned subsidiary of NYNEX Corporation and provides telecommunication services to more than 4.5 million residence and business customers in Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont. Unisys Corporation is a leading information systems company with more than 60,000 customers in more than 100 countries. The company is a leading manufacturer of commercial information systems, defense systems and related services. It has a 20 year history of providing computers to telephone companies and has over a $1.5 billion installed base in the seven Regional Holding Companies, independent telephone companies, and international PTTs. ------------- Although I work for Unisys, I don't work on NAP products or in the Communications Industry Systems Division. (I work on systems software development for the A-series line.) However, I can forward questions on telecommunications products to the appropriate people. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com If mail bounces, forward to postmaster@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ From: gauthier@ug.cs.dal.ca (Paul Gauthier) Subject: Bell Canada, MT&T and Automated Voting Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 10:14:37 -0300 Some poor techie is getting his *ss warmed in the cool climate of Canada today. In Nova Scotia (east coast) there was an election to pick the leader of the Liberal party yesterday. They set up a new-fangled way for members of the party to vote. People could watch the convention from home on TV and dial a 1-900 number, key in their PIN code and select a candidate. When done they would receive a short "Thank you" message to signal that their vote was accepted. Apparently people at the convention were using the same method to vote from a bank of phone set up for that purpose. This is one of the most trivial things I've ever heard of. This in no way stretched the limits of technology. Touch-tone reading coupled to a vote counter mechanism. How easy could it be?! Well, Bell Canada and MT&T completely blew it! The system was not returning the "Thank you" message, which all voters were instructed was the signal that their vote was accepted. So they had to re-do the vote three or four times. The vote, which was supposed to be done by 2:30pm was not even working at 5pm. At 6pm the convention organisers announced that the whole vote was null and void, and would be reattempted at a later date. Then to make things even worse, someone (who I assume had authorization) called the HQ where the votes were being counted by the computer (it was counting them, just not returning the confirmation message) on his cellular to ask what the results were. Someone with a scanner picked up the conversation, recorded it, and then got it to the news minutes before they went off-air for the night. They played it for the viewing public, letting everyone know how each candidate did in the vote. What a mess, Paul Gauthier / gauthier@ug.cs.dal.ca Phone: (902)462-8217 Fax: (902)420-1675 ------------------------------ From: michael.scott.baldwin@att.com Subject: Wireless Experience and Wants Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 00:00:00 GMT I'm curious about people's experience with data-over-cellular: 1. What kinds of data throughput do you really get? 2. Do hand-offs kill modem connections? 3. Is it ridiculously expensive per byte? 4. What do you use it for? E-mail? Interactive sessions? Does anyone have experience with non-cellular wireless networks? What would people *like* to use wireless public networks for? Just as a simple paging or notification system, file transfer (as in e-mail or FAX), or full-blown login sessions? I would appreciate any email (michael.scott.baldwin@att.com) about this from anyone who has used wireless data or would like to, or just has some ideas floating around the brain. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #459 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27770; 7 Jun 92 23:53 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16134 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 22:02:01 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01251 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 7 Jun 1992 22:01:49 -0500 Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 22:01:49 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206080301.AA01251@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #460 TELECOM Digest Sun, 7 Jun 92 22:01:50 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 460 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson GTE/Me (Steven Lichter) 213/310 Fiasco Finished (Steven Lichter) Speedy ol' GTD-5 (Ken J. Clark) Re: List of GTD-5 Observations (Joe Kelsey) Re: GTD5 Bashing and Future (Jack Decker) Re: Cellular Alliance: GTE, NYNEX, BAMS, Ameritech (Gregory Youngblood) Comparison of GTE and RTC (Curtis E. Reid) Re: Some History of GTE-Florida (Steven Lichter) Pac*Bell/GTE Confusion (John Higdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: GLORIA.C.VALLE@gte.sprint.com Date: 7 Jun 92 08:36:00 UT Subject: GTE/Me First off, the mailbox that I used was ment for internal communications and GTE has been good enough to let us have access to Internet and other areas. I now have a UUCP account access local and have used it as Pat and John as well as a few others are aware. I don't use it much since it is not a direct access to Internet as this is. My UUCP account has to go through UCR, UCI, UCB and then to Sprint. That can take as much as a full day depending on when I post. From what I have learned from people at AGCS the GTD-5 is still being made. GTECA went with the 5ESS since at the time there was a chance that the GTD-5 would no longer be made. we are still doing remotes and line adds for it. And there are several offices that have the SS7 load on line or being updated. One off hand is San Jacinto, Calif which is being updated now. Others will follow. As was pointed out there is not full ISDN and don't count on it from PacBell or GTE for the small customer for a while as the cost will kill. I myself have moved over to fiber installation and feel much better about it since I was getting tired of working with just the switching equipment. I started with Step. The GTD-5, 5ESS and the DMS 100 all have good and bad points. As John pointed out there was a city that wanted GTE out. That was The People's Republic of Santa Monica. That problem was cleared up many years ago and I guess they were a little upset because GTECA moved to Thousand Oaks. Have you priced rents there? It costs more to park a car then my house payment is. Also they needed the room that just was not there. Santa Monica wanted to put a tax on GTE's payroll even if the person did not work in Santa Monica. How would you like that if the city where your company was taxed you even if you had never been there? Steven H. Lichter GTECA COEI UUCP steven(a)alchemy.UUCP ------------------------------ From: alchemy!steven@ucrmath.ucr.edu (Steven Lichter) Subject: 213/310 Fiasco Finished Date: Sun Jun 7 15:58:40 1992 Well I got an answer from our customer service deparment on why there was a problem dialing a 520 number located in the 213 area after the area code cut date. It was PacBell's idea to just leave that exchange in the 213 area. Before the cut it would work from 213/818. It is a radio station contest exchange. GTE had set a flash cut (all at once) but Pacbell did their cut one office at a time. This caused problems with this number exchange as well as others. Also they had planned to have this number dialable from 213 also. Something changed their minds so I'm told and it can be dialed from either area code. There may be some people that can't dial it if they have a private system that has not been updated. I have also convinced (I hope) Customer Service to check the Telecom board and watch for problems that crop up that may not have been taken care of the way they should have been. I have also been told that John Higdon was contacted and dispite what we have heard about him he does not bite, or not hard. I hope this will make people understand that GTE is a big company and things do happen, but we do care and will take great pains to get a problem fixed. I have been working on this for over two weeks and most of it has been on my own time. So if someone has a problem please let me know here or via UUCP/Internet. Mad Dog (Steven) Sysop: Apple Elite II -- an Ogg-Net BBS UUCP: steven@alchemy.UUCP (714) 359-5338 1200-2400 bps 8N1 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 15:17:18 PDT From: "Ken J. Clark" Subject: Speedy ol' GTD-5 In (Volume 12, Issue 447, Message 1), john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes in response to bakerj@gtephx. UUCP (Jon Baker): > I am speaking from the customer's perspective. And if you claim that > the features operate the same as everyone else's, then it is you, sir, > that has not a clue about that which he speaks. Example (something you > gave not one of in your entire tirade against me): every feature > operates s-l-o-w-l-y to the point where the user is tempted to retry > the procedure. Sometimes he does and then things really get messed up. > When I drop the second call on a three-way, I expect it to happen a > little faster than three seconds later. Call waiting goes to limbo land > and one typically loses one or the other party. Oh, yeah, I know, my > telco is using some off-shore pirate brand of GTD-5. Whether some of you like John, or not, he knows of what he speaks (or writes). I spent my first four years living in Northern Virginia (D.C. metro area) served by C&P Telephone (Bell Atlantic, an RBOC). All of the switches which served me were of ESS(tm) flavor. Last year, I bought a house in Prince William County. PWC is in a Contel "island" serving only this county surrounded on all sides by C&P. (Of course all of you know that GTE has now bought Contel . But that's another thread. :-) What's my switch? A GTD-5. Lucky me. More than once I've experienced the "Did that feature work?" blues. I have yet to lose a caller, but the difference in speed is really noticeable. For a while, my call completion to failure ratio was as high as two to one. BTW, my work takes me back to C&P land daily. I'm still startled by the speed of switch response and call completion, because I've grown accustomed to the GTD-5 and am not expecting it. Ken J. Clark KCLARK@cevax.simpact.com System Integration & Applications Group Simpact Associates, Inc. Reston, VA {uunet..}!simpact!cevax.simpact.com!kclark 703-758-0190 ex. 2134 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 11:37 PDT From: joe@jhgrud.MsElectron.com (Joe Kelsey) Subject: Re: List of GTD-5 Observations I completely agree with John Higdon about the deficiencies of the GTD-5 when compared to other available switches. I recently moved from USWest service into GTENorthWest service and I don't like it at all. For one thing, when you order call waiting from USWest, you get *both* call waiting and cancel call waiting. In GTELand, cancel call waiting does not come packaged with call waiting unless you either order it specifically (for an extra $1.50 per month!) or buy the entire SmartestPak service (which includes all sorts of useless features like speed dialing (useless when most phones already have a similar feature)). Also, the three-way calling performance sucks the big one! At USWest, served by a 5ESS, all three parties could speak at once and understand everything. As John pointed out, > Later versions attempt to mask this by using gating. This, too, is > unacceptable. It makes three-way calls sound like a switched-gain > speakerphone. I find this quite annoying as you have to assume a radio-protocol to make sure that when two people start to talk at once, one of them doesn't get ``squelched'' out of the conversation. Can anyone give the the correct words to use so that I can describe this problem in such a way that someone at GTENW understands it? I have complained about it in the past and got nothing but "there's no problem on this end" kind of answers. Joe ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 10:56:18 CST From: Jack Decker Subject: Re: GTD5 Bashing and Future In message , bakerj@gtephx.UUCP (Jon Baker) writes to John Higdon: > *flame on* [stuff deleted] > Now, for the benefit of us who do know two cents worth about digital > switching systems, and wish to carry on intelligent and relevant > discussions regarding those systems, will you please SHUT UP! JB> *flame off* Dear Mr. Baker: I don't understand why Pat (the Moderator) allowed this to pass into the newsgroup, but since he did, I'll offer one observation: If GTE digital switches are as capable as you say they are, then GTE needs to hire some quality people to run the things, which is probably not too likely to happen given their past track record. As someone who's had the misfortune of living in GTE territory at one point, I can tell you that for the most part, GTE plays "pass the buck" and has some very incompetent people working for them (which is understandable; the GTE attitude toward employees is such that competent people tend to leave for greener pastures at the earliest opportunity). You don't give a real backhoe to a five year old playing in the sandbox, and they probably ought not to let technicians barely trained on Strowger switches play around with digital stuff. All I know is that service in Bell areas, and even in many independent areas FAR exceeds anything GTE offers. When GTE had the stepper switches, they went out frequently, but at least you could retry the call and it would go through if you made enough attempts (and the technicians usually could fix the problem, once you could convince them that there WAS a problem). Now, with the digital switches, when they go they're GONE, and your phone is about as useful as a paperweight until service is restored. And many of the techs are playing with technology they barely understand. But worst of all is the GTE attitude. They just don't seem to CARE if your service is out. And if they can blame you, or the weather, or beavers chewing up cables, or Bell, or anyone else, they do ... and then act as if it's sufficient reason that your service is out for two or three days. So I think you have no business telling Mr. Higdon to SHUT UP. He is relating what he has observed in actual experience with GTE service. If he is a little confused about the capabilities of a GTE switch, it may well be because he's never experienced one working up to specs. Is that his fault? I think not. People tend to believe what they've actually experienced over a manufacturer's claims for a product. If you sell me a car and insist it can do 100 mph but I can only get it up to 80, what's the actual capability of that car? You are talking about how the switch is supposed to work when it's configured and maintained properly, but if nobody seems to be able to configure and maintain it properly, then the capabilites you speak of are just theoretical. In my humble opinion, GTE is just about the worst telephone company in the United States (there may be some independents that are worse, but I'll bet most of them charge far lower rates, too. GTE has some of the highest rates AND the worst service around). I won't tell YOU to shut up, but I think you have a lot of nerve criticizing Mr. Higdon! Jack Decker jack@myamiga.mixcom.com FidoNet 1:154/8 ------------------------------ Subject: Cellular Alliance: GTE, NYNEX, BAMS, Ameritech - What's it Mean? From: zeta@yngbld.gwinnett.COM (Gregory Youngblood) Date: Sun, 07 Jun 92 18:38:21 EST Organization: TCS Consulting Services, Peachtree City, GA nin15b0b@merrimack.edu (David E. Sheafer) writes: > In the quarterly report of GTE it states they have joined a cellular > alliance: > "GTE_s two cellular-telelphone companies -- GTE Mobilenet and Contel > Cellular -- and three othe leading mobile communications carriers - > have signed a letter of intent to develop a nationwide brand identity > for wireless services. The others are Ameritech Mobile Communications, > Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems, and NYNEX Mobile Communications." > Does anyone have any information on what this alliance will mean for > cellular subscribers? I'm not a marketing expert, but it sounds very much like what the non-wireline carriers did with the Cellular One name. Marketing reports have proven that Cellular One is recognized over every other single cellualr carrier name, even though each outfit may be owned by different companies. It appears that the people that license the Cellular One name are making attempts to standardize the logos, and to associate the name with high quallity by enforcing quality minimums and penalties for low or bad quality service. That includes customer service and service overall, not just the system's quality of service. I don't know for sure if this is indeed happening, as I heard it as a rumor a couple of years ago and I've been out of the marketing side of things for a while. If someone knows for sure I'd like to know. I do know that the logos are changing nationwide to a single logo, and that logos are no longer associated with a holding company as it used to be. Greg ------------------------------ Date: 06 Jun 1992 20:24:01 -0400 (EDT) From: "Curtis E. Reid" Subject: Comparison of GTE and RTC In a message received on 5 Jun 1992, 13:29 m19249@mwvm.mitre.org wrote to cer2520%ritvax.isc.rit.edu@mwunix.mitre.org: > From Telephone Engineer and Manager magazine 1/15/92, edited of course, > LINES SERVED: GTE 18.7 million (Bigger than any RBOC) > United 4.1 million > Centel 1.59 million > Cinc Bell 0.81 million > RT 0.474 million I received this and I thought this is an interesting tidbit for the TELECOM Digest readers. This was in response to my query that I thought RTC is supposed to be the largest independent telepone company in the country. (Oh, RTC = Rochester Telephone Corp.) Curtis E. Reid CER2520@ritvax.isc.rit.edu Rochester Institute of Technology/NTID REID@DECUS.org (DECUS) P.O. Box 9887 716.475.6089 TDD/TT 475.6895 Voice Rochester, NY 14623-0887 716.475.6500 Fax ------------------------------ From: GLORIA.C.VALLE@gte.sprint.com Date: 7 Jun 92 17:17:00 UT Subject: Re: Some History of GTE-Florida Not to start another GTE bashing, but the problem with Home Shopping Network and GTE Florida was HSN's problem. They came into an area built a huge center for their company, but did not bother to let GTE Florida know they were doing it and then called for service as if they were just any residentual customer. Imagine a company that big coming into a small town that is set up for local service. After the dust settled the courts had ruled that HSN was at fault 100%. They were forced to pay all costs. They did get the service and from what little I have heard there has been no other problems. I had no direct knowledge other then what was in the media, but I followed it very close. This type of thing happens all the time. I have heard where develpers have come into areas and built houses without telling any of the utilities and then start screaming because there is no electric, water, gas, telephone or cable. In one case all this was brought in later (they had to rip up the streets) with the exception of the cable company. And to this day 15 years later these people don't have cable service and no amount of screaming has forced the cable company to bring service to the area. At least the telephone company did do something about it and they did not make the developer pay for it which they could have. Mad Dog (Steven) Sysop: Apple Elite II -- an Ogg-Net BBS UUCP: steven@alchemy.UUCP (714) 359-5338 1200-2400 bps 8N1 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 14:33 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Pac*Bell/GTE Confusion In reading some posts and e-mail it is evident that some are confused about whom I am flaming and about what. Setting the record straight: Pac*Bell: This is the LEC serving my home. I am a larger than average residential customer. The service (within the confines of its corporate-defined limitations) is excellent. Repair service is excellent. My dealings with the business office are cordial, productive, and informative. If one starts speaking the language of the industry to a knowledgeable rep, the conversation rises above the level of consumer telephonic "babytalk". GTE: This is the LEC serving a mountain-top transmitter site that I am responsible for. It amounts to two lines. The service is mediocre (fails in one way or another about twice a year). Repair service is poor in that repairs are done very slowly and only with continual follow-up to reinstate "cleared" tickets. My dealings with the business office are almost a waste of time. Even if one speaks the language of the industry, GTE reps apparently do not feel that customers should know about such things and always steer the conversation back to the level of telephonic "babytalk". Note that all of my complaints about Pac*Bell are focused at the corporate structure, not at the service entity. My complaints about GTE are focused at the corporate structure AND at the service entity that results. It appears that there may be a new rising star in the inflexibility department: AT&T. Later this month, we shall see if that company once again will refuse to admit the possibility of any error on its part. Needless to say, I am presently shopping for alternatives to AT&T's service "just in case". 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 V12 #460 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16373; 8 Jun 92 9:25 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01439 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 8 Jun 1992 07:30:05 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18491 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 8 Jun 1992 07:29:56 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 07:29:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206081229.AA18491@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #461 TELECOM Digest Mon, 8 Jun 92 07:29:45 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 461 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: FBI Wiretap Standard: Mag Article; Phone Conversation (Steve Forrette) Re: FBI Wiretap Standard: Mag Article; Phone Conversation (Tracy Ching) Re: Business Office Hours (John Higdon) Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone (Patrick Tufts) Re: Influencing PUCs (John Higdon) Re: Panasonic Key Systems: WARNING and FIX (Marc Unangst) Re: Payphone Xenophobia (Jonathan Lieberman) Re: Multi-Ring Detection (Art Hunter) Re: *69 Results in a Beating (Norm Aleks) Re: Ground Plane Cell Antenna (John Rice) Re: Union Involvement in McCormick Place Events (Eric De Mund) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: FBI Wiretap Standard: Mag Article; Phone Conversation Follow-up Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 05:07:51 GMT In article sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO. edu (Steven S. Brack) writes: > In this case, privacy issues aside, it should be opposed merely > because it's unnecessary. Digital taps are clean, cheap, and > completely undetectable from the sub's point of view. The only > disadvantage is that for minimum difficulty, the governmnet needs to > go through the telco to emplace the tap. If desired, that can be > worked around. A PC-box storing packets from a specific subscriber is > technically feasable, and ahouldn't be outrageously expensive. But the issue is that increasingly, as more connections to the customer go digital, it gets MORE difficult for any CO-based tap to identify individual callers. The PBX where I work makes a good example. We have a couple of T1s to US West, our LEC, and one T1 to our IXC. When I place an outgoing call, one of the channels of one of the T1s is selected, and the call gets set up. The CO has absolutely no way of knowing who is calling -- there are over 200 people here, and the PBX sends no indication to the CO as to who is making the call. So, if the FBI or other law enforcement agency were to have a warrant for a wiretap for my office phone, there's no practical way to monitor my (outgoing) calls from the CO without listening to ALL of the outgoing calls from all 200 people here. Not only would this take a huge staff, but would also infringe on the privacy rights of my 199 co-workers. Actually, the more I think about it, this really isn't much of an analog-vs-digital issue, it's more of a shared-trunk issue. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: tching@caldwr.water.ca.gov (Tracy Ching) Subject: Re: FBI Wiretap Standard: Mag Article; Phone Conversation Follow-Up Date: 7 Jun 92 19:58:24 GMT Organization: Calif. Dept. of Water Resources, Sac. > I seem to recall reading a book (Crystal Castles) with a similar theme. > A man invented a cellular phone, and.... The FBI confiscated all his > work, told him not to build another phone, and even told him not to > reveal the details of his work. Sorry, I'm not well read ... but, is Crystal Castles a fiction or non-fiction book? It would seem that any invention (including nuclear devices) that is publicized usually doesn't warrant the attention from the FBI. If anyone could name a few well known instances where the FBI -took- someone's invention and told them not to release the information, I'd greatly appreciate it. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 6 Jun 92 23:13 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Business Office Hours Jeff Sicherman writes: > But John, I thought you said that GTE would give you the business > anytime. :-) So, as it turns out, does Pacific Bell. The 6:30 AM to 10:00 PM, etc., hours are the actual hours of the local business offices. At other times your call will be answered by reps in Sacramento. I don't know what good a Sacramento rep can do for someone in San Jose, but then what the hell can a rep in Thousand Oaks do for someone in Los Gatos? And with GTE, that is all you get during the scanty business hours. In addition, Pac*Bell has its twenty-four hour automated feature ordering service which allows you to use a touch-tone phone to order simple feature changes. This is actually pretty neat and works within minutes. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: zippy@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Patrick Tufts) Subject: Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone Organization: Brandeis University Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 06:57:18 GMT Trouble shooting at New York Telephone? I'd be surprised if New Yorkers had trouble shooting at anything, much less a utility. Pat "maybe they should try Glocks instead of those old-fangled revolvers" ... ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 01:43 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Influencing PUCs scol@scottsdale.az.stratus.com (Scott Colbath) writes: > I guess what I saying here is that you should call the PUC and bug > them like me and many others did regarding the tariff for third line > costs. It may help. I have been following this out of the corner of my eye. What is this "third line cost" business? Why does it cost more to put in line three than line one or two? This almosts sounds as though "lines" are a commodity that must be rationed. It also sounds as though the telco is trying to penalize the customers for its own lack of forsight and planning. What is the rational here? Each family is entitled to one or two telephones and that is that? Third-world country stuff if I ever heard it. And just what does the telco say to digital entrance facilities, where two will get you twenty-four? For a cool grand, I can get a T1 installed just about anywhere in town. So where does USWEST get off charging that kind of money to install a single residence line? Granted my twenty-fifth line (gawd forbid) would require another grand for another T1, but that is a far cry from three lines. And there is now no monthly charge for the T1 circuit(s)! I'll say it again: USWEST and SWB are making Pac*Bell look better and better. And if the PUCs are letting them get away with it, I may rethink my position on the California Public Utilities Commission. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) Subject: Re: Panasonic Key Systems: WARNING and FIX Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 04:46:36 GMT Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI In article dmr@medicated.Corp.Sun.COM writes: > This applies to at *least* the 1232 series of switches, and might > apply to everything else in the same general line as well ... It applies to more than just Panasonic switches; I've seen it at work on our AT&T "Partner II" phone system. We blew two CPU cards before I went around with a multimeter and checked out all our phones; it turns out that the Everex modems were a particularly bad offender, and of course we use almost exclusively Everex modems. Needless to say, the AT&T repairman was *not* happy about having to replace the CPU card twice ... Marc Unangst mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us !sharkey!mudos!mju ------------------------------ From: lie6@midway.uchicago.edu (CAESAR) Subject: Re: Payphone Xenophobia Reply-To: lie6@midway.uchicago.edu Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 14:54:37 GMT > The Swiss are also very careful about rejecting incorrect coins in > their automatic machines. Supposedly this is the famed "Swiss > craftmanship" but I think it's more their banking attitude: they'll > take any money you have, but you have to pay through the nose for the > privilige. Actually many machines in Switzerland will accept Spanish five peseta coins instead of one Swiss Franc coins. Five pesetas are worth approximately 10% of one Swiss Franc. Jonathan Lieberman lie6@midway.uchicago.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Multi-Ring Detection From: art@aficom.ocunix.on.ca (Art Hunter) Reply-To: art@aficom.ocunix.on.ca (Art Hunter) Date: Sat, 6 Jun 1992 04:07:44 -0400 Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada > In order for this system to accept fax calls, you would have to find > out what numbers those fax calls will be coming in from, and program > this device accordingly. In our case here, we now have a separate > outgoing only fax machine that dials out via the PBX for least cost > routing. If I were going to send a fax to someone using this device, > I would have to find out the phone numbers of ALL of the outgoing > trunks on our PBX, call up the owner of this device, and get him to > program in all of these trunk numbers ... otherwise this device would > not know where to route a call from a line that is not in its > database. Yes, this is a problem. However, the problem has been approached by permitting a single or groups of numbers to be "masked" to a single database entry. Given that for a low cost device, it is still adequate to permit screening of calls and for directing some callers to the correct handset (or device on any of the three ports). Interestingly, there is also the ability to change your mind according to the time of day and day of the week. This permits up to 99 time events during the week that you can direct or not direct (or hang up) callers according to 16 groupings. One of the groupings is for blocked calls, another for long distance, etc etc. It is very useful to be able to change the way you wish to manage all incoming calls depending on how you group them (or the Telco has grouped them - ie blocked calls) and have this as a function of time during the week. Distinctive ringing is certainly advantage that I would never degrade. There are other means of accomplishing similar objectives at lower cost and for use in regions where distinctive rings are not available. ------------------------------ From: naleks@world.std.com (Norm Aleks) Subject: Re: *69 Results in a Beating Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 14:09:31 GMT jra@psycho.fidonet.org (Jay Ashworth) writes: >> [Moderator's Note: Great. Something new to blame on telco. The only >> thing wrong with your story is that *69 merely reconnects the parties; >> unlike Caller-ID it does not say WHO is being connected. If the party [text deleted] > GTEFL: +1 813 446 -- I believe it's a GTD-5. *69 (Calling Number > edial) reads you the number, then asks you if you wish to dial it. I > gather it works this way in other places too. [text deleted] > [Moderator's Note: I gather it does NOT work the same way in many or > most places. It does not work that way here. But since you raise the > point, let's assume it does read the number back: What has that told > you about the person's name and/or address? Nothing. In 312/708 there > exists a not-to-common public service provided by Illinois Bell called > "Customer Name and Address Bureau" (312-796-9600) which provides a > reverse listing of phone numbers ==> name and address of *published* > subscribers. Not many (any?) other telcos offer that service. In any > event, you won't find me listed there. So I repeat that whether or not > the number is read back, the person returning the call needs a bit > more information acquired elsewhere than just via *69. PAT] Reverse directory is an uncommon *public* service, but a very common for-pay service, especially in bulk volumes -- for people who want to derive mailing lists from their 800 or 900 calling reports, for instance. For those of us who want to reverse-list just one or two numbers, we can call a service like Telename, 900/884-1212. Telename happens to carry no unlisted numbers, but many other companies get their listings from multiple sources. They might even have you, Mr. Moderator! Anyway, my point is that a phone number, all by itself, is a powerful piece of information. Norm Aleks naleks@world.std.com +1 617 266 1826 ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Ground Plane Cell Antenna Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Sun, 07 Jun 92 21:01:42 GMT In article , hpubvwa!tad@ssc.wa.com (Tad Cook) writes: > hayward@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Peter Hayward) writes: >> I wish to turn an unused trunk mount cell antenna into a permanently >> mounted ground plane antenna to use on my house in rural Maine for the >> (quite often) times that the phone lines go out. What is the proper >> length for the radials? > allbery@ncoast.org (Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH) writes: >> ... but will have the wrong impedance (about 72 ohms; I'm fairly >> certain cellular uses 50 ohm impedance), so you want a 45-degree angle >> downward. > Why would the impedance be wrong? If the antenna is a typical sleeve > design made for trunk mounting, we can assume that it was built to > exhibit approximately 50 ohms at cellular frequencies when mounted on > a car trunk. Why would sloping the ground plane downward at 45 > degrees make this impedance match better? Theoretical feedpoint impedance for a 1/4wave ground plane (assuming a 'perfect' ground) is 36 ohms. Sloping the radials increases the impedance until the radials are 180deg from the radiating element at which point the impedance is 72 ohms (a dipole). Since the 'ground' is seldom perfect, the actual impedance of a 1/4 wave ground plane antenna us usually closer to 50 ohms in practice, close enough that 50 ohm co-ax is commonly used for ground plane antennas with no ill effect. If the cable length will be much greater than 20-30 feet, a lo-loss cable like 9913 would be recommended. John Rice K9IJ | "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was rice@ttd.teradyne.com | MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially (708)-940-9000 - (work) | not my employer's. ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Union Involvement in McCormick Place Events Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 16:05:56 PDT Reply-To: ead@netcom.com (Eric De Mund) > The SIGGRAPH organizers wish to run fiber around McCormick Place -- > with all that compute power Ethernet just isn't going to do the trick. > Three Chicago unions are fighting for that work -- filing grievances, > the whole bit. The telephone workers of course feel that it's their > bailiwick. The electricians say it's wiring, goes through conduit, > etc. But the plumbers claim that they should do it, because fiber > optic cable is a "light pipe." ... and because they've had so much practice recently. > [Moderator's Note: McCormick Place has been heavily unionized since > its beginning. No one does *anything* there without the blessings of > one or more unions. I mean *anything*. You do not plug a cord into an > electrical outlet. You do not move a telephone from one desk to > another. The heavy-handed union tactics there have been the reason > many former shows no longer return. You cannot set up or take down > your booth. You can do *nothing*. A union person must do it at union > scale wages. PAT] Before RSNA '91 (Radiological Society of North America), which is held yearly at McCormick Place, this used to be true. You could *not* move a phone from one desk to another, *nor* unplug a cord from one outlet and plug it into another. However, this changed at RSNA '91, where we (the exhibitors) were permitted to attempt these feats of skill. The RSNA is a large show, taking up both floors of McCormick East and this year both floors of McCormick North. Some of the booths are quite large, standing two stories tall, and of sound enough construction to hang multi-thousand-pound CAT scanners from. Companies like General Electric, Toshiba, Picker, etc., sink millions of dollars into these booths and this show, and have been doing so for yearly for many years. They're showing their wares off to the thousands of radiologists and hospital administractors from around the world who attend (and incidentally generate a great deal of business for the city of Chicago). They finally (as I understand it) got tired of the union nonsense at McCormick, and got the RSNA organizers to threaten to move the show from Chicago unless the union restrictions were relaxed. The RSNA organizers did so, and the unions backed down. I and other exhibitors can now disconnect and reconnect telephones in our booths at will. Timing can be critical if one jack is bad, the concessions selling $7 hamburgers are closed because its 10pm, and I need to order a pizza for my crew. Eric De Mund ead@netcom.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #461 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18182; 8 Jun 92 10:01 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21628 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 8 Jun 1992 08:02:18 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07320 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 8 Jun 1992 08:02:09 -0500 Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 08:02:09 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206081302.AA07320@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #462 TELECOM Digest Mon, 8 Jun 92 08:02:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 462 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: 4,000 Person CWA Conference Call (William J. Carpenter) Re: Advice Needed: E-Mail From US to Russia (Joe Jesson) Re: Union Involvement in McCormick Place Events (John R. Levine) Re: GTD5 Bashing and Future (John Higdon) Re: From the Usenet Rumor Department (Ken Abrams) Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone (Ed Greenberg) Re: Where is 617-422? (Mike Ardai) SNET/NYNEX Call Delivery to Suffolk County (Douglas Scott Reuben) ATC - LDDS Merger (Bill Huttig) Wax On, Wax Off (Was An Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake) (R McMillin) Things We Remember The Most (Timothy K. Hong) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 00:00:23 GMT From: news@cbnewsh.att.com Subject: Re: 4,000 Person CWA Conference Call Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories > Strike aside, I wan't to hear about the logistics of setting > up a 4,000 person nationwide conference call! I have no actual information about the call in question. When I saw the press release, I thought that was a pretty big number for a conference call, too. Then I realized that a lot of those folks would be in the same buildings, so there's a pretty good chance that lots of endpoints were rooms with speakerphones and possibly up to a few dozen folks listening in. My guess is that there would still be several dozen locations involved, so it's no small feat of cooperation if they were all on the same call. Bill William_J_Carpenter@ATT.COM or (908) 576-2932 attmail!bill or att!pegasus!billc AT&T Bell Labs / AT&T EasyLink Services LZ 3C-207 ------------------------------ From: zjej11@hou.amoco.com (Joe Jesson (TEZjej11S)) Subject: Re: Advice Needed: E-Mail From US to Russia Organization: Amoco Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 15:42:43 GMT If you want a very *reliable* commercial e-mail source in Russia, I would recommend SprintMail. I checked a few months ago as to the commercial E-mail local connections and Sprint seemed to "won" the market in Russia. Connections to other providers -- AT&TMail is one I tested -- from Sprint worked great. Of course, a fee is required (about .22 cents / minute). No, I do not work for Sprint ... Joseph E. Jesson Address1: mhs!amoco!joseph_e_jesson@attmail.com 21414 W. Honey Lane Address2: jessonj@cerf.net Lake Villa, IL, 60046 Address3: jej@chinet.chi.il.us Telephone: (day) 312-856-3645 (eve) 708-356-6817 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Union Involvement in McCormick Place Events Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 7 Jun 92 23:41:12 EDT (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > [Moderator's Note: McCormick Place has been heavily unionized since > its beginning. No one does *anything* there without the blessings of > one or more unions. I mean *anything*. You do not plug a cord into an > electrical outlet. When I was four years old, in 1961, I had a brief career as a scab. My father was setting up a booth at a technical show at the New York Colliseum which has, if anything, worse unions than McCormick and I was hanging around with him. He'd have me do things like plugging in floor lamps for the booth. The union guy would notice and say that was supposed to be a union job, my father would point out that I was a four-year-old child (I was big for my age) and they'd usually back off. Jeez. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl [Moderator's Note: In 1968, McCormick Place burned to the ground. Some said it was arson; a result of a dispute between mobsters who ran the union and McCormick Place management at the time. It was rebuilt from the ground up, with a bigger and better exhibition hall given the same name opening there a couple years later. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 7 Jun 92 20:40 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: GTD5 Bashing and Future On Jun 6 at 10:56, Jack Decker writes: > someone who's had the misfortune of living in GTE territory at one > point, I can tell you that for the most part, GTE plays "pass the > buck" and has some very incompetent people working for them (which is > understandable; the GTE attitude toward employees is such that > competent people tend to leave for greener pastures at the earliest > opportunity). Thanks, I could not have said it better. Mr. Baker's tone has been that GTE (the manufacturer) was not responsible for what GTE (the telco) did with its switches. My belief has been that if GTE cannot set up and use GTE switches properly, then who can? The GTD-5 switches that I have tried have been owned and operated by none other than GTE, not "Fred's Fone Company". If they don't work, which GTE do I blame? Theoretical specs in the lab do not impress me much. As a telephone customer I have to live with what something really does out in the cold, cruel world. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) Subject: Re: From the Usenet Rumor Department Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 17:24:39 GMT In article jack.winslade%drbbs@ ivgate.omahug.org writes: > Whoever started the thread implied that the telco was randomly > listening to subscriber calls (not just those from a sub to the telco) > and taking whatever action they deemed necessary. Now you and I know > this is caca, but to jump in to something like this without doing some > homework is major flame bait. Can anyone state what type of > monitoring Wisconsin Bell does, and how it is stated, and where it is > stated.? Whoever started the thread only heard half of what was originally said and probably didn't understand the half that he/she heard. When this was done, it was called Service Observing and was essentially as Pat described. Great pains were taken to ensure that a trustworthy person held the job AND that that person did not have (easy) access to the phone numbers of the lines that were being monitored. The sole purpose was to sample connection quality. I cannot speak for Wisconsin but in Illinois, Service Observing was eliminated about seven years ago. There was too much potential for abuse and misunderstanding and with the advent of electronic and digital switching, they just weren't finding enough to make it worth the effort. I STRONGLY suspect that this falls into the urban legend category. Ken Abrams nstar!pallas!kabra437 Springfield, IL kabra437@athenanet.com (voice) 217-753-7965 ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone Date: Sun, 07 Jun 92 23:49:50 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) In article oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov writes: > This is unsurprising to those of us served by NYT; I've been asked on > more than one occasion when reporting a dead phone line whether I was > in fact calling from that very line to report the problem ... This is reminiscent of the time the advice nurse at the HMO asked my wife if she was having or had ever had prostate trouble. Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0511 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ From: ardai@teda.EDA.Teradyne.COM (Mike Ardai) Subject: Re: Where is 617-422? Date: 8 Jun 92 01:46:29 GMT Organization: Teradyne EDA, Inc. In article cmoore@BRL.MIL (VLD/VMB) writes: > [Is 617-422 Boston or Sterling?] When we upgraded our phone system here at Teradyne, they gave us all extensions which are direct dial in the 617-422 exchange. These are all in downtown Boston (and possibly a few running over a leased line to our Waltham sales office). These are all in the 02118 or 02111 zip code. Michael L. Ardai N1IST Teradyne EDA ardai@teda.teradyne.com ------------------------------ Date: 7-JUN-1992 23:33:12.80 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: SNET/NYNEX Call Delivery to Suffolk County After spending a few days in Suffolk County, Long Island, NY, I noticed something unusual about the SNET/NYNEX call delivery system. (This is the system which delivers SNET calls into the NYNEX/NYC system, where callers hear a message saying "Please hold on, your party is being located" while your phone is validated PER CALL. It is rather unusual, and many people simply hang up when they hear the message, but it works.) While in Suffolk, generally anywhere five miles EAST of NY-110, SNET customers will NOT get calls. An SNET customer's phone will be queried/interrogated, and send back an overhead message to NYNEX, but the call is not put through (callers don't get the "Please hold ..." message) -- the phone will simply not ring in Suffolk County. Moreover, if the SNET phone is busy in Suffolk, callers will get an immediate busy signal (which may sometimes be prefaced by a very short ring). This is the same result a caller will get if the phone is busy outside of Suffolk, yet outside of Suffolk (as far as I can tell) calls are delivered just fine. Now I know NYNEX/NY's coverage is pathetic -- you get "No SVC" in the middle of some of the most populated sections of Long Island, even the relatively flat areas. The "A" carrier, Cell One/NY, has, in most areas, superior coverage. Thus the poor service on NYNEX's part has nothing to do with topography. There are plenty of times that I have missed calls while in NY on NYNEX simply because the signal was not strong enough. With this in mind, I called my SNET number from the NYNEX/NY roam port at (212) 301-7626. It rang fine. This indicated to me that I was in an acceptable coverage area. I then tried calling my SNET number directly. Yet each time, this failed to ring the phone. So it MUST be a problem with SNET and NYNEX in terms of call delivery to Suffolk. Has anyone else noticed this? Or possibly in other areas of NYNEX/NY's (poorly covered) service area? Interestingly, I noticed the SAME thing happening in Bell Atlantic's Western NJ system, which went up relatively recently. If you call an SNET number directly, and they are roaming in Western NJ, their phone is queried, but it won't ring. If the SNET phone is busy in the Western Jersey area, callers will get an immediate busy. There isn't supposed to be a connection between SNET and BAMS/Western NJ, and I get differing stories from NYNEX as to a connection for call-delivery between NYNEX/NY and BAMS/Western NJ. (BAMS says the West Jersey system is NOT part of the NYNEX partnership service, which I believe is correct, while NYNEX says it is.) I called NYNEX about both Suffolk and Western New Jersey, and had to go through the usual series of mindless questions before I could talk to a more technically inclined person. ("Is your phone on?", "Is the antenna connected?" etc ... utter idiocy ... :( ). When I was finally put through, they had left for the day (at 4PM?). I'm calling SNET on Monday to see what they can do from their end, but I'd still appreciate any info from SNET (or other) customers who roam in Suffolk and/or Western New Jersey as to what their call delivery experiences have been. Thanks, Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 00:40:50 -0400 From: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) Subject: ATC - LDDS Merger Just came across this on America On Line ... I preceive it as good news. ATC is merging with LDDS. They just complete their billing upgrade. SouthTel was the last to be added. ATC now is SouthTel, Telus, MircoTel Teltec, North America Telephone, Claydesta, and lots of others. Anyway the stock swap will be .083 share LDDS for each ATC $500 mill ... I have had several accounts with various ATC purchased companies and the service has gone way way downhill since ATC stepped in. Maybe with LDDS things will shape up!!! If anyone wants to hear any of my ATC account merging stories just email me. Bill ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 04:18:39 -0700 From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Wax On, Wax Off (Was: An Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake) Jim Haynes wrote: > Gee, I was just thinking about how Herb Caen, columnist for the {San > Francisco Chronicle}, used to wax lyrical about the charm of the fog > horns sounding there. Can't you (or Mike Royko) come up with > something equally lyrical about how charming Chicago is with the > sounds of burglar alarms screaming in the night? to which our esteemed Moderater noted: > [Moderator's Note: Actually most nights here we listen to shots fired > and gangbangers yelling at one another. By comparison, burglar alarms > are an assault only on the ears, not on the mind and body as well, and > at least the gangs run and hide when they go off. Our neighborhood has > become worse than ever before this year. PAT] -- start of decidely un-lyrical waxing -- But don't believe that you can run away from the problem by fleeing to the suburbs. Having moved behind the Orange Curtain (into Orange County, that is -- about fifty miles south-southeast of downtown El Lay, and far, far away from any rioting), one would have thought that the homeless (who used to carry the sobriquet "bums" before it became fashionable to canonize the lot of them), the prostitutes, the gangbangers, et al, would be left behind. Not so -- the only difference is that the ethnicities change a bit. One reads of Asian terror-robberies: thugs of Vietnamese/Cambodian/what-have-you extractions hold entire families of similar ethnicities at gunpoint in their homes for extended periods of time. Many Southeast Asians (a) don't trust the banks (can you blame them?), (b) don't trust the police, and therefore, keep large wads of cash and jewelry in their homes. Entire families can be ruined instantly. White folk tell themselves that this is only visited on Southeast Asians, but scarcely anyone believes it. Three nights ago, the doorbell started insistently ringing at 11:30 PM; a stocky young Asian man of about 23 was there, looking for our next door neighbors. (Manners mean different things to different cultures.) I pointed him in the right direction. I peeked out the window of the bedroom that faces our Vietnamese neighbor's house to make sure that was where he headed afterward before I called the cops. (I didn't.) I was scared silly, though. Oh, sure, there are fewer homeless in O.C., just as there are fewer whores working the street, less graffiti, etc. But the disease has spread south. We can build more prisons, or we can invest in education. We can, and should, do both. Robert L. McMillin | Voice: (310) 568-3555 Hughes Aircraft/Hughes Training, Inc. | Fax: (310) 568-3574 Los Angeles, CA | Internet: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com [Moderator's Note: I will either move to a totally rural, very small town area or I may move out of the USA entirely. PAT] ------------------------------ From: TIMOTHY.K.HONG@gte.sprint.com Date: 6 Jun 92 22:25:00 UT Subject: Things We Remember The Most I guess it is true when they say that you remember the "bad" things that happen more often then the "good". I have been reading a lot of negative stories about phone company quality and service lately, but nothing good. I probably should count my blessings that I never had to go through what many of you have. The few problems that I did have with my billings were cleared up very quickly, and the people were very friendly and helpful. If anything, I have more complaints about my phone than my phone company. I finally settled on a Sony cordless, but even that gives me static sometimes. Overall, I am very happy with the quality of service that Hawaiian Tel has provided over the years, and I wouldn't change. But then again, maybe I'm a little biased. Another thing, with all this talk about Caller ID (something that we don't have here yet, but then half the people are probably friends and family anyway), is there an answering machine capable of reading the incoming number and synthesizing that number onto the tape. My machine leaves the day and time of each call, so it should probably be simple to get it to leave the number too. But then, like I said, we don't have anything like that here, so maybe I'm just asking a useless question. Aloha Everyone! Timothy Hong GTEMail: T.Hong Internet: Timothy.K.Hong@GTE.Sprint.com X.400: /ADMD=TELEMAIL /PRMD=GTEMAIL /O=GTE /S=HONG /G=TIMOTHY /I=K Disclaimer: I am not an official representative of Hawaiian Tel. Everything written here is strictly my own opinion, and does not reflect the policies or opinions of my employer. If this was an actual statement from the company, they would have found someone a lot smarter and more important than me! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #462 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id ab01856; 9 Jun 92 2:51 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14960 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Jun 1992 00:55:04 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15692 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Jun 1992 00:54:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 00:54:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206090554.AA15692@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #463 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Jun 92 00:54:58 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 463 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Death of the Competition (David Lesher) MCI Founder Dies (Steven S. Brack) MCI's McGowan Dies (John R. Levine) Newly Dialable Points (John R. Levine) Hotel Phone Charges - A Limey's View (John Slater) Status of Caller ID in Indiana? (Michael Harpe) Telecom Observations on Long Island (Phillip J. Birmingham) RFC For Fax Specs? (Monte Freeman) More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Robinson Telecom in The Economist (Julian Macassey) Codes for Latvia (Carl Moore) Ring Tones (wuz 917 DA) (Jack Winslade) Phones Ringing Off The Hook (Bill Berbenich) 703-527 : Alexandria/Arlington (Carl Moore) Re: LATAs Crossing State Lines (Carl Moore) Re: 800 Number With "Routing Error" (Jim Gottlieb) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Lesher Subject: Death of the Competition Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 18:26:26 EDT Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Lakeside Terrace William McGowan, 64 died today of a heart attack. He was the founder/spearhead of MCI, who took on ATT's monopoly of the long distance market. This was one half (Carterphone being the other), of the breach in the walls of Bell's monopoly. He had been in ill health for some time, and had a heart transplant several years ago. Like it or not (and CDT readers know where Mr. Moderator stands) MCI helped usher in a new word to the industry -- competition. And that brought about change. wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu ------------------------------ Date: 08 Jun 1992 19:21:05 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: MCI Founder Dies I read this in the news this evening ... WASHINGTON (UPI) -- William G. McGowan, founder and chairman of MCI Communications Corp., died Monday, MCI said. An MCI statement said McGowan, 64, died of a heart attack at Georgetown University Hospital. He had undergone a heart transplant in April 1987. McGowan, born in Ashley, Pa., in 1927, was a graduate of Kings College in 1950 and earned his master of business administration degree from Harvard University in 1952. ------------------------------ Subject: MCI's McGowan Dies Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 12:08:15 EDT From: John R. Levine National Public Radio reports that MCI's William McGowan died at age 64 from a heart attack. He took MCI from a struggling little private line microwave carrier to its current status as the US's second largest long distance carrier. McGowan had a heart transplant several years ago, and was one of the country's longer-lived transplant patients. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Subject: Newly Dialable Points Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 2:15:27 EDT From: John R. Levine {Newsbytes} reports that AT&T says that as of June 15th, they will offer direct dial service to these points: Antarctica, Casey and Scott Bases Lebanon Outer Mongolia Niue, Norfolk Island, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and Wallis and Futuna Islands, in the South Pacific Diego Garcia, Christmas and Cocos Islands in the Indian Ocean To most of these places the only service previously offered was person-to-person operated assisted. (For the places that did allow station calls, the extra charge for person-to-person was only about two minutes worth, probably a bargain unless you were really sure your callee would be next to the phone.) I didn't know there were any civilian phones on Diego Garcia. Newsbytes also says that Israel will offer phone service to Iraq, Libya, and Syria, who are not happy about it but have no technical way to stop it. Israeli calls will apparently be transit traffic mixed in with calls from other countries and they can't turn off the Israeli calls without turning off everything else. There's been similar service since March to other less hostile but still displeased Arab countries, with quite a lot of traffic, thousands of calls per day. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 15:23:15 BST From: John.Slater@UK.Sun.COM (John Slater - Sun UK - Gatwick SE) Subject: Hotel Phone Charges - a Limey's View I was in San Francisco recently, staying at the Burlingame Hyatt near the airport. I was surprised, to say the least, at the phone charges from the room. Here's the scoop: Local calls: 75c access charge Long distance: AT&T *operator* rates, *plus* 75c access charge, *plus* 20c/minute! 950-XXXX long distance access: 75c 800 numbers: Free, except that 800-numbers to connect to long distance service providers attract a 75c charge. My verdict: 1) 75c for a local call is not too unreasonable. 2) Their long distance charging is extortionate. 3) How do they detect that an 800 number connects to a long distance service provider? I know about 1-800-950-XXXX, but what is to stop MCI, say, using a number not of this format to provide this service? And is it legal for the hotel to charge even for this type of 800 number? I thought there was a blanket rule that 800 numbers must not attract any charge. I used my Visa-card-linked MCI card for my long-distance calls, and I did it from the payphones in the lobby. (PacBell, fortunately!). I also got excellent service from MCI (1-800-444-4444) with a how-to question and a request to change the Visa card to which my account is billed. I used my BT chargecard via UK Direct (1-800-44-55-66-7) for my international calls to the UK. Operator rates, but my company pays :-) John Slater, Sun Microsystems UK P.S. I can write again about phone charges in UK hotels if this is of interest. [Moderator's Note: Yes, please give us background on UK hotels. PAT] ------------------------------ From: meharp01@vlsi.ct.louisville.edu (Michael Harpe) Subject: Status of Caller ID in Indiana? Organization: University of Louisville Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 13:46:52 GMT Does anyone know what the status of the Caller ID offering in Indiana is? Last I heard (and posted here) was that it was a go. The local Radio Shack in Jeffersonville has started selling Caller ID boxes ($69.95) but flagging them "only for use in Kentucky - Indiana coming soon". What's the scoop? Also, what switch does your area need to be able to run the CLASS services? I live in 812-28X if that helps. Thanks! Mike Harpe University of Louisville ------------------------------ From: birmingh@fnala.fnal.gov Subject: Telecom Observations on Long Island Date: 8 Jun 92 21:04:13 GMT Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab My girlfriend and I drove to Brookhaven National Lab (she's working there this summer) and I had a couple of experiences I thought I might share: 1) The weather was awful most of the weekend (at least to this Arkansas boy) so we spent most of our time shopping. I needed to use a payphone, so I used one in the Service Merchandise near Patchogue. Looked like a standard Bell payphone, and the placard said all long distance was handled by AT&T, but when I dialed my number, I got some AOS. Fortunately, 10288 worked, but I wonder if this sort of thing is common. 2) On the flight back, I got to use the GTE Airphone. The sound was really pretty scratchy, and it costs about as much as a 900 number (two bucks per minute plus two bucks setup charge) but it was kinda fun to call my mother and my girlfriend from 35000 feet. I can see where this gadget could be a lifesaver to some people. Phillip J. Birmingham birmingh@fnal.fnal.gov I don't speak for Fermilab, although my mouth is probably big enough ... ------------------------------ From: mf15@prism.gatech.edu (Monte Freeman) Subject: RFC For Fax Specs? Date: 9 Jun 92 01:33:18 GMT Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology Hello, I need the RFC (or some other type of "oficial document" ) that gives the specs for fax transmissions. A description of the protocol, etc ... Anyone have any idea where I can find something like this? Preferably in on-line Internet accessible format ... Thanks in advance, Monte Freeman -- Operations Department / Information Technology Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332 uucp: ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!mf15 Internet: mf15@prism.gatech.edu ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDarcos@MCIMail.Com From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 08 Jun 92 17:29:41 EDT Subject: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking I realize that my last article was a little skimpy so I'll try again to give more details on the blocking of calls made by those who block the delivery of their calling number to a telephone which is equipped with Caller-ID capability. Note that where *nn is used, rotary phones would dial 11nn, i.e. *67 on a Touch-tone (R) telephone, and 1167 from a rotary telephone. A reader of this newsletter wrote to me privately to ask more details about Caller-ID block-Blocking. This is a feature in which the holder of a Caller-ID box can dial a code of *77 to indicate that if anyone calls that number with caller-id blocking in effect, that call will be routed to an intercept recording telling the user to call with Caller-ID blocking disabled. Note that using the Caller-ID *67 block does not prevent the called party from denying a connection by, in addition to using the *67 code, of using the alternate "blocking list" in which they can put a list of several numbers that, whether or not they are known to the caller, are permanently denied connection; this service also allows you to add the last number that called you to the list of people to deny a connection. And one may still use call-trace even if the return number is blocked. And you can also dial *69 to call-back the last called number. The code *77 is a toggle; if you have Caller-ID, you dial *77 to indicate you want to refuse calls from people who block their number; then if you want to accept blocked calls, you dial *77 to disable this feature. This code is not available to users without Caller-ID (since you can't get the caller's number anyway without it). I have tried this myself when someone who runs a BBS gave me a number he has Caller-ID block-Blocking enabled; I dialed the number and it rang; I hung up. I then dialed *67 and the number, it threw me to an intercept recording; I dialed the number again without the *67 and it does work. We are on Centrex service here; the interesting thing is that you have to dial *67 BEFORE dialing 9 for an outside line. Note that the code may change from place to place; *67 is used to block Caller-ID information from being passed; *77 is used to block delivery of callers who have their line blocked. These are the valid codes in Washington, DC, Maryland and Virginia. These star codes may not be the same in other areas. [Moderator's Note: Next thing you know, we will be hearing complaints from people about *77 being a toggle, i.e. how do I know which way the toggle is set in case I forget and I want to block the possibility some telemarketer might call me blocking *his* ID, etc ... :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Telecom in The Economist Date: 7 Jun 92 18:17:17 GMT Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. For those interested in telephony, the {Economist} provides excellent coverage. Better coverage in fact than is provided by that content free, PR flack dumping ground {Telephony} magazine. The June 6 - 12 issue has an good article on the Sprint Centel merger (Pages 73 - 74). Also on page 74 is an article on country codes and the politics involved. The May 30 - June 5 issue has a special article (Pages 19-22) on Mobile telephones. The {Economist} is a news magazine that likes to get its facts right and reports in depth. It takes a centrist and global perspective. It likes to provide lots of charts and figures with its stories. In fact, one of the first places I read a good description of CLASS (Evil Caller ID etc.) services was in the {Economist.} Most libraries carry the {Economist}. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 9:50:07 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Codes for Latvia Somone who forwarded the article (about 1200-baud modems wanted in Latvia) didn't have the telephone codes, so here they are, excerpted from a list for what was the USSR: If asterisk appears at end of line, then for 5 or 6 digit numbers, add '22' or '2', respectively, before a 5 or 6 digit phone number. Otherwise, add '00' or '0' respectively. 7 (the former) Soviet Union 013 Latvia 013 2 Riga* 013 52 Jekabpils 013 54 Daugavpils ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 08 Jun 92 07:06:22 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Ring Tones (wuz 917 DA) Reply-To: jack.winslade%drbbs@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha In a message dated 02-JUN-92, Vld/vmb writes: > Calling 917-555-1212 via C&P pay phone using AT&T has gotten through. > The ringing signal was that old E-flat-major chord. That older ringing tone was the topic of a recent conversation 'on another network'. That's the first time I've heard it called E flat major. I could not find any specifications for that old tone. Does anyone know what they are or where they might be located? For those who may not know/remember (not to show my age ;-) this was the common ringback tone used in Ma Bell's larger panel and #1 crossbar (and some #5 cross) up through the early 1980s. (The last I remember it around here was '84 or so. 212-569 had it until quite recently.) Good day! JSW Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1 DRBBS (Lamb cush-cush in saffron-tamarind sauce ..) (1:285/666.0) ------------------------------ Subject: Phones Ringing Off the Hook" From: bill%wabwrld.UUCP@mathcs.emory.edu (Bill Berbenich) Date: Mon, 08 Jun 92 19:39:26 EDT Organization: Doraville 30340 I am curious about the origins of this oft-heard cliche. Does it mean that the phone rang, even though it was already off the hook or does it mean that the phone rang so hard that it knocked itself off the hook? Is there a possibility that I missed? {Communications Week} this week has a cover story on the effect of the air-fare wars upon the telephone network and it uses that catch-phrase on the headline. Bill SysOp of ---+++ wabwrld Waffle BBS +++--- A small, quality news/e-mail system on the outskirts of Atlanta domain - bill@wabwrld.UUCP bangpath - tridom!wabwrld!bill ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 18:27:57 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: 703-527 : Alexandria/Arlington I made a call from a pay phone in Arlington (Rosslyn area exchanges) on 703-527 via C&P, and I got 703-527 ALEX (short for Alexandria) on my May 1992 phone bill for the From part of that call. I realize that the DC area call guides show Arlington/Alexandria for the Ar- lington and Alexandria exchanges in Virginia, but little noises like this make it more difficult to map an exchange to a more specific area (in this case, Arlington/Rosslyn). ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 9:25:15 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: LATAs Crossing State Lines de@moscom.com writes: > There is some overlap of the two latas in the 613 and 514 NPAs, > around Ottawa, one of the very few places that NPAs cross state or > provincial lines. 819, not 514, is the Quebec area code next door to Ottawa, Ontario. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 11:58 JST From: jimmy@tokyo07.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Re: 800 Number With "Routing Error" Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan slonim@iilcad.intel.com writes: > Note that there are now international 800 numbers available from AT&T, > but they must be set up by the owner on a per country basis. Last time > I inquired the cost was about $100/hr + $100/month/country The per-country cost isn't that high. They charge about $20 a month for as many countries as you want. I have toll-free numbers in Thailand and Malaysia so that my friends there can call me in Los Angeles without spending a week's salary on a ten-minute call. Since they don't charge for additional countries, one might be tempted to request numbers from everywhere, but the wrong numbers could quickly add up. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #463 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa03081; 9 Jun 92 3:21 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17423 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Jun 1992 01:29:01 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17627 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Jun 1992 01:28:53 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 01:28:53 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206090628.AA17627@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #464 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Jun 92 01:28:45 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 464 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (Steve Forrette) Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (John Higdon) Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (Kath Mullholand) Re: *69 Results in a Beating (Paul Knupke Jr.) Re: *67 and Related Topics (Alan L. Varney) Re: Does *67 Really Work? (Toby Nixon) Re: Business Office Hours (William T. Sykes) Re: Multi-Phone Line Protection (Hans-Gabriel Ridder) Re: Digital Mixing (Jack Adams) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 14:59:29 pdt From: Steve Forrette Subject: Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA In article John Higdon writes: > I have the makings for a real nightmare here. As I was paying bills, I > noticed three calls to the UK on three separate days a week apart. The > total cost of the calls came to $32.98. I reached for the phone and > called AT&T to have them removed, since I made no such calls. > I was firmly told by the rep that unless I called Pac*Bell and had "my > lines checked" and some reason for those calls found, they could not > be removed. I was given the usual third-degree about someone else in > the house making the calls (not possible), or having made them without > remembering (not possible). In any event, I was told that no credit > could be given. I had the same thing happen to me about four years ago. It was on a second line in my parents house that I used sometimes when visiting. I hadn't been by there for about two months, and there was only one jack in the house for that line, and no phone was even plugged in there went I wasn't there. They were all domestic calls in my case, and to all sorts of places: George, Texas, etc. There appeared to be two or three calls a day to various places, for about three weeks (up to and including the closing day of the bill, so I thought that there might be more next month, which there were). Some of the numbers were called many times. At the time, my carrier was US Sprint, and I called to complain. I got the same thing that John did -- "maybe someone else in the household used it without your knowing, maybe you forgot, maybe maybe." I can't blame them completely for this attitude. John among all people should be familiar with people who call numbers (especially 900 numbers) then later "deny all knowledge." The carriers have to deal with this every day. Equally true is another thing John said: that when a long-time customer with a history of large bills and on-time payments calls to dispute a relatively small amount, that it's just general good business practice to take them at their word. I too had to call Pacific Bell to "have my lines checked" before they would do anything more about it. So I played along with the game. A couple of days later, I got a call back from the Pacific Bell lineman, who had indeed discovered a spurious bridge somewhere that was sending my line into an unused pair of another residence! Family X had apparently discovered dialtone on their "idle" pair and figured that it would be as good of a place as any from which to make their toll calls. It didn't appear that they abused it that much, but just made their regular calls. I was astounded that they actually found the problem. I thought that this was the end to my problem, but it was only the beginning. Of course, Sprint would not take me at my word when I told them what the lineman told me. I had to get Pacific Bell to call them directly. I didn't have the name of the lineman that had called me (stupid of me!), so I ended up talking to a repair supervisor who could look this up in the records. Then they said that Pacific Bell could not initiate a call to any IXC because of His Honor, and that Sprint would have to call them. Back to Sprint, who said that they would waste no further time with this matter, and would not call Pacific Bell. After all, they said, it was Pacific Bell's fault that the bridge was left in place, so they can take the time to resolve the billing matter. (I was receiving my bill directly from Sprint, so it's not like Pacific Bell could give me a credit themselves). I finally ended up having Pacific Bell write me a letter and send it to me, which I then copied and sent to Sprint. It took five or six additional calls, and as many months, before I finally got my credit on my bill. Good luck, John! Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com [Moderator's Note: I've found I can usually get messages from AT&T to Illinois Bell by simply asking the one to fax a message to the other. I've done this when there was a problem getting Reach Out installed on my line (with IBT doing the billing for AT&T, etc). PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 15:32 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare On Jun 8 at 14:59, Steve Forrette writes: > I finally ended up having Pacific Bell write me a letter and send it > to me, which I then copied and sent to Sprint. It took five or six > additional calls, and as many months, before I finally got my credit > on my bill. Good luck, John! I will not stand for this under any circumstances. If AT&T wants to get snotty about it, I will go down to the office supply store, get a new toner cartridge for my printer, buy a case of paper, and print the entire output of my SMDR from 4/30 to the last call in question on any future bill. I will then send the entire package of thousands of pages to someone at AT&T. I will demand that someone show me where those calls were made. If that record does not interest anyone, I will take that as a presumtion by AT&T that I am intentionally attempting to defraud the company. At that point, I will be prepared to take my business, my company's business, my clients' business (after relating the entire story in detail) and all future business that might come from recommendations elsewhere. AFTER doing all of this, I will write up the details of what happened and what I did about it and send it to Robert Allen. "So let it be written ..." John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: You won't stand for it? So sit down then. :) The problem is John, *where* would you take all that business? Sprint? Aren't you also punishing them right now? MCI? (snicker) Or maybe Ma and Pa Kettle's Long Distance Service? PAT] ------------------------------ Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 11:12:02 -0400 (EDT) From: K_MULLHOLAND@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Kath Mullholand, UNH Telecom, 862-1031) Subject: Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare John Higdon writes: > It boils down to this: Pac*Bell cannot issue a credit for AT&T. AT&T > will not issue a credit, period, unless trouble can be proven > (translation: someone found who was bridged on the line) and then > Pac*Bell will be stuck for the cost of the calls anyway. In essence, > AT&T NEVER eats the cost of a call. **stuff deleted** > But what is more distressing is AT&T's attitude. It seems to be > willing to lose my business over $32.02. This is the primary reason that we have chosen to do business with AT&T as little as possible. Their attitude toward customers requesting adjustments is extremely poor. In one situation, I had copies of a bill from a student showing that the caller had made a call from Italy, been disconnected, and redialed the call, intending both portions to appear on her credit card. Instead, portion two of the call was billed to UNH. It took us three weeks to get action on this, and one rep (who I hope was fired, but was probably given a commendation) accused me bluntly of lying and assisting the student in "cooking this up". Total cost of the call: less than $14.00. In another instance, a caller dialed a call to Connecticut, but must have misdialed and got Egypt instead. She neglected to dispute the call with us until two month later. I called AT&T and offered to fax a copy of the bill (as I know they only keep two months on-line) and was told, "We never credit calls older than two months." Seeking clarification I said, "You mean, you may take up to two years to bill call, but you will only allow two months to dispute it?" "Yes, ma'am," drone replies. I requested her supervisor. Credit is forthcoming. Total cost of the call: less than $8.00. So for $22.00 out of our several thousand dollars worth of business with AT&T, AT&T is willing to offend us and lose our business. I hope it's worth it to them. Side note: I always fall over laughing when I see the "You're not dealing with AT&T" commercial. (My response, "No, I'm not -- thank goodness!") kath mullholand university of new hampshire durham, nh ------------------------------ From: Paul.Knupke.Jr.@f750.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Paul Knupke Jr.) Subject: Re: *69 Results in a Beating Date: Sun, 07 Jun 92 16:11:02 EDT Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/750 - FTC Mail System, Largo Fl Pat, GTE-Florida offers the same service (1+ 270-8711, for up to two numbers and 1+ 270-8211 for three to 15 numbers.) from anywhere in the area it services. It is called "GTE Name and Address service." As with Illinios Bell, only numbers listed in the directory are available with this service. My job makes use of this service on a daily basis. Paul Knupke Jr. pekjr@psycho.fidonet.org Communication, Etc. Fidonet 1:3603/750 RIME ->PETEXCH Telecommunications Consulting Largo, Florida USA Internet: Paul.Knupke.Jr.@f750.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG UUCP: ...!uunet!myrddin!tct!psycho!750!Paul.Knupke.Jr. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 09:57:12 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: *67 and Related Topics Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article peters@beltrix.guild.org (Peter Sleggs) writes: > Bob_Frankston@frankston.com writes: >> Remember that what you THINK the Caller-ID setting is on your line and >> what it ACTUALLY is are not necessarily the same thing. >> [Moderator's Note: Then that is your problem. Either you are in >> control of your phone or you are not. > Sorry Pat, I have to jump in here, forget that it a phone for a > moment ... (I know I know it is the _Telecom_ Digest :) > Consider the situation of ANY toggle, .... Just so this thread won't be totally un-bounded, let me mention: 1) Bellcore's update to TR-TSY-000391, Iss. 2, "CLASS(sm) Feature: Calling Number Delivery Blocking" (the one with the "toggle code" reference) will be Issue 3 (around 12/92) with a new title: "CLASS(sm) Feature: Calling Identity Delivery Blocking & Related Features". The TA review period ended 3/92. If the TR isn't modified TOO much from the TA, there will be several new codes assigned. Since "Calling Identity" handles both Calling Number and Name, there are many combinations of per-line and per-call blocking, and several have toggle or "force" codes assigned. Included is a code that will, for the following call, indicate "presentation restricted" for both the Name and Number, regardless of the caller's per-line status. So the issue is on it's way to being "fixed". 2) *XX code exhaust has a concern in the early 1980's, when the 1A ESS folks at AT&T were designing (and coding a CCIS6 version of) LASS, renamed "CLASS(sm)" by Bellcore. At a recent conference, a Bellcore speaker indicated the all XX codes had been tentatively assigned, as had many of the *2XX and *3XX proposed extended codes. The solution, according to Bellcore, is a new switch/CPE interface that will allow an interactive, display-based, context-sensitive dialog between the switch and the customer; capable of services well beyond the current *XX(X) capabilities. Of course, I'm not sure how you build portable, feature-insensitive dialing strings into a lap-top/modem to support such feature access. And an update for those waiting on Caller-ID-on-Call-Waiting: Bellcore has released TA-NWT-000575, "Calling Identity Delivery on Call Waiting" (RFC 92-30). Comments are due 7/15/92. This uses the capabilities in TA-NWT-000030 to deliver number and/or name when "call waiting" occurs. Al Varney - just my opinion ------------------------------ From: Toby Nixon Subject: Re: Does *67 Really Work? Date: 8 Jun 92 16:50:40 GMT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , dave@westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > The data link on which Caller*ID is delivered is not duplex. It is > simplex. The CO transmits a data message, but does not listen for any > ACK or anything else from the customer's equipment. This won't necessarily be true in the future. The newly-published Bellcore spec for delivery of Caller-ID information with Call Waiting does require the Caller-ID box to send back an "ack" (to the call-waiting tone) before the Caller-ID information is sent. The Caller-ID box is supposed to first split the connection to cut the phone off the line, to prevent the user from getting blasted with Bell 202 modulation. But, still this won't let you get information the switch isn't programmed to deliver. Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 151243420 Hayes Microcomputer Products, Inc. | Fax +1-404-447-0178 CIS 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | BBS +1-404-446-6336 AT&T !tnixon Atlanta, Georgia 30348 | UUCP uunet!hayes!tnixon Fido 1:114/15 USA | Internet tnixon@hayes.com ------------------------------ From: wts1@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (wts1) Subject: Re: Business Office Hours Organization: AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies - Greensboro, NC Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 17:55:21 GMT In article cfs@cowpas.waffle.atl.ga.us (Charles Stephens) writes: > Southern Bell hours are M-F 8-5. That's it. It's a real > pain, when you want to make orders or have questions about your bill. > Southern Bell has two 24 hour services. The first is > RightTouch(tm) that allows you to use a touch tone phone to place > simple orders (ie disconnect line, order Prestige(r), etc.). They > also have a 611 repair service. Unless my eyes deceive me, per the March 1992-93 Burlington, NC and January 1992-93 Greater Greensboro, NC Southern Bell phone book, the Business Office Service Representative hours are "Monday through Friday between 7:30 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Saturday..." When one says Southern Bell is so-and-so, be sure of your info. I was talking to a SB Service Rep at 6:30 p.m. June 4, 1992, so at least in this SB teritory, extended hours and Quick(SM) are already implemented. William T. Sykes AT&T FSAT-Engineering Greensboro, NC 27420 UUCP: att!burl!wts att!cbnewsb!wts1 ------------------------------ From: Hans Ridder Subject: Re: Multi-Phone Line Protection Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 16:18:42 GMT In article bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) writes: > There is real advantage to sharing a ground for both power > and phone line protection. Neither ground will be that good in a > typical installation, but having them common limits the voltage > differences seen inside the equipment. Not only is it an advantage, but bonding all grounds together is now *required* by code (National Electrical Code) in the US. It's a good idea too! :-) Hans-Gabriel Ridder Digital DECwest Engineering ridder@rust.zso.dec.com Bellevue, Washington, USA {pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26546-adams) Subject: Re: Digital Mixing Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 13:22:57 GMT In article , martin@datacomm.ucc. okstate.edu writes: > What method is used to digitally mix the audio from several sources > such as on a conference call carried on a digital PBX? Simply adding > the signed values of the digital samples at any given time could > result in illegal values such as when both samples happened to be at > their maximum value. One of the added benefits of digital (aka PCM encoding) switching is that the actual samples of members on the bridge are *NOT* added! Conference bridging is accomplished through a simple distribution algorithm. The transmitting signal (an encoded sample) is distributed to all other ports on the bridge as a receive signal. Rather slick eh! Jack (John) Adams Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #464 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa05066; 9 Jun 92 4:24 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21323 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Jun 1992 02:32:30 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17699 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Jun 1992 02:32:17 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 02:32:17 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206090732.AA17699@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #465 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Jun 92 02:32:16 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 465 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: GTD5 Bashing and Future (Todd Langel) Re: GTD5 Bashing and Future (Eric M. Carroll) The GTD5 vs the Bean Counters (Bud Couch) GTE's Local Presence (or Lack Thereof) (Paul Knupke Jr.) Re: Good Service From GTE in L.A. Area (Paul Knupke Jr.) Re: Some History of GTE (Tim Gorman) Re: Influencing PUCs (Fred Goldstein) Re: Influencing PUCs (Steve Forrette) Re: Call Own Phone Number Back Wanted (Derek Andrew) Re: 4,000 Person CWA Conference Call (Robert J. Woodhead) Re: Wax On, Wax Off (Was Inconsiderate Neighbor) (Robert S. Helfman) Re: Wax On, Wax Off (Was Inconsiderate Neighbor) (Matthew Holdrege) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Todd.Langel@f230.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Todd Langel) Subject: Re: GTD5 Bashing and Future Date: Sun, 07 Jun 92 22:08:34 EDT Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/230 - CSFSO Telecomm, Clearwater FL John, The reason the GTD5 is going out is because AT&T bought the technology about a year and a half ago to eliminate a competitive switch to its 5ESS. Nedless to say, I dont think GTE will be putting any new GTD5's in anymore. I Know for a fact that there have been at least five new 5ESS's installed in the Bay Area in the last year, and have three more schedueled to be installed this year. Some of those are full blown 5ESS'S and some are small remote's. Rumor Has-it, within five Years All of GTE's CO's will be coverted to 5ESS's. Seems to be that GTE is so far behind in technology compared to Southern Bell that there just now starting to follow in their footsteps. If you ask around you will find out that the 5ESS is pretty much the standard today because of the software support and future expandability. It may cost more now, but in the long run they will save (I mean make) money! Todd Langel Internet: Todd.Langel@f230.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG UUCP: ...!uunet!myrddin!tct!psycho!230!Todd.Langel ------------------------------ From: Eric M. Carroll Subject: Re: GTD5 Bashing and Future Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 12:15:22 -0400 Mr. Baker, Please do not presume to represent the majority of telecom-digest readers. I have enjoyed Mr. Hidgon's opinion and technical expertise in the telecom digest for many years. I hope he continues to post. His articles are relavent, entertaining, informative, and, where I have the knowledge to assess, technically accurate. They are certainly personal perspectives, but noone is paying him to be objective. Your comments are inappropriate, and not representative of my opinion. Please stick to whatever facts you can marshal if you wish to refute Mr. Higdon's opinion. I should note Mr. Higdon has no idea who I am -- we have never exchanged email before. Eric Carroll Network Development University of Toronto Computing Services ------------------------------ From: kentrox!bud@uunet.UU.NET (Bud Couch) Subject: The GTD5 vs the Bean Counters Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 17:02:58 GMT I've been sort of following the thread here about how bad (or good) the GTD5 digital switch is (or isn't), and a number of suppositions about its deserved (or undeserved) orphan status. John Higdon made the statement that the GTD5 was the "switch that drove GTE out of the business". Not really. What drove GTE out of the switch business (and the long distance business and the transmission equipment business, etc) was the MFJ. The bean counters looked at the result, decided that they were next, and got rid of anything that looked like it might attract an antitrust suit. They peddled Sprint to United, AE to AT&T, and Lenkurt to Siemens. As an engineer and ex-Lenkurt employee, I thought it was a poor decision; the net effect was to reduce the number of independent design and development centers in this country. As a GTE stockholder (hey, 12 years of employee stock purchase plans were a *good* deal) I would have to say that the bean counters were probably correct; financially I think that the corporation is better off. On balance, though, I think that the telephone business itself is worse off, because a large pool of experience and expertise was basically thrown out "with the bath water". Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew ... standard BS applies ------------------------------ From: Paul.Knupke.Jr.@f750.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Paul Knupke Jr.) Subject: GTE's Local Presence (or Lack Thereof) Date: Sun, 07 Jun 92 15:59:01 EDT Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/750 - FTC Mail System, Largo Fl John Higdon wrote: > I hope that gives you a small idea of why I find GTE to be the worst > of telephone companies. It just appears that GTE doesn't give a damn. Here is another GTE horror story, this time GTE-Florida. Last fall I was at a friends apartment in St. Pete on a Saturday evening and suddenly his voice line went dead. He called maintenance on his data line and asked for them to check it out, and was told no one would be able to check the problem until 8 AM on Monday morning as no repair "people" were available. Needless to say, he was out a voice line until Monday ... GTE did credit his account for two days of nonservice though on that particular line. Internet: Paul.Knupke.Jr.@f750.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG UUCP: ...!uunet!myrddin!tct!psycho!750!Paul.Knupke.Jr. ------------------------------ From: Paul.Knupke.Jr.@f750.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Paul Knupke Jr.) Subject: Re: Good Service From GTE in L.A. Area Date: Sun, 07 Jun 92 15:53:00 EDT Organization: FidoNet node 1:3603/750 - FTC Mail System, Largo Fl > Actually, some time ago (some years), many had spoken ill of the > Indiana GTE operation as well ... I wonder if things have changed > much. Not that I know of. Many of my relatives live in Ft. Wayne, (GTE-North of Indiana territory) and they don't speak well of their operation up there. The rates are quite high, signifigantly higher than what I pay GTE-Florida here in St. Petersburg. I remember my aunt mentioning their average GTE phone bill was about $28/month (compared to $16 or so here in the Tampa area.) GTE North wasn't even offering many of the special features yet either. On a positive note, GTE North has slowly been expanding the local dialing area for Ft. Wayne/Allen Co. Internet: Paul.Knupke.Jr.@f750.n3603.z1.FIDONET.ORG UUCP: ...!uunet!myrddin!tct!psycho!750!Paul.Knupke.Jr. ------------------------------ Date: 08 Jun 92 10:10:20 EDT From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Re: Some History of GTE-Florida steven@alchemy.UUCP writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #460: > This type of thing happens all the time. I have heard where develpers > have come into areas and built houses without telling any of the > utilities and then start screaming because there is no electric, > water, gas, telephone or cable. In one case all this was brought in > later (they had to rip up the streets) with the exception of the cable > company. And to this day 15 years later these people don't have cable > service and no amount of screaming has forced the cable company to > bring service to the area. At least the telephone company did do > something about it and they did not make the developer pay for it > which they could have. I have a bone to pick with this. I have had this fight with my own wire center forecasters before. There is no reason why they cannot, on a monthly basis, get around to all of the county courthouses (or whereever) to review building permits and plat filings. A good working relationship with commercial real estate sales offices can also usually pay dividends. This type of development is not usually done overnight, not even over a summer. If something this major is missed, it is not just the customer's fault for not telling the "utilities". The utilities must accept blame for not doing a "good" job of staying current with activities in the area. Tim Gorman - SWBT *opinions are mine, any relationship to official policy is coincidence* ------------------------------ From: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred Goldstein) Subject: Re: Influencing PUCs Reply-To: goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com (Fred Goldstein) Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Littleton MA USA Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 20:35:04 GMT In article , jessea@homecare.com (Jesse W. Asher) writes: > Our local carrier is in the process of tariffing ISDN and I would like > to know how much influence the public has over this process. You CAN talk back! Each state's PUC is a bit different, of course; their attitude towards ISDN is their own. But there are both formal and informal "intervention" processes in every state. Generally, when a tariff is filed, the PUC sets a public hearing date. Anybody can talk. They might even listen! Maybe more if you bring friends. A formal intervention is a bigger deal, of course, best done by specialists; intervenors get access to the records and filing documentation and get to rebut it. The rate for residential ISDN in Massachusetts, thanks to intervention, is quite reasonable. Basically, choose your tariff class and for ISDN, add $13; another $6.60 gets you D-channel packet access. I think another $6 activates the second B channel (alternate voice/data). Installation is around $75 above POTS. BTW, this rate is the result of intervention; they had proposed much higher. Usage charges are currently set at "measured rate only" (same as voice measured) for intra-office data. Interoffice data isn't tariffed yet (no SS7) and voice goes at the usual rate. Of course you can try sending 56k over "speech" calls and it'll usually work, but not guaranteed. Now actually getting it installed is a different story... they haven't yet trained the residence service center droids to take the orders yet, and only a few COs are ready. But that's not a tariff issue. The worst part is when they tariff it as a Centrex feature only. That's nasty and worth fighting. Withholding one monopoly product (ISDN) to benefit a competitive product (Centrex) is of questionable legality, and at least the Mass. DPU got it right. Fred R. Goldstein goldstein@carafe.enet.dec.com or goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com voice:+1 508 952 3274 Standard Disclaimer: Opinions are mine alone; sharing requires permission. [Moderator's Note: Fred wrote a good book about ISDN recently, and I will get around to reviewing it here soon. PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Influencing PUCs Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 22:16:47 GMT In article scol@scottsdale.az. stratus.com (Scott Colbath) writes: > I guess what I saying here is that you should call the PUC and bug > them like me and many others did regarding the tariff for third line > costs. It may help. The PUC can be surprisingly helpful at times. Recently, I was getting a price quote from Pacific Bell for T1 access, and had a question about tariff interpretation. After checking into it a bit, my Pacific Bell rep said that whoever they asked interally told me to consult my attorney or the PUC. So I called the California PUC, and told them what Pacific Bell had told me. They said that it was Pacific Bell's responsibility, and not the customer's, to interpret the tariff for the customer, and the woman at then transferred my call directly to the Pacific Bell executive offices, who were able to put me in touch with the person with my answer. All in all, I was satisfied with the way the matter was handled. As others have mentioned in the Digest, it is truely amazing the red carpet treatment you get from an RBOC when you talk to the executive offices and they know that the call came through the PUC. It was a striking contrast to the regular business office run-around. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: andrew@jester.USask.ca (Derek Andrew) Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted Reply-To: andrew@jester.USask.ca Organization: University of Saskatchewan Date: Sun, 7 Jun 1992 12:53:44 +0100 Javier Henderson writes: > In GTE areas in So. Cal, you can dial your own number, and hang up, > and your phone will ring. In article rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) writes: > Nope, it doesn't matter if you have call waiting or not. I've got call > waiting, and I routinely dial my own number by mistake when calling > Personal Secretary for my messages, resulting in the 'beep', and then > a ringback when I hang up. > [Moderator's Note: Interesting that you mention this, because Illinois > Bell does not work the same way. Dialing your own number always > results in a busy signal, call-waiting not withstanding. To get a > 'true' busy (and thus force the call to roll to a second line or voice > mail or whatever) prepending *70 before dialing your number will work. > You'll never get the call-waiting tone when dialing your own number > here, even with *70 on the front, since prevention of call-waiting is > the very reason *70 was added! PAT] Interesting ... in Saskatchewan Canada, the provincial phone company is offering a service called "Intercom". You dial your own phone number, hang up, it rings, then when it stops ringing you pick it up and talk to someone else in the house. The interesting part is that there is a monthly fee of $2 or $3 for the intercom service. Derek Andrew, Manager of Computer Network & Technical Services University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon Saskachewan, Canada, S7N 0W0 Andrew@Sask.USask.CA, +1-306-966-4808, 52 11 23N 106 48 48W [Moderator's Note: I think IBT offers 'intercom' also. PAT] ------------------------------ From: trebor@foretune.co.jp (Robert J Woodhead) Subject: Re: 4,000 Person CWA Conference Call Organization: Foretune Co., Ltd. Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 06:05:09 GMT news@cbnewsh.att.com writes: > I have no actual information about the call in question. When I saw > the press release, I thought that was a pretty big number for a > conference call, too. I wonder if they used AT&T for the call? ;^) Robert J. Woodhead, Biar Games / AnimEigo, Incs. trebor@foretune.co.jp ------------------------------ From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman) Subject: Re: Wax On, Wax Off (Was: An Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake) Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 17:40:22 GMT In article TELECOM Moderator noted: > [Moderator's Note: I will either move to a totally rural, very small > town area or I may move out of the USA entirely. PAT] Try moving to rural western Kansas, and you can enjoy the fate of the Clutter family (doesn't sound familiar? Read "In Cold Blood"). [Moderator's Note: I've read everything Truman Capote wrote, despite the fact that I found him a bit strange. Actually, I'll be living in southeastern Kansas a few miles from the Oklahoma border. But you see, the Clutter family was the exception to the rule there, not the *norm* as is the case in Chicago. People there were actually shocked when that occurred; they remember it to this day. I can't recall the names of the people the {Sun Times} said got murdered over the weekend. I'll gladly tolerate three or four murders per year instead of three per day, which is our average here to date in 1992. Somehow, I'll survive without the drugs, gangs and violence I deal with every day here. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 04:17 GMT From: Matthew Holdrege Subject: Re: Wax On, Wax Off (Was Inconsiderate Neighbor Keeps Me Awake) > [Moderator's Note: I will either move to a totally rural, very small > town area or I may move out of the USA entirely. PAT] Love it or leave it, Pat. The reason Rogers Park and Uptown are so bad is because people gave up fighting and left. The "good" neighborhoods are the ones where the homeowners refuse to give up on their community. A quote from Edmund Burke as printed in Tom Clancy's Patriot Games: "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." Matt Holdrege Pacificare Health Systems 5156065@mcimail.com 714-229-2518 [Moderator's Note: Okay, so I'll leave it. I was a community activist for over twenty years, and a lot of good it did. Admittedly the Clutter family met a terrible fate, but I doubt their neighbors then or now have any concern about walking a few blocks at night to the Dairy Queen for ice cream with their two year old child; nor do they have a drug house across the street and a combination whore house and shooting gallery in the garage down the alley. Think of how much I will miss and how dangerous it will be living in Independence, KS! PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #465 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28873; 10 Jun 92 1:25 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31005 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 9 Jun 1992 23:33:44 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02418 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 9 Jun 1992 23:33:35 -0500 Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 23:33:35 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206100433.AA02418@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #466 TELECOM Digest Tue, 9 Jun 92 23:33:25 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 466 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Bell Canada, MT&T and Automated Voting (Melvin Klassen) Re: How Bell Labs Selects Ringers (Julian Macassey) Re: Panasonic Key Systems: WARNING and FIX (Steve Forrette) Re: Things We Remember The Most (Art Hunter) Re: Cellular Alliance: GTE, NYNEX, BAMS, Ameritech (Steve Forrette) Re: Union Involvement in McCormick Place Events (Gordon Burditt) Re: The Economist 5/30/92 (Gregory Youngblood) Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone (Gregory Youngblood) Re: Ring Tones (wuz 917 DA) (John Higdon) Re: Newly Dialable Points (John McHarry) Re: Payphone Xenophobia (David Hyams) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: klassen@sol.UVic.CA (Melvin Klassen) Subject: Re: Bell Canada, MT&T and Automated Voting Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. CANADA Date: Mon, 8 Jun 92 22:02:08 GMT Excerpts from the Canadian Press story: A technological nightmare hijacked the Nova Scotia Liberal leadership conventions Saturday, forcing organizers to postpone voting indefinitely. The phone company, Maritime Telegraph and Telephone, had boasted about the infallibility of the system. An MT&T official said the computer overloaded when everybody seemed to call at the same time. Instead of leaving the choice [leader of the Liberal Party in Nova Scotia] to the convention-floor delegates, it made every Liberal in Nova Scotia an eligible voter, by allowing each to vote from home by touch-tone phone. By saying, "Thank you for voting", the computer was supposed to tell each caller it had register his or her vote. Sometimes the computer worked; other times it said nothing. Delegates were asked to try again, only to be told that their eight-digit identification number was no longer valid. "It's very frustrating", said Sandy DeWolf, who dialed more than 100 [!!!] times, and still was not able to register her vote. ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: How Bell Labs Selects Ringers Date: 7 Jun 92 16:41:32 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article mjg@nwu.edu (Michael J Graven) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 454, Message 8 of 14 > martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu writes: >> The solution seems to be [to] allow the user to select which >> notes are played. This means that everybody's phone plays its own >> little tune when it rings, making it possible to pick an individual >> phone out of the surrounding racket. > Users like this. When my building in Murray Hill was cut over to > ISDN, we came into work the next day to find 7506's on our desks. > Many of us spent the rest of the morning running through the > user-selectable ring cadences to see which one we thought would work > best for us. The caco-phony of rings in the hall was tremendous. Maybe I am tone deaf, or possibly just stupid, but I have trouble determining if a warble ringer is mine. I also have trouble determining the direction a warble ring comes from. Unless, it is on my desk and I am sitting at it. I know I am not the only person with this problem. So when I get presented with a phone with a warble ringer, I drag in a good old gong ringer and attach that. Then I know when my phone is ringing. Also putting a neon flasher in the ceiling of corridors is also handy to show that the ringing phone is mine. Yes, one of the horrors of modern telephony is the warble ringer. The main reason we are subjected to these devices is that they are cheaper than gong ringers. Another is that some devices, ISDN phones and proprietary key systems, do not use regular ringing voltages, but a digital signal that is used to turn on the ringer on the phone. In these cases, detection circuits can be built to turn on a ring generator to drive a real gong ringer. Putting one of these on a phone will really confuse the house phone technician. I still believe that anyone has yet to design and build a better instrument than the standard 2500 set. Certainly no one has built a more rugged phone -- explosion proof mine phones excepted. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Panasonic Key Systems: WARNING and FIX Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 22:08:40 GMT In article rice@ttd.teradyne.com writes: > Now that's unique. Wonder if this is a trend in the industry -- an > unlisted customer support phone number. I'll have to tell my boss, we > won't want to be left behind. Though not strictly telecom related, Bank One now has an unlisted number for its MasterCard/Visa customer support. I think the general topic of why certain businesses have unlisted numbers is worthy of discussion. I complained loud and clear to Bank One, as I had been on vacation when I needed to call them, and couldn't since I didn't know the number. The number isn't on the back of the card (seems like a good thing to do), nor was it listed with 800 Directory. Fortunately, it wasn't an emergency and could wait until I got home. But the thing I told them was: What if I had lost the card? I am required under federal bankcard regulations to report the loss to the card issuer within 48 hours of my knowledge of the loss in order to limit my liability for fraudulent charges. I asked them, If I had been on a two-week vacation and had the card lost/stolen, was I expected to fly home to look at my statement in order to get the number to call them? They didn't seem to think this was a big deal. I can't imagine why they would want it hard to find the number. I can't imagine why anyone who wasn't a cardholder would want to call, and certainly cardholders need to be able to call, especially if the card gets lost or stolen. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Things We Remember The Most From: art@aficom.ocunix.on.ca (Art Hunter) Reply-To: art@aficom.ocunix.on.ca (Art Hunter) Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 19:46:10 -0400 Organization: AFI Communications - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada > Another thing, with all this talk about Caller ID (something that we > don't have here yet, but then half the people are probably friends and > family anyway), is there an answering machine capable of reading the > incoming number and synthesizing that number onto the tape. My > machine leaves the day and time of each call, so it should probably be > simple to get it to leave the number too. But then, like I said, we > don't have anything like that here, so maybe I'm just asking a useless > question. I can't say about an answering machine but there certainly is a device that can capture the phone number, bounce it off a database to attach a name and to put up "notes" that can be edited while on line (or off if you so desire). It has many other facilities that permit masking to other numbers, permitting "time slices" or management options that depend on the day of the week and time of day to either direct the caller to one of three ports (say answering machine, handset, modem etc) and to keep a log of all inbound and outbound calls. I have been using one for over a year now and find that I can't live without it. One of the features is to be able to hangup on those pesky telemarketers when they call back the second time (the first time is to get their phone number but it never happens again). Linking this to an answering machine is not beyond the abilities of man but I find that it is not necessary as I know who called when and can just hit the keyboard to call back. It is a board and software that works with DOS on any old PC that happens to be around. It works as a TSR as well so the machine can be used for any other purpose you desire while monitoring the phone line. There are a growing number of them in use in this part of the world. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Cellular Alliance: GTE, NYNEX, BAMS, Ameritech - What's it Mean? Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 00:51:15 GMT In article zeta@yngbld.gwinnett.COM (Gregory Youngblood) writes: > It appears that the people that license the Cellular One name are > making attempts to standardize the logos, and to associate the name > with high quallity by enforcing quality minimums and penalties for low > or bad quality service. That includes customer service and service > overall, not just the system's quality of service. I guess this explains why the A carrier in LA, "LA Cellular," has not licensed the Cellular One name! :-) Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: Union Involvement in McCormick Place Events Organization: Gordon Burditt Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 05:11:22 GMT > This summer, Chicago's McCormick Place will be hosting the 1992 > SIGGRAPH conference. This is a big yearly get-together for the > computer graphics industry. The organizers are bringing in an NSFNET > T-3 connection so that remote supercomputers can drive displays in > Chicago. How did the conference deal with the issue of autodial modems, or for that matter, non-union humans, vs. the 13 Telephone Dialer Unions (one for each digit, #, *, and flashing), the Telephone Answerer's Union, the Telephone Call Originator's Union, and the Telephone Call Terminator's Union? Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon [Moderator's Note: It's funny, but it's not funny, if you understand what I am saying. In an issue of the Digest on Wednesday morning I'll print an article from someone who went there and the union guys busted up the computer by accident, screwing up the whole display. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: The Economist 5/30/92 From: zeta@yngbld.gwinnett.COM (Gregory Youngblood) Date: Mon, 08 Jun 92 19:17:49 EST Organization: TCS Consulting Services, Peachtree City, GA DG01@UNMMUSIC.UNM.EDU (Bob Anderson Div Gov Res 73305) writes: > The {Economist} of 5/30/92 pages 19-22 has an article on Mobile > telephones. Subtitle "The fast-spreading mobile telephone is > challenging its wire-linked ancestor. It will change society in rich > countries and poor alike." > From page 22 FIXED-LINK FIGHT-BACK: > "Will mobile telephones replace fixed-link ones? In places starting > almost from scratch, they are already doing so. In the poor countries > of Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe, existing networks are so > small and bad that those who can afford it buy mobile telephones just > to make calls at all. ..." "In poor countries, radio networks are > also easier to safeguard against theft ( no attractive copper wires) > and to repair (no need to send linemen out into the bush)." Even in the US, sometimes it is cheaper to use a cellular phone than regular Bell. For instance, three years ago, you could get a contract with a carrier in TX (409 area code) that included most of 409 and all of 713 as local calling area. The airtime rate after 11 or 12 at night was 4.5 cents per minute. The going telco rate was 9 to 13 cents per minute MIN. at that time of night (if memory serves). While it wasn't practical for normal users, it was attractive to people that make calls after hours ... ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Trouble Shooting at New York Telephone From: zeta@yngbld.gwinnett.COM (Gregory Youngblood) Date: Mon, 08 Jun 92 18:41:31 EST Organization: TCS Consulting Services, Peachtree City, GA oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov writes: >> This is unsurprising to those of us served by NYT; I've been asked on >> more than one occasion when reporting a dead phone line whether I was >> in fact calling from that very line to report the problem ... > While the question seems silly, I suspect that there are a lot of > customers even dumber than the operators. Even though I'm sure that > the question is on a standard script for trouble calls (not one > specific to dead phones), I'd bet that more than once the answer has > been "yes". > The IQ requirement for being an operator may be pretty low, but the > required IQ for placing a call is just about vegetable level. I've seen cases where the phone would not dial any numbers at all except the customer service line (his phone was cut off for late payment). I thought that was rather cute. Nothing could complete except for trouble reporting. Cute eh? So is this. I've run a switch for a cellular carrier. (I won't say who did this.) One day the called my home number from the office because their phone was getting no service. I answered and they proceeded to scream and yell because the system was down during the middle of the day. This was going on at the same time that I kept my home number forwarded to my cellular, so they actually got me eating lunch at a restaurant, ON THE CELLULAR, when the system was 'down'. I proceeded to 'correct' them, and told them where to go (check the problem that is. :) ). Turns out the sales rep did something to his phone (beats me what). hehe. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 01:03 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Ring Tones (wuz 917 DA) Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) writes: > For those who may not know/remember (not to show my age ;-) this was > the common ringback tone used in Ma Bell's larger panel and #1 > crossbar (and some #5 cross) up through the early 1980s. The machine that generated the ringback tone (and the ringing voltage) was about the size of a machinist's lathe. There were two models: AC and DC. The AC version used an induction motor that resembled a large fan motor as was usually the primary unit because of the superior speed regulation over the DC model. The motor was attached to a gearing mechanism that had two output speeds: slow and much slower. The slow output turned the actual ringing generator which was an alternator that supplied 20 Hz that was rich in harmonics. A high-passed version of the generator's output was fed back to the caller. The much slower output of the gear train turned a drum filled with mercury. This, as you might expect, provided the ring cadence. After years of operation, the inside of the drum would become filthy with contaminants and crackling could be heard between rings. The severity of the crackling could reveal the age (or at least the time since the last cleaning) of the unit. During power outages or during maintenance of the main unit, the DC unit was pressed into service. It was always obvious when this generator was on line since the ringback tone would have severe speed fluctuations. We always referred to the sound of the ringback tone as "metropolitan ring". John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: mcharry@mitre.org (John McHarry(J23)) Subject: Re: Newly Dialable Points Organization: The MITRE Corporation Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 13:07:54 GMT In John R. Levine writes: > {Newsbytes} reports that AT&T says that as of June 15th, they will > offer direct dial service to these points: > ..., Vanuatu, ... So much for their ads about not being able to call there by accident. ------------------------------ From: dhyams@autelca.ascom.ch (David Hyams) Subject: Re: Payphone Xenophobia Organization: Ascom Autelca AG, Guemligen, Switzerland Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 14:23:21 GMT Someone wrote: > The Swiss are also very careful about rejecting incorrect coins in > their automatic machines. This shouldn't be too surprising when you consider that Switzerland is a small country in the middle of Europe, surrounded by a large number of different countries, all of which issue their own coins of assorted shapes and sizes. The chances that people will try and use incorrect coins in payphones / ticket machines / etc. is very large. Hence the Swiss have no choice but to be very careful to make coin checkers that are intelligent enough to reject as many incorrect coins as possible. For comparison, imagine that every state within the USA issued its own currency, each of which has coins of different sizes and values. Now try and make a coin checker intelligent enough to reject as many incorrect coins as possible. You should now have some idea of the problems faced making automatic machines (payphones, ticket machines, etc.) here in Europe. Someone also wrote: > Supposedly this is the famed "Swiss craftmanship" but I think it's > more their banking attitude: they'll take any money you have, but you > have to pay through the nose for the privilige. You're not wrong. Swiss public payphones are designed to accept Swiss, German and French coins. In areas close to the French and German borders (eg. Basel) the payphones will normally accept all three currencies. In areas further "inland" the payphones have been programmed to accept Swiss coins only. David Hyams. Ascom Autelca Berne, Switzerland ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #466 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18150; 10 Jun 92 9:22 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31472 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Jun 1992 07:28:19 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA28321 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Jun 1992 07:28:11 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1992 07:28:11 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206101228.AA28321@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #467 TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Jun 92 07:28:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 467 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Christopher Owens) Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Alan L. Varney) Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Laurence Chiu) Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Ed Greenberg) Re: MCI Founder Dies (Ken Jongsma) Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (John Higdon) Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (Carl Moore) Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (Solutions?) (Paul Robinson) Re: Ring Tones (wuz 917 DA) (Alan L. Varney) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owens@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Christopher Owens) Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 14:49:11 GMT In Paul Robinson writes: > [... Description of Caller-ID "block-blocking" deleted ....] > The code *77 is a toggle; if you have Caller-ID, you dial *77 to > indicate you want to refuse calls from people who block their number; > then if you want to accept blocked calls, you dial *77 to disable this > feature. > [Moderator's Note: Next thing you know, we will be hearing complaints > from people about *77 being a toggle. ...] After a while, some combination of the incessant wailing of his neighbor's burglar alarm and the Wagnerian Sturm und Drang reverberating around his office began to wear on Townson's sanity. Something finally snapped, and he adopted the bizzarre opinion that toggles without feedback were acceptable user interface design. He taped over all the indicator lights on his stereo, and he specially modified his telephone to prevent him from hearing the DTMF tones as he dialed. For a while he tried composing electronic mail messages by typing blindly on a keyboard with his computer's monitor switched off. But he could find no respite from the incoming deluge of electronic mail from his friends, colleagues and acquaintances, all begging him to recant. "All this feedback is driving me nuts," quipped Townson. "It's as bad as those stupid elevator buttons that light up when you push them. Or the dashboard indicator lamp for the turn signal in a car. What a total waste." [Moderator's Note: Clever retort! Touche, and all that. Still, we live with *70 as a toggle for one call only. Would you have it that *70 turned off Call Waiting and something else turned Call Waiting back on -- provided you did not forget? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 11:03:47 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking Organization: AT&T In article TDarcos@MCIMail.Com writes: > The code *77 is a toggle; if you have Caller-ID, you dial *77 to > indicate you want to refuse calls from people who block their number; > then if you want to accept blocked calls, you dial *77 to disable this > feature. This code is not available to users without Caller-ID (since > you can't get the caller's number anyway without it). An Assistant Vice President of Bell Atlantic told me (and a crowd of folks) last month that they PLAN to offer *77 to non-Caller-ID subscribers for a monthly fee -- Caller-ID subscribers get it for "free". And that includes areas where Caller-ID blocking itself is not available. There seems to be a market for this capability, either as a screening device (might reduce unwanted calls) or as a status symbol (the caller THINKS you have Caller ID) ... Al Varney - just MY opinion. ------------------------------ From: lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 23:15:55 GMT In article rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) writes: > Javier Henderson writes: >> In GTE areas in So. Cal, you can dial your own number, and hang up, >> and your phone will ring. > Last time I checked, this was dependent on whether you have call > waiting active. If you don't have it or turn it off (prepend 70# to > your phone number), this 'service' doesn't work. I had a slightly different but similar experience. In my area 137 will cause ring back. We don't have call waiting disable so I decided to order call diversion so that my modem communications would not be disrupted. I would divert the phone to my office answering machine. Then I thought about diverting to myself thinking it might give a busy signal. I did so and then dialled 137 and hung up to see what would happen. Sure enough my phone rang and so I thought all was well. No it wasn't! What happened was that after diversion my phone was perpetually busy, a constant source of annoyance to my friends and relatives. I would often only notice I had forgotten to un-divert when I tried to make a call and heard the distinctive dial tone. Now I am very careful to check my line after a modem session! Laurence Chiu Principal Consultant GCS Ltd, Wellington, New Zealand Tel: +64 4 801 0176 Internet chiu@animal.gcs.co.nz Fax: +64 4 801 0095 Compuserve 71750,1527 ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted Date: Tue, 09 Jun 92 23:11:11 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) In article andrew@jester.USask.ca writes: > Interesting ... in Saskatchewan Canada, the provincial phone company > is offering a service called "Intercom". You dial your own phone > number, hang up, it rings, then when it stops ringing you pick it up > and talk to someone else in the house. > The interesting part is that there is a monthly fee of $2 or $3 for > the intercom service. > [Moderator's Note: I think IBT offers 'intercom' also. PAT] Pacific Bell offers this too. it's called "Intercom Plus." There are three ringback codes, *51, *52 and *53. They produce, respectively, short-short, long-short-short, and short-long-short. Once the phone is answered, the CO provides battery for as long as two extentions wish to talk. The other feature of Intercom Plus is call-hold. If you flash and dial *54, you can then hang up and the call will remain on hold until you pick up again. This, in my view, is worth the $5/month that they get for it. Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0511 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) [Moderator's Note: When two extensions are off-hook in intercom mode, what happens to incoming calls? Do the intercommers get call waiting tones or does the outside caller get a busy signal? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 9 Jun 92 08:41:00 EST From: Ken Jongsma Subject: Re: MCI Founder Dies With no disrespect at all to Mr. McGowen, I think a slight correction needs to be made: A gentleman named John Goekin from Joliet, Illinois started a company called Microwave Communications, Inc. back in the late 60s. It was the 'struggling private microwave carrier' referred to in another post. Goekin sold out to McGowen & Co., who later changed the name to MCI. Goekin and his daughter Sandy went on to form AirFone, later sold to GTE and are presently running a company that is installing networked seatback PCs and telephones in US Air commercial aircraft. Ken (who had abolutely no idea any of this was going on when he was hanging around the Goekin house in the 60s!) jongsma@benize.si.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 01:40 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare On Jun 9 at 1:28, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: You won't stand for it? So sit down then. :) The > problem is John, *where* would you take all that business? Sprint? > Aren't you also punishing them right now? MCI? (snicker) Or maybe Ma > and Pa Kettle's Long Distance Service? PAT] To quote Jack Benny (in response to the question, 'your money or your life'), "I'm thinking, I'm thinking." The damnable reality is that given my current needs and volume, AT&T is IT. I don't have the time, patience, or even the money to fool around with Sprint, MCI and all the gang. I've been that road, thank you very much. That is why between now and the end of the month (showdown time), I need to do some heavy-duty research. Part of the problem is cost. AT&T is the cheapest of the "real" carriers for the calling patterns that I have. MCI is close, but I just cannot bring myself to pay slightly more for the honor of enduring the bafoonery. Sprint is the premium-priced carrier. It's cheapest rates and AT&T's cheapest rates (at my volume) roll out to about a 15% differential in AT&T's favor. That is a hefty premium to pay for the wonder of failed Trailblazer connections. And a non-negotiable requirement for any carrier that I use is the ability to support high-throughput PEP data. Suggestions, anyone? (BTW, accurate billing would also be nice :-) John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 10:19:25 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare So a caller tried to call Connecticut and got Egypt instead? For those who don't know: Connecticut is area code 203, and Egypt country code is 20. ------------------------------ Reply-To: tdarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson, Contractor Date: Tue, 09 Jun 92 18:45:04 EDT Subject: Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (Solutions?) John Higdon writes: > It boils down to this: Pac*Bell cannot issue a credit for AT&T. > AT&T will not issue a credit, period, unless trouble can be > proven (translation: someone found who was bridged on the > line) and then Pac*Bell will be stuck for the cost of the > calls anyway. In essence, AT&T NEVER eats the cost of a call. on Mon, 8 Jun 92 15:32 PDT he also wrote: > On Jun 8 at 14:59, Steve Forrette writes: >> I finally ended up having Pacific Bell write me a letter >> and send it to me, which I then copied and sent to Sprint. >> It took five or six additional calls, and as many months, >> before I finally got my credit on my bill. Good luck, John! > I will not stand for this under any circumstances. If AT&T > wants to get snotty about it, I will go down to the office > supply store, get a new toner cartridge for my printer, buy > a case of paper, and print the entire output of my SMDR from > 4/30 to the last call in question on any future bill. > I will then send the entire package of thousands of pages to > someone at AT&T. I will demand that someone show me where > those calls were made. If that record does not interest > anyone, I will take that as a presumtion by AT&T that I am > intentionally attempting to defraud the company. At that > point, I will be prepared to take my business, my company's > business, my clients' business (after relating the entire > story in detail) and all future business that might come from > recommendations elsewhere. I've got some much simpler choices to make: Make a photocopy of the SMDR list(s) for the days in question, (should only require two or three pages) since all you need are the period running for say two minutes before and after the time in question, ESPECIALLY if the SMDR and the phone bill match on other calls made. And photocopy the bills in question. Therefore you should only have to print up about six pages. (My ignorance of the amount of data an SMDR recorder shows is probably quite evident at this point, if a section of five minutes of time for a couple of phone lines is more than two or three pages). Generally you cannot withhold payment on a phone charge unless you can get the phone company to agree on the matter. You have two choices at this point: (1) Pay the bill and deduct the charge, and send the photocopies in with the bill. If you send the payment to Pathetic Bell, let them know that it is over a dispute with AT&T and not with them. Then use step (3) below. Of course, if both sides refuse to give in, and you are being stuck for the bill, you have another option especially since it involves a billing errror for which you have evidence and the amount in detail is minor: (2) Send the entire amount of the bill including the erroneous $32 as a payment made payable to the California Public Utilities Commission, indicating that you have a BILLING ERROR from AT&T, and that they refuse to recognize the error. Indicate where their bill, by time and date, matches the SMDR data, and from this it is obvious they are billing you for calls not made, and request that AT&T cancel this charge. CPUC's address is on the back of the phone bill. Indicate also that AT&T is attempting to, in the event that it is shown that they are wrong in billing you, to defraud Pacific Bell by making them pay the cost of the calls. CPUC will send your uncashed check back to you if it's a dispute over service, but a billing error is something they will take a look at. Other actions you may take in addition to either of the above are: (3) Send the same packet to AT&T's legal department in New York. Inform them that if a credit is not granted, you will see if there is grounds for a class action suit since AT&T, knowing there is an error in a bill, is intentionally attempting to defraud customers, and/or the local wire company by attempting to make THEM eat the charge that AT&T has screwed up on. Indicate to them that you are taking a credit (if you go that route) for the incorrect bill, and for all future incorrect bills which YOUR WRITTEN RECORD shows were not made. (4) Send the packet to the Common Carrier Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission asking them to investigate the possibility of fraud and/or negligence on the part of AT&T. (5) Find a hungry lawyer to actually try and file a class action suit on spec (without your having to pay anything). It's one thing to raise a question about their charges on a line when it's a residential customer they don't know much about, it's another when the customer has a pen register on his phone line! It's kind of, shall we say, unprofessional to try and deny it when someone has written evidence you made a mistake. (6) Pay the bill, then send them a notice (return receipt requested) with a demand for a refund of the erroneous amount with notice that if it is not received within five business days you will sue them. Then file suit against AT&T in small claims court for the $32 plus court costs. This might be faster, and you might even be able to sue them for aggravation or other issues; in any case, they will be a little more careful about mistakes on your bill in the future. and (7) Send a copy of the packet to the Postal Inspectors. Outside of #2, if they won't go along, your only avenues of recourse are the CPUC or #6. Paul Robinson Opinion probably isn't that of the owner of this account, and even if it was they'd probably deny it anyway... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 11:40:16 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Ring Tones (wuz 917 DA) Organization: AT&T In article jack.winslade%drbbs@ ivgate.omahug.org writes: > In a message dated 02-JUN-92, Vld/vmb writes: >> Calling 917-555-1212 via C&P pay phone using AT&T has gotten through. >> The ringing signal was that old E-flat-major chord. > That older ringing tone was the topic of a recent conversation 'on > another network'. That's the first time I've heard it called E flat > major. > I could not find any specifications for that old tone. Does anyone > know what they are or where they might be located? Much of the technical history of the old Bell System is written down in Bellcore's "Notes on the BOC Intra-LATA Networks - 1986", TR-NPL-000275 or in "BOC Notes on the LEC Networks - 1990", SR-TSV-002275. But you'd better hurry; each release seems to lose some information. The LATA maps of TR-275 are just tables of LATA numbers and NPAs in SR-2275. Each version has about 25 pages devoted to "Call Progress Tones", including their meanings, frequencies, temporal pattern, level, etc. A two-page table describes the "current knowledge of nonprecise call progress tone characteristics". They list the following possible Audible Ring tones: 440+480 Hz, 2 seconds on, 4 seconds off at -19 dBm0/frequency [ This is the "precise tone" standard ] 420+40 2 seconds on, 4 seconds off at 61-to-71 dBmC/frequency 500+40 2 seconds on, 4 seconds off at 61-to-71 dBmC/frequency [ These are the most common "nonprecise tones", the first is from the 803C & 805C tone plants, the latter from the 804C. Audible Ring from the 805B, 806D, 806E and 806F are variable, and "unknown". Some depend on the AC supply, and could be different when emergency AC backup is in use. ] Nonprecise tones are +10%, -8% on frequency, the Precise Standard is based on four "pure" tones, with +/- 0.5% variation. All bets are off on PBXs. Al Varney - just MY opinion. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #467 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19894; 10 Jun 92 10:06 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05149 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 10 Jun 1992 07:58:18 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10250 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 10 Jun 1992 07:58:09 -0500 Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1992 07:58:09 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206101258.AA10250@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #468 TELECOM Digest Wed, 10 Jun 92 07:58:02 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 468 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Fighting Cellular Fraud (John Slater) UK Hotel Phone Charges (John Slater) About 'Area Code' 710 (Paul Robinson) Forbes on National Directories (Ken Jongsma) Squabbling Over Country Codes (Bob Goudreau) McCormick, Trade Shows, Union Involvement (Lynne Gregg) TDD For Portable Computer (Michael Grant) Swiss Phones and Italian Coins (Alfredo Cotroneo) *67 *69 *70 etc. (Eric Tholome) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 09:35:51 BST From: John.Slater@UK.Sun.COM (John Slater) Subject: Fighting Cellular Fraud I saw this press release on a Sun internal mailing list, and thought it might be if interest here. Disclaimer : Yes, I work for Sun, and no, I'm not attempting to advertise our products or anyone else's. Just FYI, y'know. John Slater Sun Microsystems UK ----- Begin Included Message ----- The following announcement was made today, June 8, 1992. SMCC AND CORAL SYSTEMS TEAM UP TO FIGHT CELLULAR FRAUD MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. --June 8, 1992-- Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation (SMCC) and Coral Systems Inc. have signed an agreement to jointly market Coral's "Intelligent Network" solution for cellular service providers internationally. Under the agreement, two new products, called HLR (Home Location Register) and FraudBuster, will be introduced at the end of 1992. The products will run on the Sun SPARCserver 600MP(TM) series and the Solaris(R) environment. With the tremendous growth in the wireless industry over the past five years and the decreasing costs a carrier can charge for service, competition has forced carriers to differentiate themselves through better customer service, enhanced service functionality and network reliability. Coral's wireless network software will give cellular service providers the ability to offer their customers more services, as well as protect themselves against revenue loss resulting from fraud. "Coral's products and Sun technologies are a winning combination," said Eric Johnson, Coral's president and CEO. "SMCC's strong distributed application environment, price/performance and client-server architecture are a good match with Coral's software solutions." The SPARC(R)/Solaris platform is being used by software providers, like Coral Systems, and carriers doing in-house development to build the components of an Intelligent Network. The Intelligent Network architecture, embraced by the telephone industry, consists of a switching system, a signaling system (SS7), a central database, and a support system for the database. "It is SMCC's goal to provide telecommunications companies with the distributed computing platform that is needed to design new services that migrate the intelligence of the system as close as possible to the customer," said Bruce Golden, director of commercial market development at SMCC. "Coral's solution is an example of the implementation of a client-server architecture within the Intelligent Network framework." Coral's HLR (Home Location Register) software transparently routes calls to any subscriber, regardless of location. Carriers will be able to generate additional revenues by attracting more subscribers, who will be able to use their equipment in a broader geographic area. Fraudbuster detects and prevents fraud through pre-call (with HLR) and post-call verification and authorization of cellular calls. Cellular fraud is a serious problem for carriers. It is estimated that over $600 million is lost in revenues each year due to fraud. Coral's beta software on the Sun SPARCserver 600 MP(TM) Series has already detected the most common types of wireless fraud, including subscriber fraud, clone phones and tumbler phones. "After evaluating the needs of the highly competitive cellular market, we are confident that our partnership with SMCC will provide customers with the strategic solution necessary to meet industry challenges," said James E. Blake, chairman of the board at Coral Systems. Coral Systems, Inc. is a UNIX software house focused on the wireless telecommunications industry. The Coral modular services platform is designed to bring Intelligent Network (IN) call handling capabilities to existing cellular operations and emerging personal communications services (PCS). Other Coral products in development include Data Message Handler (DMH) and Visitor Location Register (VLR). The company, founded in 1991 and headquartered in Boulder, Colorado, is doing business worldwide with its strategic partners Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation and CSC Intelicom, a company of Computer Sciences Corporation. Sun Microsystems Computer Corporation, a subsidiary of Sun Microsystems, Inc., is the world's leading supplier of client-server computing solutions, which feature networked workstations and servers that store, process and distribute information. Used for many demanding commercial and technical applications, SMCC's products command the largest share of the computer industry's fastest-growing market segment: workstations and servers. The company, founded in 1982 and headquartered in Mountain View, Calif., is a multi-billion dollar corporation doing business worldwide. ### Sun, Sun Microsystems, Sun Microsystems Computer Corp., Solaris and the Sun logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. UNIX is a registered trademark of UNIX System Laboratories, Inc. SPARCserver is a registered trademark of SPARC International, licensed exclusively to Sun Microsystems Inc. All other product or service names mentioned herein are trademarks of their respective owners. PR contacts: Sun Microsystems Computer Corp. Lauren Swingle (415) 336-7273 Coral Systems Inc. Flemming Jensen (303) 441-2925 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 10:37:06 BST From: John.Slater@UK.Sun.COM (John Slater) Subject: UK Hotel Phone Charges > [Moderator's Note: Yes, please give us background on UK hotels. PAT] OK, you asked for it. Pretty simple really. BT phone charging is based on meter pulsing. One meter pulse will buy anything from about five minutes of local call time (evenings and weekends), to maybe less than ten seconds of a call over 30 miles in the weekday morning peak. There is no unmeasured service from BT. Domestic users pay around 5p/unit. Payphone users pay 10p/unit, using either (1) coins, or (2) a prepayment card, or (3) a BT charge card by dialling 144 followed by card number, PIN and phone number. Hotels typically charge 25-28p/minute, so guests pay five or six times the charge from their own phone. They get the meter pulses directly from the exchange and pass them on theo the guest, so there is no dispute about charging for uncompleted calls or other anomalies. Some hotels permit 144 to be dialled from the room, but increasingly they are getting wise to this and are either blocking 144 or charging a fixed fee for it (50p or so). There is increasing worry about fraud arising from hotel records of the card number and PIN which can be abused. (Is this a problem in the US too?) One advantage of the meter pulsing system is tht 0800 numbers (toll free) never cause a charging pulse to be delivered, so such calls can always be made for free, even from the room. It's worth pointing out that BT's only current competition, Mercury, does not use meter pulses. They charge by the second instead. They promote this as a cost-saving feature, because under BT's system almost all of a 5p unit could be "wasted" if the clock ticks just before the call is ended. My verdict, and common opinion in the UK: hotels rip people off on phone charges. If BT can make money by providing a phone in a public place, at a capital cost well into four figures and with regular visits from BT staff for maintenance/coin collection/cleaning, how does a hotel justify charging at such high rates for a similar service? John Slater, Sun Microsystems UK ------------------------------ From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 08 Jun 92 19:59:52 EDT Subject: About 'Area Code' 710 I posted a revised list of area codes to show all the current assignments. The Moderator bounced it because of some errors, which I now realize are there. One that bothered me was that he mentioned that the area code 710 was used for "Government Special Services", which I thought was incorrect. I've been involved with a contract with a government agency for more than two years. I have never heard of an area code 710 number used for any government agency. I wondered if maybe I was wrong about this, so I started doing some checking. I called the State Department. I called the Federal Emergency Management Agency. I called the Capital. I called the White House. I called the Pentagon. I then called the FTS-2000 operator (the agency I am contracted to is using AT&T's portion of the FTS contract). NONE OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS HAD EVER HEARD OF AN AREA CODE 710! I thought, now how could this sort of thing go by; the Moderator cannot be that careless; there has to be something else. That's when it hit me. The reason I didn't remember it is that it is used so rarely as to be almost unknown. I've never had to use it, but in the far-off recesses of my brain, a little light came on. If one is sending a telex from a Western Union account to another telex number in the U.S. that is seven digits and is not on Western Union's system, one connects to the number by dialing 710 and the 7 digit number. (Actually, you don't dial it, you type in the number at the keyboard of a computer or TWX terminal, but the same idea applies). So the answer was correct but (as far as I am able to discover,) right for the wrong reason: the area code 710 is used for Telex numbers, and not for Government Services. If anyone has heard of anyone, anywhere, using area code 710 for anything other than telex numbers, please tell me about it! Paul Robinson These opinions do not necessarily reflect those of the owner of this account. [Moderator's Note: There has long been a TWX 'area code' 710, and it was/is a code applying to WUTCO. But according to Harry Newton, 710 is also 'government special services', or 'special government services', one of the two. I wish we could clear this up one way or the other. I assumed it had something to do with FTS-2000. More ideas? I will post that new area code chart here sometime soon. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma) Subject: Forbes on National Directories Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 11:25:30 EDT The current issue of {Forbes} has an interesting article on the RBOCs and national phone directories. Some datapoints from the article: - NYNEX sells a CD ROM of New England listings for $9500. It's updated monthly and is very accurate. - NYNEX sells a CD ROM set of the entire country for $50,000. Numbers from outside New England come from various secondary sources, but not the other RBOCs. - PhoneDisk USA sells a national white pages listing for $1800. Later this summer they expect to sell it via mail order for around $200. The two CDs will contain 90 million listings, with addresses and zipcodes. Listings will be encrypted such that reverse searches or neighbor searchs will not be allowed, however wildcard searches based on partial numbers will be allowed. (PhoneDisk is based in Bethesda, MD) - American Business Information (ABI), Omaha, NE, sells a yellow pages CD for $298. Again, the listings are encrypted with the search software somehow limiting the number of searches to 5000 names before a new disk is required. Ken Jongsma ken@wybbs.mi.org Smiths Industries jongsma@benzie.si.com Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115.1041@compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 15:46:35 -0400 From: goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Subject: Squabbling Over Country Codes The current (June 6th) edition of the {Economist} contains an interesting little article about upcoming changes to the world dialing plan. It notes: Starting next year, the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) ... promises to give lots of countries unhappy with the numbers assigned to them new, and presumably more prestigious, digits. Bureaucrats and politicians care deeply about this. The article goes on to discuss Europe in particular: The most frantic to get new numbers are the countries of the ex-Soviet Union. Lumped in with Russia under the single-number code 7, they want to become part of Europe -- and that means getting a 3 or 4 as the first digit to their national code. The former East Germany's precious 37 becomes vacant next year when the two Germanies unify telephonically on the West's 49. At the ITU, the Baltic states are busy lobbying against Greenland and the Faroe Islands, which now share, none too happily, the number-2 prefix with African countries and also want to lay claim to the former East Germany's 37. I personally don't see why there should be any dispute. The countries under question are all tiny enough to merit three-digit country codes, so splitting the former 37 into ten new codes (370...379) should satisfy all five of them, not to mention Moldova and the ex-Yugoslav countries of Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia & Hercegovina, and Macedonia to boot (should any of them also desire new codes). Does anybody happen to know what other countries (if any) are "unhappy with the numbers assigned to them" and are lobbying the ITU for new codes? Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive +1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA ------------------------------ Date: 09 Jun 92 18:22:26 EDT From: Lynne Gregg <70540.232@CompuServe.COM> Subject: McCormick, Trade Shows, Union Involvement Bill Nickless's posting reminded me of my last exhibit at NCC in Chicago (around '85). Unfortunately for Chicago/McCormick, the difficulty with the trade unions really hampers their ability to attract and keep the shows and participation among vendors high. I'll never forget the poor folks that were exhibiting for a Japanese computer comany: the union guys INSISTED on installing the computer (yeah, right) and had the thing up on a forklift and dropped it. It was the day before the doors opened on the show and the firm had to air express another system from Japan because the first one had been damaged beyond repair. I spoke with a number of representatives of exhibiting companies and was told that they'd never do another show in Chicago. I guess stringing cable is one thing. Installing and moving sensitive equipment is another. As it ended up, my company was lucky. Only our booth was damaged. Good luck! Lynne Gregg ------------------------------ From: mgrant@fedeast.Sun.COM (Michael Grant) Subject: TDD For Portable Computer Date: 9 Jun 1992 19:11:20 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc., Vienna, VA. Does anyone know of a small portable, preferably battery operated TDD that could be connected to a portable computer to turn it into a TDD? It would be nice to find something that was acoustically coupled. Please reply to me directly: mgrant@east.sun.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 12:08:27 +0200 From: alfredo@quickt2.it12.bull.it (Alfredo Cotroneo) Subject: Swiss Phones and Italian Coins David Hyams, Ascom Autelca Berne, Switzerland wrote: > Swiss public payphones are designed to accept Swiss, German and French > coins. In areas close to the French and German borders (eg. Basel) > the payphones will normally accept all three currencies. In areas > further "inland" the payphones have been programmed to accept Swiss > coins only. I have never seen a Swiss phone in Ticino (the Italian speaking part of Switzerland, next to the border with Italy) which accepted Italian coins (nor would the Swiss Phone Offices in Ticino accept Italian Lire!) I simply wonder why ... ;-)! Alfredo Cotroneo, Milano, Italy. ------------------------------ From: tholome@esf.uucp (Eric Tholome) Subject: *67 *69 *70 etc. Date: 10 Jun 92 11:51:20 GMT Reply-To: tholome@esf.uucp (Eric Tholome) Organization: ESF Headquarters, Berlin, FRG People in this newsgroup seem to talk about these different codes (e.g. *67 *69 *70) as if all TELCOs were using the same ones. Is there indeed some sort of standardisation? Is this a de facto standard or some kind of regulation? If the answer to the first question is yes, could anyone post an exhaustive list of these codes, together with a little explanation of each feature? Sorry if this sounds obvious to American readers, but I believe it isn't for European ones (at least not for me!). BTW, IMHO this ought to be in the comp.dcom.telecom FAQ, but I've never seen one. Does it exist? Eric Tholome ESF Headquarters Internet: tholome@esf.de Hohenzollerndamm 152 UUCP: tholome@esf.uucp D-1000 Berlin 33 Ph.: +49 30 82 09 03 25 Germany Fax: +49 30 82 09 03 19 [Moderator's Note: The telecom FAQ is located in the Telecom Archives, accessible using anonymous ftp: lcs.mit.edu PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #468 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa06705; 11 Jun 92 3:15 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01437 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Jun 1992 01:02:56 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17522 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Jun 1992 01:02:46 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1992 01:02:46 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206110602.AA17522@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #469 TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Jun 92 01:02:48 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 469 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson C&P To Revoke Telephone Number (Baltimore Sun via Paul Robinson) New List - CPSR (Paul Hyland) Leading 1's and Toll Calls (Jerry Leichter) Supercomm '92 Chicago (John Gilbert) Remaining Area Codes (Michael M. O'Dorney) Voucher Received From IntegreTel (Carl Moore) What is "SLC-96"? (Jamie Hanrahan) Smart Fault Tolerant Mux (Charles Yamasaki) Novel Use of a Cellphone (Steven S. Brack) Wanted: Dialogic Card (Brian Crawford) Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? (Jim Langridge) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: Tdarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 20:51:58 EDT Subject: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number [Photo: Untypical nuclear family, Husband, Wife, two kids (boy and girl) and a dog sit on the floor in front of a beige desk Touch Tone phone. Map next to them shows that where they live (the Kendall Ridge area, between Columbia and Ellicott City, Maryland) is 1/4 mile beyond the "official" line drawn for the Columbia Exchange area. This area is area about 10 miles from Baltimore and 30 miles from Washington, DC.] Caption: Randy and Karen Allen, with their children, Stephanie and Michael, don't want C&P to rectify its mistake and give them a new telephone number. C&P Changes Exchanges - And Calls up Trouble [{The Sun} - Baltimore, June 10, 1992, Page B1] By Leslie Cauley Staff Writer Can the phone company give -- and take away -- your phone number at will? That's the question the Public Service Commission will explore in a series of public hearings beginning tomorrow night in Columbia. At issue is whether Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co. has the right to cancel a customer's phone number and hand out a new one if it decides, for whatever reason, that a change is needed. The hearings stem from a situation in the Ellicott City area of Howard County that has left C&P officials with red faces -- and phone customers in Kendall Ridge stomping mad: It seems that over the past several years C&P mistakenly assigned some Kendall Ridge customers -- 138 so far -- to the Columbia calling exchange. That exchange -- that is, the first three digits of the seven-digit phone number -- allows customers to call the Washington suburbs of Silver Spring as well as the metropolitan Baltimore area without an extra charge. The remaining 122 accounts in Kendall Ridge are properly assigned to the Ellicott City exchange. As the company intended, those callers have broad access into Columbia and metropolitan Baltimore. But they can't call Silver Spring without paying extra. "It was human error, plain and simple," explains Jim Tracy, staff manager of regulatory relations for C&P. As best as C&P can figure, those wrong assignments began six or seven years ago and continued unabated until February, when new software uncovered the blunder. C&P told the misassigned customers shortly after that they had to switch to a new telephone exchange -- or start paying extra. In some cases, customers would pay fees of as much as $72 a month to hold onto their old numbers. That didn't sit well with some Kendall Ridge residents with the Columbia exchange who by now are accustomed to calling into the suburbs of Washington without paying a toll charge. That would include customers such as Randy Allen, a two-year resident of Kendall Ridge who works in Silver Spring. "Why should I suffer because the company screwed up?" fumes Mr. Allen, co-chair of the Kendall Ridge Telephone Task Force, a newly formed neighborhood alliance that is fighting C&P's plans. Some customers, however, aren't upset. C&P says a few misalligned customers who were paying extra to be on the Ellicott City exchange -- that is, the correct City exchange -- have been reimbursed by the company. One customer received $2,000 from C&P as repayment. But for Mr. Allen and others, holding onto their existing phone numbers will be expensive if C&P prevails at the commission. Under the C&P plan, residents who want to keep their existing Columbia exchange would have to pay between $17.25 and $72 a month extra. That's in addition to the $16.15 a month for basic phone service. C&P contends that it needs the right to switch customers into new telephone exchanges as it deems fit to administer the two million accounts it handles each month in an orderly fashion. Although there is no technical reason why some communities, such as Kendall Ridge, must be in one telephone exchange or another, C&P contends that it needs to treat similarly located customers in a similar manner. "We admit there was a human error, but to perpetuate that error would be to continue a discrimination." Mr. Tracy said. "When we find an error, we try to correct it. Two errors never do make a right." The company's argument has already struck out with the People's Counsel, which is responsible for representing the interests of ratepayers before the commission. That's an argument you're going to believe only if it's in your interest to believe it," People's Counsel John M. Glynn said. "The fact is, people at some point somewhere are going to have different exchanges." C&P is hoping the commission will take a different view, because it is likely that other, undiscovered situations similar to that in Kendall Ridge are lurking out there. Mr. Tracy said C&P has ordered a slew of updated state maps in the wake of the Kendall Ridge blunder. He said C&P would update its exchange maps accordingly and make changes as needed. The result? A new phone exchange may be coming your way soon. "That's entirely possible," Mr. Tracy said. "It's foolish for us to think we won't uncover a few more Kendall Ridges." [Date and time of hearing omitted] [Moderator's Note: This is like what happened when the suburbs were split away from the Chicago 312 area code. At various places around the northwest side of Chicago where the city boundary line is obscure and or difficult to detirmine by an untrained person, there were lots of businesses -- along Harlem Avenue for example -- who ordered service and gave their address as xxxx Harlem, Chicago when it was really Norridge instead. Either way, the service comes from the CO known as Newcastle, and instead of cosulting their atlas and street reference guides, IBT service reps just assigned whatever number they thought was correct. When 708/312 split, all of a sudden there are isolated instances of 312 on the west side of Harlem Avenue and 708 on the east side. A shopping mall near there had a mix of 312/708 numbers in stores next to each other. Two payphones in the mall hanging from the same mounted frame on a pole: one 312, one 708. So some folks got their number changed and weren't happy about it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 16:51:43 EDT From: Paul Hyland Subject: New List - CPSR Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) has set up a list server to (1) archive CPSR-related materials and make them available on request, and (2) disseminate relatively official, short, CPSR-related announcements (e.g., press releases, conference announcements, and project updates). It is accessible via Internet and Bitnet e-mail. Mail traffic will be light; the list is set up so that only the CPSR Board and staff can post to it. Because it is self-subscribing, it easily makes material available to a wide audience. We encourage you to subscribe to the list server and publicize it widely, to anyone interested in CPSR's areas of work. To subscribe, send mail to: listserv@gwuvm.gwu.edu (Internet) OR listserv@gwuvm (Bitnet) Your message needs to contain only one line: subscribe cpsr You will get a message that confirms your subscription. The message also explains how to use the list server to request archived materials (including an index of everything in CPSR's archive), and how to request more information about the list server. Please continue to send any CPSR queries to cpsr@csli.stanford.edu. If you have a problem with the list server, please contact the administrator, Paul Hyland (phyland@gwuvm.gwu.edu or phyland@gwuvm). We hope you enjoy this new service. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 16:49:52 EDT From: JERRY LEICHTER Subject: Leading 1's and Toll Calls In the past, there's been debate in TELECOM Digest as to whether it was ever "official policy" that a leading 1 indicated a "toll call". Here's an interesting bit of evidence about SNET's thinking on the subject: A couple of months back, SNET changed the "Stamford Toll Free Calling Area" by adding three exchanges, 531, 532, and 552, in Byram, a part of the adjacent town of Greenwich. In a letter they sent to all "Stamford Exchange Customers", they say that all such calls with become "(toll-free) local calls". (They used to be in-state toll calls, at maybe eight cents a minute -- very expensive compared to the non-measured local service I've got.) There is no discussion of this in either the letter or anywhere I can find in the phone book, but the following is a fact: Before the changeover, 1+ was REQUIRED for calls to these exchanges. After the changeover, 1+ is FORBIDDEN. Jerry ------------------------------ From: johng.all_proj@comm.mot.com (John) Subject: Supercomm '92 Chicago Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1992 00:14:22 GMT Supercomm 92 will be held June 15-18 at McCormick Place in Chicago, Illinois. This telecommunications industry show is Co-sponsored by the United States Telephone Association, The Telecommunications Industry Association, and The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. From The Supercomm program update: Now is the time to get ready for the biggest telecommunications event of the year. And it all begins by reading this comprehensive booklet that describes the broad array of seminars, exhibits, forums, and panel discussions that will take place. Once again, SUPERCOMM will colocate with the International Conference on Communications (ICC) this year in Chicago at McCormick Place. This world-class exhibition and two premier conferences promise to be even more exciting, informative and global than ever before. Over 450 exhibiting companies and 20,000 industry professionals from more than 80 countries are expected to attend. This is your chance to meet and network with potential customers, worldwide teaming partners, the innovators changing our industry, leading telcos, interexchange carriers, telcom/MIS managers and more. Imagine, three series of programming ranging from non-technical to technical. Plus the largest collection of telecommunications equipment all under one roof. Also, new product demonstrations that will change the way you think about telecommunications. There's so much to see and do at SUPERCOMM/ICC '92! You'll be able to choose from the following: Tuesday-Thursday are free exhibit days. You'll need all those days to see the more than 400,000 square feet of high-tech displays and new product introductions as company after company show of the best they have to offer. Please remember that the exhibts will not be open Monday. Seminars and lectures on three different levels. Three different educational levels plus many tutorials and workshops you choose the tracks which will benefit you most, and the speakers will bring you insight into a multitude of telecommunicaions issues. For General Information: Telecommunications Industry Association 150 N. Michigan Avenue Suite 600 Chicago, IL USA 60601-7524 Phone (312) 782-8597 FAX (312) 782-3617 TELEX: 595236 USTSACGO John Gilbert Secure and Advanced Conventional KA4JMC Systems Division johng@ecs.comm.mot.com Motorola Communications Sector post: CPGR17 Schaumburg, Illinois [Moderator's Note: Anyone coming to town for the show wishing to meet me can send email. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mmo2273@aw2.fsl.ca.boeing.com (Michael M. O'Dorney) Subject: Remaining Area Codes Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1992 14:57:53 GMT What are the remaining area codes, where are they going to be, and when are they going to be turned on? What is the game plan for the "New" area codes (those not in the x0x/x1x format)? Also, about three years ago, I heard a rumor that Nova Scotia would lose the 902 area code and be absorbed into another area code (709 or 506). Is this technically (enough available exchanges) or politically (area code covering two provinces) possible? The 902 was to be given to western Washington outside Seattle. I heard this from a printer in southern California who monitored area code changes so that his customers would not print too much stationery before A/C changes. Michael M. O'Dorney | Voice: 206-237-1274 (work) Boeing Commercial Airplanes | P.O. Box 3707, M/S 96-02 | Internet: mmo2273%aw2@orcas.fsl.ca.boeing.com Seattle WA 98124-2207 | Boeing net: mmo2273@aw2 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 10:08:48 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Voucher Received From IntegreTel I have received a check which can only be applied to the IntegreTel portion of my phone bill. It is made out to Diamond State [Telephone], dated 5/19/92, and for the amount of $4.43 . The bank name on the check is Plaza Bank of Commerce, 55 Almaden Road, San Jose, CA 95113; the bank number is "90-3762/1211". Elsewhere in the mailing, it says that it includes applicable federal taxes. But the amount I had withheld from my phone bill payment was not $4.43, but $4.69 . What about the extra 0.26? That was the Penn- sylvania tax (the call was within Pennsylvania). I'll pay the 0.26 under protest. The IntegreTel check is too long to fit in my regular phone bill payment envelope. ------------------------------ From: jeh@cmkrnl.com Subject: What is "SLC-96"? Date: 8 Jun 92 13:32:52 PDT Organization: Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego, CA I would like confirmation from someone that an "SLC96" is "Subscriber Loop Carrier" -- the scheme that allows telco to multiplex two phone "numbers" onto a single pair. --- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA Internet: jeh@cmkrnl.com, hanrahan@eisner.decus.org, or jeh@crash.cts.com Uucp: ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh ------------------------------ From: chip@osh3.OSHA.GOV (Charles Yamasaki) Subject: Smart Fault Tolerant Mux Organization: U.S. D.O.L - Occupational Safety & Health Admin. Date: Tue, 09 Jun 1992 20:13:32 GMT I'm looking for something that may well not exist, but here goes. We currently have four 19.2k leased lines to a mainframe site and are in the process of moving to a new site. I would like to replace these with the following: 2-56K leased lines connected to a single mux at each end that can support multiple V.35 interfaces from 9.6 to 56K. The device should multiplex these channels, but spread the traffic across the two lines unless one goes down in which case it should simply step down and do the best it can with the remaining line. I've seen articles about inverse mux'es, but I haven't seen anything about a combination mux/inverse mux (which is what this sounds like to me). Does anybody know about such a product? How stable is the technology? Who makes it and how do I contact them? I need this info ASAP because we will be putting this into producion before too long. Please respond via E-Mail because news expires here before I can catch up. Thanks!!! Charles "Chip" Yamasaki| The opinions expressed here are my own and are not chip@oshcomm.osha.gov | supported or even generally accepted by OSHA. :-) ------------------------------ Date: 09 Jun 1992 18:48:01 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: Novel Use of a Cellphone According to UPI, a legislator in the Canadian province of Manitoba named Maurice Laurdeneau was kidnapped and locked in the trunk of his car. He summoned the police, as his kidnapper was making away with him, and was rescued shortly thereafter. I suppose this just goes to show that the new tools of telecom are having a real impact on many areas of life, including crime. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 18:57:23 -0700 From: Brian Crawford Subject: Wanted: Dialogic Card Wanted to buy: A four or 12-line dialogic card. If anyone has a used one for sale, please contact me at any of the address listed below. Please include price with your description of the card. Thank you. Brian Crawford InterNet: crawford@enuxhb.eas.asu.edu (Temporary) PO Box 804 crawford@stjhmc.fidonet.org (Permanent) Tempe, Arizona 85280 crawford@p12.f15.n114.z1.fidonet.org (Alternate) USA UseNet: {sunburn.west.sun.com}bcrawf01@overlord.aps.com Fax: +1 602 921 4022 FidoNet: 1:114/15.12 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 92 12:06:48 edt From: jlangri@relay.nswc.navy.mil Subject: Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? I have been asked for a set of Erlang tables by someone in my office. Can anyone tell me where to find them? Are they updated as time passes? What ever anyone can tell me would help. The main one they need is Erlang C. "I wonder what kind of thread this could start???" Jim Langridge jlangri@relay.nswc.navy.mil 703 663-2137 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #469 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23379; 11 Jun 92 10:12 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02361 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Jun 1992 07:46:15 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA21360 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Jun 1992 07:46:07 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1992 07:46:07 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206111246.AA21360@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #470 TELECOM Digest Thu, 11 Jun 92 07:46:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 470 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson More AT&T Billing Problems (Timothy K. Hong) DOD Squelches Patents (John Gilbert) Government Taking Inventions (David A. Banisar) Apple's Newton Personal Digital Assistant (Corinna Polk) What Causes Lack of Dial Tones? (birchall@pilot.njin.net) Re: 'Area Code' 710 (Paul Robinson) 710 Area Code is Used by Federal Government (Tim Gorman) Automated Menu Systems (Monty Solomon) CF&P Radio (Gregg McVicar) Tapping Digital Connections (Steven S. Brack) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: TIMOTHY.K.HONG@gte.sprint.com Date: 11 Jun 92 03:37:00 UT Subject: More AT&T Billing Problems Maybe I spoke too soon when I said that I had very little trouble with my phone bills. I just got my latest bill this week, and there on the second page was a $2.87 charge from AT&T for a call from Los Angelas to Kansas City. Three things caught my attention right away. The first being that my IXC is Long Distance/USA. The second was that I live in Hawaii, and this call was from California to Kansas. This definitely meant that this was a third number billing call. So, I asked everyone living in the house, whether they had approved such a call. Of course, no one did. Which makes you wonder, what happened to the operator? Third, all my calls made away from home are done on my AT&T Universal card, so I should only see calls made from Hawaii on my phone bill. (Yes, I use two long distance carriers, possibly three, if you don't include the fact that Sprint took over Long Distance/USA. Long Distance still has its own access code.) I called the local billing office (no 1-800 number here). The customer rep was very friendly. She looked up the name of the calling party in LA and asked if I new the person. Nope. This was a third party call, she told me. What probably happened was that they pushed the wrong buttons. Unfortunately, these things do happen, she said. However, she would see to it that my account was credited in next months bill. She was so nice, that I couldn't even begin to ask why the AT&T operator never called for verification. Could it be that I always let my AT&T answering machine pick up the phone, and it gave the okay? I can't wait to see next month's bill. I thought this was going to be a lot harder, considering all the horror stories I've read here. I didn't even have to bother calling Hawaiian Tel's customer service. The Aloha Spirit is still alive and well here. Timothy Hong (GTE Hawaiian Tel - CUSTOMER & employee) GTEMail: t.hong Internet: timothy.k.hong@gte.sprint.com Disclaimer: All opinions expressed here are strictly my own. They belong to no one else, and in no way reflect the policies of my employer. If I have offended anyone, I apologize, it wasn't intended. ------------------------------ From: johng.all_proj@comm.mot.com (John) Subject: DOD Squelches Patents Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1992 23:39:39 GMT In article tching@caldwr.water.ca.gov (Tracy Ching) writes: > Sorry, I'm not well read ... but, is Crystal Castles a fiction > or non-fiction book? It would seem that any invention (including > nuclear devices) that is publicized usually doesn't warrant the > attention from the FBI. If anyone could name a few well known > instances where the FBI -took- someone's invention and told them not > to release the information, I'd greatly appreciate it. From what I understand, all patents are reviewed by the Defense Department prior to being issued by the Patent and Trademark Office. I have heard of cases where patents that seem to have no national security implications have been rejected. If publication of the patent information would be a national security risk in DOD's eys, they WILL get in touch with you. My company has a special award catagory set up so that when this happens you still get the same bonus dollars you would have received if the patent issued. John Gilbert Secure and Advanced Conventional KA4JMC Systems Division johng@ecs.comm.mot.com Motorola Communications Sector post: CPGR17 Schaumburg, Illinois ------------------------------ From: David A. Banisar Subject: Government Taking Inventions Organization: Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 12:12:00 GMT Under the Invention Secrecy Act, it is possible for the government to step in and classify an invention and order the inventor to not discuss it with anyone. This has occured many times in the last 40 years, mostly for equipment that has cryptography. In the late seventies (78, I believe) the government classified an invention called ?the Phaserphone? which would have provided voice encryption for around $100. They also classified an invention by Prof. George Davida of the University of Wisconsin. Both were allow to continue after public outcry. More recently, in 1986, the NSA tried to classify research done by Adi Shamir at the Weitzman Institute in Israel. They backed down after this became public. I?m sure there are many other instances where this has occured. Anyone else have examples? David Banisar <> Banisar@washofc.cpsr.org Computer Professionals for Social Responsiblity 666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, #303 Washington, D.C. 20003 Voice - (202) 544-9240 <> Fax - (202) 547- 5481 ------------------------------ From: polk@usc.edu (Corinna Polk) Subject: Apple's Newton Personal Digital Assistant Date: 9 Jun 1992 14:04:36 -0700 Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA Taken from {MacWeek} 06/08/92, p8: DEVELOPERS LINE UP TO DO PDA HOOKUPS by April Streeter A platoon of developers promised robust communication capabilities for Apple's {Personal Digital Assistant} Newton. Motorola Inc.'s Paging and Telepoint Systems Group, based in Boynton Beach, FL, plans one-way wireless messaging capabilities for Newton similar to those available for Hewlett Packard Co's 95LX palmtop. But company sources said that development of a Newton-compatible NewsStream driver has not begun because Apple has not provided specifications. Traveling Software Inc. of Bothell, Wash., said its Universal Communications Object, a new technology designed to provide connectivity for any operating system and any media, will work with Newton. The company will ship a PCMCIA {Personal Computer Memory Card Industry Association} card that will let Newton exchange data with DOS systems. SkytTel Corp. will put its wireless messaging servics on a Newton, said Dave Garrison, president of the Washington, D.C.-based paging company. He said a PCMCIA card due next year will let the device filter SkyTel data and alert the user that a message has arrived. Bellcore, Inc. said {Apple Computer's Personal Digital Assistant} Newton will extend telephone services such as call waiting and caller ID. Said Barry Schwartz, executive director of voice services for the Livingston, NJ-based research arm of the regional Bell operating companies: You'd just plug it into the telephone, and when a call comes in Newton would look in its internal directory, display the caller's name and maybe even bring up a record of your last conversation." Schwartz said his company's Analog Display Services Interface (ADSI) protocol will be ready for Apple and third-party developers by the end of the year. But Newton may not be ready for ADSI, sources said. The first Newtons reportedly will be short on telephone-communications savvy. Aside from vague ideas about Newton's mobile Appletalk protocol stack and operating system, these companies said they don't know exactly how Newton will support promised connectivity. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 00:48:14 EDT From: birchall@pilot.njin.net (Shag) Subject: What Causes Lack of Dial Tones? NJ Bell has promised me they'll fix this, but I figured I'd ask ... I don't have a dialtone. I can't do a thing on my line. Before everyone writes this off to customer wiring ... there are no phones on my line. My line goes from the street to an interface box, and ends at the test jack. There's no dial tone in the test jack, just a faint hiss. My bills are paid, the jack gets used maybe three times a year, when I change what number it forwards to at the local net.dialin. *evil grin* Since it's only used for forwarding, this problem may have existed for several months, without being noticed. Just wondering what conditions (in the telco wiring) can cause this. Shag ------------------------------ Reply-To: Tdarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 20:55:41 EDT Subject: Re: 'Area Code' 710 Someone wrote me a private note to ask if there was an area code 710, i.e. "How about calling 710 555 1212 and asking the operator who this area code serves. Even if they don't tell us, we will learn something." Well, they didn't tell us; in short, there's nobody there. From this government agency I am a contractor for, I went to a telephone without restrictions, and I used the FTS-2000 network to try the number. I dialed '8' to get a dial tone, and dialed 710-555-1212. I did this before during the flood in Chicago when someone wanted to call the Transit Authority and find out which parts were damaged and thus inaccessible, and I had called information in Chicago to get the number to the CTA. After trying this, I then called commercially by dialing 9-1-710-555-1212. In both cases, I got a recording indicating that the call could not be completed. In short, the 'Area Code' 710 is used for U.S. Telex numbers on Western Union and for connection to some other carriers, and is not being used as a 'Government Service' number. [Moderator's Note: A Southwestern Bell person disagrees with you and says it is in use for 'special government services'. Read the next message. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: 10 Jun 92 16:04:07 EDT From: tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> Subject: 710 Area Code is Used by Federal Government Pat, I am unsure just how much information is to be given out about 710. Mr. Newton is right, however, in that it is for special government services and they do have a designated use for it. Tim Gorman [Moderator's Note: Mr. Gorman, since you are employed by Southwestern Bell, I do not want to cause you any jeopardy ... but are you permitted to explain *anything at all* about 710? Can you tell us who will discuss it? Is this in the realm of national security or defense? Would the CIA/FBI/Pentagon know about it? Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1992 06:23:19 -0400 From: Monty Solomon Subject: Automated Menu Systems bill@phoenix.az.stratus.com (Bill Everts) wrote: > I agree that ring-no-answer is worse than an answering machine. > However, what some businesses are doing to automate their phone > systems is criminal! I recently tried to reach a friend at work. They have an automated system which tells the caller that he doesn't answer the phone or that he is on the phone! This particular system doesn't appear to have individual OGMs. He was on the phone when I called and the system asked me if I wanted to hold. This system apparently doesn't have a camp-on feature and periodically notified me that it was trying the extension. After repeating this about three times, it made me press a key to remain on the line. Of course, I had the call on the speakerphone and was busy across the room and got disconnected when I wouldn't respond. I tried calling him several times and became quite annoyed at the stupid system. Whoever programmed this system should be shot. Audix is another example of a voice mail system with a poor user interface. The Rolm PhoneMail system is quite nice. The industry should agree on some standard user interface for the common and basic features of voice mail systems and answering machines. Monty Solomon / PO Box 2486 / Framingham, MA 01701-0405 monty%roscom@think.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 01:57 GMT From: Gregg McVicar <0003200667@mcimail.com> Subject: CF&P Radio CFP-II Radio Public radio listeners across the nation will have "virtual front row seats" at the Second Annual Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy. The sessions were recorded at the March conference by Bruce Koball and digitally edited for broadcast by Gregg McVicar (The Privacy Project). Ten one-hour programs will be available to stations through the public radio satellite system, beginning June 23rd. 1 Bruce Sterling "Speaking for the Unspeakable". 2 Ethics, Morality, and Criminality. 3 Logging on to the Networks of the Future. 4 Free Speech and the Public Telephone Network. 5 Who's in Your Genes? Genetic Data Banking & Privacy. 6 Private Collection of Personal Information. 7 Privacy and Intellectual Freedom in the Digital Library. 8 Computers in the Workplace: Elysium or Panopticon? 9 Who Holds the Keys? Cryptography, Privacy, and Security. 10 Public Policy for the 21st Century. Each station decides independently whether or not to air a program offering and where to place it in its broadcast schedule. Therefore, interested listeners are advised to immediately contact the program director at their public radio station to request local broadcast of the COMPUTERS, FREEDOM, & PRIVACY series. KALW in San Francisco, Oregon Public Broadcasting, KPBS in San Diego, WYEP in Pittsburgh, and WUMB in Boston plan to air the programs this summer and have graciously provided seed funding for the project. For more information, contact Gregg McVicar at Pacific Multimedia (510) 938-2877, or GMcVicar@MCImail.com. ------------------------------ Date: 09 Jun 1992 18:34:07 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: Tapping Digital Connections In article stevef@wrq.com writes: > In article sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO. > edu (Steven S. Brack) writes: >> Digital taps are clean, cheap, and >> completely undetectable from the sub's point of view. The only >> disadvantage is that for minimum difficulty, the governmnet needs to >> go through the telco to emplace the tap. 'course, you've got to wonder whether the telco will charge the FBI for Three-Way Calling. 8) >> If desired, that can be >> worked around. A PC-box storing packets from a specific subscriber is >> technically feasable, and [s]houldn't be outrageously expensive. > We have a couple of T1s to US West, our LEC, and one T1 to > our IXC. When I place an outgoing call, one of the channels of one of > the T1s is selected, and the call gets set up. The CO has absolutely > no way of knowing who is calling[.] > So, if the FBI or other law enforcement agency were to have a warrant > for a wiretap for my office phone, there's no practical way to monitor > my (outgoing) calls from the CO without listening to ALL of the > outgoing calls from all 200 people here. Not only would this take a > huge staff, but would also infringe on the privacy rights of my 199 > co-workers. Of course, sampling and voice frequency matching aside, you, personally, don't have phone service at work. The PBX, the connections, and probably even the phonesets are owned and paid for by your employer. Ergo, the FBI would have to get a warrant authorizing a tap of *your employer's* lines, if they think you are doing something illegal at work. Or, the FBI could capture the entire data stream, then select your call out, either by voice recognition, or by telco/PBX recordkeeping, like SMDR. > Actually, the more I think about it, this really isn't much of an > analog-vs-digital issue, it's more of a shared-trunk issue. OK. Does anyone know how wiretaps were arranged in the days of party lines? It seems that we're dealing with the same problem, but on a larger scale. [Moderator's Note: I think what you will find is that in 'party line days' things generally were a lot more laid back: people were much less sophisticated about their rights, and although warrants were obtained when needed, as often as not the FBI (for example) did pretty much as it pleased. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #470 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23925; 11 Jun 92 10:18 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27931 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 11 Jun 1992 08:03:11 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22772 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 11 Jun 1992 08:02:53 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1992 08:02:53 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206111302.AA22772@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Subject: Updated USA/Canada Area Code List [Moderator's Note: Here is an updated list of area codes submitted by Paul Robinson. You may with to file this with other telecom reference materials. PAT] From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 08 Jun 92 21:52:13 EDT Subject: List of U.S. Area Codes Area Code List for the United States June 8, 1992 The following are the area codes for the United States and Canada. Dial +1 from outside the U.S. or Canada to call a number. All telephone numbers in the United States and Canada are 10 digits in length, consisting of a 3 digit area code (as shown below), followed by a 3 digit prefix and four digit suffix. All area codes are based on a numbering system called NPA, or Numbering Plan Area, in which the code is as follows: The first digit of an area code is 2 through 9. The second digit is a 0 or a 1. The third digit is 0 through 9. There are a few combinations that are not normally used because they are used for other purposes. Certain area codes are set up for special purposes, as shown below. Prefixes are the three digit number following an area code. Prefixes start with the number 2 through 9, followed by any two digits of 0 through 9. People who deal with telephone systems will sometimes use the term NXX to refer in general to a prefix number. Prefixes generally indicate a geographic location of the called party within a particular area code, or in rare cases are used for special services. The prefix code 555 is used for directory assistance in most area codes. The prefix code 950 is often used for connection to telephone carriers' computer systems or for a special class of called-party-pays telephone number similar to the 800 area code (see note 1, below). The prefix code 976 is generally used as a special class of surcharged telephone services, with calls being charged at rates from US 20c per call or US 20c per minute, to as high as US $20.00 per call or US $4.00 per minute. (This is similar to the area code 900 mentioned in note 2, below). When someone is calling a number in the same area code, they normally do not have to dial the area code to call, they simply dial 7 digits. When calling from offices that have internal telephone systems, called PBXs, one usually dials "9" to get an outside line, followed by a 7 digit local number. If the number is in the same area code but is a toll charge call, usually one must dial "1" and the 7 digit number. Calls made to another area code from within the U.S. are usually dialed by calling "1" then the area code and the 7 digit number. With the exception of the 700, 800, and 900 area codes, an area code is used exclusively for a single state. Where C appears immediately after the area code in the list below, the area code is for a Canadian Province. Recent reports indicate that most of the available unused area codes will be used up within a few years. At least two area codes were made available when Mexico was separated from the United States into an international number. Some time could be gained by such methods as moving area code 809 to an international code, and moving Canadian provinces to international code. This might buy some time, but the obvious "solution" is to extend area codes by making the middle digit of an area code be any number from 0 through 9. This would add hundreds of new area codes but it might mean having to dial 10 digits to call someone across the street, as is currently the situation in the metropolitan area of Washington, DC. While the international dialing codes are standard, generally, Area codes in the United States are not uniform, and were more-or-less assigned as needed. Special notes regarding some area codes: Note 1. Telephone numbers in the 800 area code are called-party-pays numbers, called "WATS" or "toll free" calls; a caller within the area served by the 800 number may call that number at no charge as the caller. Callers at Pay Telephones often can dial an 800 number without deposit of coin, as the number is a "recipient pays" number, called "collect," "toll free" or "reverse charges" in the U.S. Note that 800 numbers dialed from outside the U.S. may require that the caller pay for the call depending on which carrier has issued the 800 number and from what country you are calling from. In some cases it may not be possible to call some 800 numbers because there is no means to access the carrier from outside of the United States, or the number is for use only for calls from part of one state, or a specific geographical area of the U.S. Note 2. Telephone numbers in the 900 area code are used for telephone service providers who are paid a fee for each call received, which can range from US 20c per minute to US $20 per call. Note that some telephone numbers in the 900 area code may or may not be dialable from outside the United States. The same rule applies to any local exchange number in an area code which begins with "976", as mentioned above, depending on whether the particular telephone company is tariffed to offer the service in other areas. Note 3. The 700 area code is reserved for use of each individual telephone carrier who may assign numbers for their own use or for persons who are customers of that carrier. Some numbers may be reserved by the carrier for connection to it for such things as finding out which carrier serves a line, some numbers may be reserved for conference call dial in numbers and/or setup numbers. At least one carrier is going to issue 700 area code numbers to individuals to allow them to use the number assigned as a forwarded number to some other telephone number, with the option of either charging the caller a fee to call the number or the subscriber of the number deciding accept the charge similar to an 800 number. Some carriers may install some services similar to area code 900 numbers on area code 700 lines. In some cases it may not be possible to reach some 700 area code numbers because one cannot obtain access to the telephone carrier supplying the 700 area code, or that particular number is only available in some states, or one cannot connect to that carrier from outside of the U.S. Note 4. The 700 area code is also being used by the Federal Government under its FTS-2000 system, in which telephone numbers which were 7 digits on the internal telephone system, are being translated back into the area code and commercial public (ordinary) telephone number they were originally issued to. In some cases some telephones do not have actual commercial numbers and are assigned their 7-digit FTS number with area code 700 in front of them. These numbers are not dialable except from U.S. Government telephones which are connected to the FTS-2000 network, or have authority to use the FTS carrier code 10FTS or the interconnect number 1-800-OFFNET-4. Note 5. Some U.S. Government numbers which are on the Sprint "B" FTS-2000 network which do not have regular commercial public numbers as indicated in note 4, will be assigned the area code 200 rather than 700. Numbers on the AT&T "A" FTS-2000 network which do not have regular commercial numbers will generally be assigned to the 700 area code, as indicated in note 4. Note 6. The 800 and 900 area codes are broken down piecemeal and individual three-digit prefixes are assigned to different long distance interexchange companies. As such, you may or may not be able to reach a particular 800 or 900 area code if you are calling from outside of the U.S., depending on which carrier you are connected to once you reach the U.S., and because some numbers are restricted to access from certain parts of the country or are only available during certain times of the week. Note 7. Area Code 905 is listed as not in use, some areas that do not have full international dialing use it as a ficticious area code for calls to Mexico. This only works from some places within the U.S. and cannot be used for calls from outside the U.S. There are reports that the area code 905 will be assigned to a part of Canada. Note 8. Reports are that the area code 909 will be assigned to Canada. I am unable to confirm this at this time as the three major interexchange carriers do not show it assigned for anything. Note 9. The code 710 is used for certain Telex II numbers on the telex network. Note A. The code 610 is reported as in use for Canadian Telex numbers. Note B. Area codes ending in 11 will probably not be used except as a last resort, because of the use of three digit codes for special three digit local numbers: Note C. Some private pay telephone providers are using special code 211 as the number for repair service for their pay telephones. Note D. Advertisements, books and motion pictures often use the area code 311 as a ficticious area code, and the prefix 555 ("KLondike 5") in any area code as a ficticious telephone exchange number. Note E. The special code 411 is often used for connection to directory assistance. Note F. The special code 611 is used for connection to telephone company repair service in some places. Note G. The special code 911 is being used for a universal number for connection to police, fire and emergency services. Send comments about this list to: Paul Robinson Mail Stop P-812 Washington, DC, USA 20555-0812 Internet: TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM NOT USED: 200 (see note 5), 210, 211 (see note C), 300, 311 (see note D), 400, 411 (see note E), 500, 511, 600, 610 (see note A), 611 (see note F), 710 (see note 9), 711, 811, 905 (see note 7), 909 (see note 8), 911 (see note B) 200 * NOT USED (See note 5) 201 New Jersey 202 District of Columbia 203 Connecticut 204 C Manitoba 205 Alabama 206 Washington 207 Maine 208 Idaho 209 California 210 N NOT USED 211 * NOT USED (See Note C) 212 New York 213 California 214 Texas 215 Pennsylvania 216 Ohio 217 Illinois 218 Minnesota 219 Indiana 300 N NOT USED 301 Maryland 302 Delaware 303 Colorado 304 West Virginia 305 Florida 306 C Saskatchewan 307 Wyoming 308 Nebraska 309 Illinois 310 California 311 * NOT USED (See Note D) 312 Illinois 313 Michigan 314 Missouri 315 New York 316 Kansas 317 Indiana 318 Louisiana 319 Iowa 400 N NOT USED 401 Rhode Island 402 Nebraska 403 C Alberta, Northwest Territories, Yukon 404 Georgia 405 Oklahoma 406 Montana 407 Florida 408 California 409 Texas 410 Maryland 411 * NOT USED (See Note E) 412 Pennsylvania 413 Massachusetts 414 Wisconsin 415 California 416 C Ontario 417 Missouri 418 Quebec 419 Ohio 500 N NOT USED 501 Arkansas 502 Kentucky 503 Oregon 504 Louisiana 505 New Mexico 506 C New Brunswick 507 Minnesota 508 Massachusetts 509 Washington 510 California 511 N NOT USED 512 Texas 513 Ohio 514 C Quebec 515 Iowa 516 New York 517 Michigan 518 New York 519 C Ontario 600 N NOT USED 601 Mississippi 602 Arizona 603 New Hampshire 604 C British Columbia 605 South Dakota 606 Kentucky 607 New York 608 Wisconsin 609 New Jersey 610 * NOT USED (See note A) 611 * NOT USED (See note F) 612 Minnesota 613 C Ontario 614 Ohio 615 Tennessee 616 Michigan 617 Massachusetts 618 Illinois 619 California 700 * Carrier Service (See notes 3,4) 701 North Dakota 702 Nevada 703 Virginia 704 North Carolina 705 C Ontario 706 Georgia (Effective June 1, 1992) 707 California 708 Illinois 709 California 710 * NOT USED (See note 9) 711 N NOT USED 712 Iowa 713 Texas 714 California 715 Wisconsin 716 New York 717 Pennsylvania 718 New York 719 Colorado 800 * Toll Free (See notes 1,6) 801 Utah 802 Vermont 803 South Carolina 804 Virginia 805 California 806 Texas 807 C Ontario 808 Hawaii 809 Puerto Rico and Carribean Islands 810 N NOT USED 811 N NOT USED 812 Indiana 813 Florida 814 Pennsylvania 815 Illinois 816 Missouri 817 Texas 818 California 819 C Northwest Territories 900 * Dialing Service (See notes 2,6) 901 Tennessee 902 C Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island 903 Texas 904 Florida 905 * NOT USED (See note 7) 906 Michigan 907 Alaska 908 New Jersey 909 * NOT USED (See note 8) 910 N NOT USED 911 * NOT USED (See note G) 912 Georgia 913 Kansas 914 New York 915 Texas 916 California 917 New York 918 Oklahoma 919 North Carolina   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11454; 12 Jun 92 2:42 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22732 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Jun 1992 00:49:31 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30769 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Jun 1992 00:49:18 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 00:49:18 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206120549.AA30769@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #471 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Jun 92 00:49:17 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 471 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Harry P. Haas) Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Phil Wherry) Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Ed Greenberg) Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Brent Whitlock) Re: From the Usenet Rumor Department (Steven P. Mazurek) Re: Phones "Ringing Off the Hook" (Glenn R. Stone) Re: Digital Mixing (Rolf Meier) Re: Hotel Phone Charges - a Limey's View (Julian Macassey) Re: Hotel Phone Charges - a Yank's View (Randall L. Smith) Re: *67 and Related Topics (Clive Feather) Re: Ring Tones (Tony Harminc) Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (Floyd Davidson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hhaas@RAIL9000.gatech.edu (Harry P. Haas) Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking Date: 10 Jun 92 13:27:37 GMT Organization: Georgia Tech Research Institute In article owens@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Christopher Owens) writes: > In Paul Robinson > writes: >> [... Description of Caller-ID "block-blocking" deleted ....] >> The code *77 is a toggle; if you have Caller-ID, you dial *77 to >> indicate you want to refuse calls from people who block their number; >> then if you want to accept blocked calls, you dial *77 to disable this >> feature. >> [Moderator's Note: Next thing you know, we will be hearing complaints >> from people about *77 being a toggle. ...] > After a while, some combination of the incessant wailing of his [... Cute story deleted . . .] >" All this feedback is driving me nuts," quipped Townson. "It's as bad > [Moderator's Note: Clever retort! Touche, and all that. Still, we live > with *70 as a toggle for one call only. Would you have it that *70 > turned off Call Waiting and something else turned Call Waiting back on > -- provided you did not forget? PAT] The original poster did not explicitly say there was no feedback. Before we get carried away here ... Is this true?? When I type *73 to forward my calls I get an interupted (three times) dial tone. Twice interupted when I turn it off. It seems as though it would be painfully easy to provide audible feedback ... in fact SILLY if it were not already true. Does anyone know if there IS or IS NOT audible feedback? [PAT will now say ... "Next thing you know, we will be hearing complaints from people about the audible feedback not being a synthesized voice saying EXPLICITLY which mode you are in." And of course, someone will :=) ] Harry Haas GTRI/RIDL/EB | Georgia Tech Research Institute Research Engineer II | Georgia Institute of Technology 404-528-7679 | Atlanta Georgia, 30332 hh2@prism.gatech.edu | "What makes it DO that?!" - Bones ------------------------------ From: psw@vibes.mitre.org (Phil Wherry) Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking Reply-To: psw@vibes.mitre.org (Phil Wherry) Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean, Va Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1992 13:58:39 GMT I'm a caller ID subscriber in the Virginia suburbs of Washington DC, so I tried out the *77 caller ID block-blocking feature. It worked, but it's not implemented as a toggle without feedback -- at least not in my CO. The code *77 caused me to be routed to a recording which said that anonymous call blocking was now on. A second invocation of *77 yielded the same result. I tried *87, which gave me a recording saying that anonymous call blocking was now off. I wasn't able to exercise the feature further, since caller ID blocking via *67 is not available in Virginia. I intend to find out if/when this feature will be available in Virginia, and will let the group know what I find out. Phillip Wherry Member of the Technical Staff The MITRE Corporation, McLean, VA psw@mitre.org ------------------------------ From: edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 14:17:04 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) > [Moderator's Note: Clever retort! Touche, and all that. Still, we live > with *70 as a toggle for one call only. Would you have it that *70 > turned off Call Waiting and something else turned Call Waiting back on > -- provided you did not forget? PAT] Excuse please, Mr. Moderator, but your humble servant would beg to point out that *70 is NOT a toggle. It turns off Call Waiting for one call. If you don't HAVE call waiting normally, it DOESN'T turn it on! The *67 and *77 complaints are valid criticisms, although I'll agree with you that they're getting loud. Ed Greenberg | Home: +1 408 283 0511 | edg@netcom.com P. O. Box 28618 | Work: +1 408 764 5305 | DoD#: 0357 San Jose, CA 95159 | Fax: +1 408 764 5003 | KM6CG (ex WB2GOH) ------------------------------ From: bkwg0457@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Brent Whitlock) Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1992 17:49:41 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Clever retort! Touche, and all that. Still, we live > with *70 as a toggle for one call only. Would you have it that *70 > turned off Call Waiting and something else turned Call Waiting back on > -- provided you did not forget? PAT] Illinois Bell's (Ameritech's) Call Waiting feature in the Champaign-Urbana area does not implement *70 as a toggle. To quote from the phone book: "To cancel Call Waiting (where available): * Before placing a call press "*" button and 70 (rotary dial 1170) * Listen for dial tone; dial the number. * Call Waiting is automatically restored after you hang up." This is the way I like it. I can include 1170 in the telephone number on my computer's terminal software to prevent call waiting from disconnecting me without any problems. (1170 works for tone dialing as well as *70.) What telephone companies implement it as a toggle? I wouldn't like that at all. * * * * * * --> DISCLAIMER: I speak only for myself. <-- * * * * * * Brent Whitlock Beckman Institute for Advanced Science & Technology bwhitlock@uiuc.edu Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign ------------------------------ From: smazu@ameris.ameritech.com (Steven P. Mazurek) Subject: Re: From the Usenet Rumor Department Organization: Ameritech, Hoffman Estates, IL Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1992 16:46:04 GMT kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) writes: > In article jack.winslade%drbbs@ > ivgate.omahug.org writes: >> Whoever started the thread implied that the telco was randomly >> listening to subscriber calls (not just those from a sub to the telco) >> and taking whatever action they deemed necessary. ... deleted text ... > Whoever started the thread only heard half of what was originally said > and probably didn't understand the half that he/she heard. When this > was done, it was called Service Observing and was essentially as Pat > described. Great pains were taken to ensure that a trustworthy person > held the job AND that that person did not have (easy) access to the > phone numbers of the lines that were being monitored. The sole purpose > was to sample connection quality. > I cannot speak for Wisconsin but in Illinois, Service Observing was > eliminated about seven years ago. There was too much potential for > abuse and misunderstanding and with the advent of electronic and > digital switching, they just weren't finding enough to make it worth > the effort. Just two more points: service observers were only allowed to monitor the call to ensure that the call "completed" to something: person, recording, etc. With the introduction of SI Tones, the need to monitor pretty much disappeared. Steven P. Mazurek | Email : {...,uunet,bcr,ohumc}!ameris!smazu Ameritech Services | smazu@ameris.center.il.ameritech.com Hoffman Estates, IL USA 60196 | Phone : (708) 248-5075 ------------------------------ From: gs26@prism.gatech.edu (Glenn R. Stone) Subject: Re: Phones "Ringing Off the Hook" Date: 11 Jun 92 18:17:35 GMT Reply-To: glenns@eas.gatech.edu Organization: The Group W Bench In the referenced article Bill Berbenich writes: > I am curious about the origins of this oft-heard cliche. Does it > mean that the phone rang, even though it was already off the hook or > does it mean that the phone rang so hard that it knocked itself off > the hook? The latter, sort of. This generally refers to the Western Electric wall-mounted, real-bell phones (the model number escapes me ... anyone?) common in so many kitchens until the MFJ took hold ... the phone rang so much one feared that the handset would get bounced out of the holder. More common in my experience is "... ringing off the wall", i.e. enough bell-ringing vibration to (eventually) shake the phone from its mountings. I have severe doubts that either of these phrases is more than hyperbole, but ... :) :) :) :) :) Glenn R. Stone (glenns@eas.gatech.edu) ------------------------------ From: meier@software.mitel.com (Rolf Meier) Subject: Re: Digital Mixing Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1992 12:06:40 -0400 Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada. In article vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26546-adams) writes: > One of the added benefits of digital (aka PCM encoding) switching is > that the actual samples of members on the bridge are *NOT* added! > Conference bridging is accomplished through a simple distribution > algorithm. The transmitting signal (an encoded sample) is distributed > to all other ports on the bridge as a receive signal. Rather slick There's a bit more to it than that. What you described is what is known as the "loudest talker" algorithm. The DSP examines all the incoming samples and distributes the signal with the highest level to all other conferees (the listeners). This algorithm works best for a small number of parties (three to five or so). For a larger number of parties, better audio quality is achieved by more complex means. The DSP converts each sample to a linear code, adds them, divides by the number of parties, converts back to companded PCM, and distributes this signal to the listeners. Rolf Meier Mitel Corporation ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Hotel Phone Charges - a Limey's View Date: 11 Jun 92 15:05:33 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article John.Slater@UK.Sun.COM (John Slater - Sun UK - Gatwick SE) writes: Stuff about hotel rip-off telephone rates deleted. > I used my Visa-card-linked MCI card for my long-distance calls, and I > did it from the payphones in the lobby. (PacBell, fortunately!). When staying at hotels, I always call from a phone company pay phone in the lobby. If they don't have telco payphones I bitch loudly to the current manager at the reception desk. My usual tone to hotels that gouge on the telco rates and charge $180.00 per night for the room is: "AT&T doesn't charge for beds, why should you charge for phones?" When staying at places where I pay the bills and make the bookings, I choose Motel 6 if there is one nearby. Why? Cos I get the same bed as the Hyatt plus free local calls and no LD charges. Yes, I choose a hotel because they don't charge me third world rates for phones. Julian Macassey, julian@bongo.info.com N6ARE@K6VE.#SOCAL.CA.USA.NA 742 1/2 North Hayworth Avenue Hollywood CA 90046-7142 voice (213) 653-4495 ------------------------------ From: rls!randy@cis.ohio-state.edu (Randall L. Smith) Subject: Re: Hotel Phone Charges - a Yank's View Date: 11 Jun 92 18:19:25 GMT John.Slater@UK.Sun.COM (John Slater - Sun UK - Gatwick SE) writes: > And is it legal for the hotel to charge even for this type of 800 > number? I thought there was a blanket rule that 800 numbers must not > attract any charge. It must be legal. I was in Oakbrook (Chicago suburb) a week ago and I stayed at the Embassy Suites. They royally screwed me on long distance charges. It ran almost $5.00 per call, regardless of call duration. I recall four calls that went like this. 1-614-xxx-xxxx - busy - charge $4.26 later, 1-614-xxx-xxxx - answering machine, 30 sec message - charge $5.09 later, 1-800-xxx-xxxx - sorry, the number you have dialed..., charge $3.93 later, 1-800-xxx-xxxx - connected, 20-30 minute discussion, charge $4.60 I don't see any rhyme or reason for these charges. Nor did I have time to argue the phone abuse along with some movie for $7.50 I didn't see, nor the discount they promised (and I didn't get) for taking a smoking room. Grrr. I refuse to use my calling card, just because the hotel may save all the digits I punch in for later use. B-| > P.S. I can write again about phone charges in UK hotels if this > is of interest. Yes, please do. Cheers! - randy randy@rls.uucp !osu-cis!rls!randy rls!randy@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu ------------------------------ From: clive@x.co.uk (Clive Feather) Subject: Re: *67 and Related Topics Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 5:25:43 BST In Telecom 12.452.7 Peter Sleggs writes: > Consider the situation of ANY toggle, a light switch is a fair > example. Convention is that when the lever is UP the light is ON > (code requirement in some places). Speak for yourself. In the United Kingdom, UP means OFF. Clive D.W. Feather | IXI Limited clive@x.co.uk | 62-74 Burleigh St. Phone: +44 223 462 131 | Cambridge CB1 1OJ Fax: +44 223 462 132 | United Kingdom ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 01:06:10 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Ring Tones john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) wrote: > The much slower output of the gear train turned a drum filled with > mercury. This, as you might expect, provided the ring cadence. After > years of operation, the inside of the drum would become filthy with > contaminants and crackling could be heard between rings. The severity > of the crackling could reveal the age (or at least the time since the > last cleaning) of the unit. Interesting. I can remember from my earliest days of "playing with the phone" that the "silent" space between SxS rings was filled with a sound that would build from silence immediately after the ring to a sometimes ferocious background crackle just before the next ring. I always assumed that this was a side effect that the ringing *signal* (not tone) had on the called line -- perhaps temporarily cleaning up various unintended diodes and other noisemakers on the line. Perhaps the explanation lies in the ringing generator itself. But why would the noise level be so predictably variable ? Tony H. ------------------------------ From: floyd@hayes.ims.alaska.edu (Floyd Davidson) Subject: Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare Organization: University of Alaska Computer Network Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1992 13:02:56 GMT In article John Higdon writes: (in reference to correcting errors in billed calls...) > Suggestions, anyone? (BTW, accurate billing would also be nice :-) One suggestion. Don't even bother calling them up and asking about the errors. Mark the items on your bill that are in error and include a note with your payment that you are not paying for the items that are incorrect. Mail in your payment. Most likely that is the end of the story. I admit that I do not have to deal with deadbeats as you describe them ... but I've NEVER called some poor lowly clerk and tried to get a sensible discussion of anything technical, and billing errors are very technical. While my bias is obvious, in that I am employed by the regulated long distance company here, it is also true that my house mate handles the commercial communications billings for Eielson AFB, near Fairbanks, and she sends back pages and pages of not just false billings, but impossible billings, every month! There has never been one kick or moan from the other end ... and actually she has had some considerable difficulty getting them to notice some obvious patterns that should cause someone to get excited! (The false billings often originate with, ahhhh, the same nice people you are dealing with ... ). I see no point in discussing billing details with a clerk, or perhaps even the first level supervisor. If you get any higher than that and someone tells you that errors don't happen ... use whatever facilities you have to embarass them into submission and demand an apology. Floyd ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #471 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13151; 12 Jun 92 3:27 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29061 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 12 Jun 1992 01:24:19 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26230 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 12 Jun 1992 01:23:57 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 01:23:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206120623.AA26230@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #472 TELECOM Digest Fri, 12 Jun 92 01:23:53 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 472 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Some History of GTE-Florida (John Higdon) Re: Some History of GTE-Florida (Marc T. Kaufman) Re: Some History of GTE-Florida (Joe Talbot) Re: GTE of S. California and Intralata Calls (Chris Arndt) Re: GTE of S. California and Intralata Calls (Steven S. Brack) Re: List of GTD-5 Observations (Jon Baker) Re: GTE/HSN (Jon Baker) Re: GTE-Bashing (Randy Gellens) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 12 Jun 92 03:10 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Some History of GTE-Florida tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> writes: > steven@alchemy.UUCP writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #460: >> This type of thing happens all the time. I have heard where develpers >> have come into areas and built houses without telling any of the >> utilities and then start screaming because there is no electric, >> water, gas, telephone or cable. > I have a bone to pick with this. So do I. Most of the time, GTE is just stupid when it (doesn't) plan for an area. I present for your consideration my very service in the Santa Cruz mountains. My building is at the end (top) of what amounts to a very exclusive residential street. These are literally palaces built on a hillside with seven-figure views of the SF Bay and surrounding population. There is much undeveloped property, mostly at the top near my site. What, in its infinite wisdom, did GTE deem necessary to run up the hill? A single 25 pair cable, about one pair per customer AT THE TIME THE CABLE WAS INSTALLED. That's right -- no expansion was even considered. Given the upscale nature of the community, the undeveloped property, and the fact that a radio transmitter site was at the top, this was the most stupid thing a utility could have done. It certainly would have been cheaper to install a larger cable at the time than to have to later install a whole new cable which is what eventually happened. In the meantime, GTE used its scourge of telephony, subscriber carrier. I have already denounced the use of this nonsense, something that GTE has always made heavy use of when its woefully inadequate cable planning has become evident. Other telcos manage to plan. Other telcos manage to avoid subscriber carrier. I live in a neighborhood that is over thirty years old. For miles in every direction is property zoned R-1 (residential single-family use). The nearest shopping center of any size is more than four miles away. Have I had trouble getting additional lines? No. Have my neighbors? No. Is anyone on subscriber carrier? No. Next excuse, GTE? Is there someone ELSE we can blame for your lack of planning? > This type of development is not usually done overnight, not even over > a summer. If something this major is missed, it is not just the > customer's fault for not telling the "utilities". The utilities must > accept blame for not doing a "good" job of staying current with > activities in the area. A telco can even forecast on its own. GTE appears to just be ahead of its time. The corporate way in many companies, and apparently in GTE, is to sacrifice the long term for the short term. It installs the absolute minimum that it can immediately get away with. Later on, it can blame a host of "causes" when it explains to a customer or a whole neighborhood why it cannot supply additional service. This is pathetic in view of its recent acquisition of Contel. Contel's impeccable planning is a wonder to behold. An associate who lives twenty miles outside of Victorville (but served out of a Victorville CO) can have as many lines as he likes. No subscriber carrier, no excuses. Around him is a community that literally sprung up overnight. Did Contel get caught with its pants down? Not a chance. Everyone has as much phone service as he likes. Eventually, GTE will impose its wretched way of doing things on poor old Contel. Gone will be the Victorville offices, repair center, everything. It will all be turned over to 1000 Jokes, where the Artificial Persons will tell the desert customers why their phones cannot be installed/fixed/moved/changed/upgraded. This merger has made me more angry than almost any other telecom news in the past couple of years. Fortunately, the inevitable has been postponed by the CPUC, which has demanded that, for the present, Contel be operated as a separate company. Anyone now wonder why? I appreciate the efforts of well-meaning people at GTE. But the company is SO rotten that I cannot imagine that much could ever be done without a soul transplant. Yes, everyone can come up with a good experience with GTE (even I can, but with broadcast services, not the telco per se). But overall, if GTE set the standard in this country rather than the former Bell System, Mexico's telephone service would start to look very good. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: kaufman@xenon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) Subject: Re: Some History of GTE-Florida Reply-To: kaufman@cs.stanford.edu Organization: CS Department, Stanford University, California, USA Date: 12 Jun 92 03:37:01 GMT tim gorman <71336.1270@CompuServe.COM> writes: > steven@alchemy.UUCP writes in TELECOM Digest V12 #460: >> This type of thing happens all the time. I have heard where develpers >> have come into areas and built houses without telling any of the >> utilities and then start screaming because there is no electric, >> water, gas, telephone or cable. In one case all this was brought in >> later (they had to rip up the streets) with the exception of the cable >> company ... > I have a bone to pick with this. I have had this fight with my own > wire center forecasters before. There is no reason why they cannot, on > a monthly basis, get around to all of the county courthouses (or > whereever) to review building permits and plat filings. A good working > relationship with commercial real estate sales offices can also > usually pay dividends. As a former planning commissioner, I find this somewhat nonbelievable. When we reviewed a subdivision map, we required dedication of utility easements (and acceptance by the utilities) as a requirement for filing the subdivision map. Presumably, this ought to be sufficient notice. If not, no developer is going to be able to sell a house (or get a final sign-off from the building inspector) without electricity, gas and water, at least. Usually, the utilities have to agree to supply the subdivision before work can start. However, I, too, moved into a new house several years ago, with telephone service guaranteed to be installed on moving day, with two weeks notice to the phone company. On moving day, at 5pm, we got a call at the old number that there were no pairs, and it would be two weeks before service could be installed. I noticed a dangling drop across the street that had gone to the developer's construction office trailer, and so informed the phone company. They said that that was a business line, and the pair was "owned" by the business side of the office, and could not be assigned to a residential line. As it happened, it was all a pack of lies anyway, and I had service the next day. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@CS.Stanford.EDU) ------------------------------ From: joe@mojave.ati.com (Joe Talbot) Subject: Re: Some History of GTE-Florida Date: 11 Jun 92 20:42:19 GMT Organization: ATI, High desert research center, Victorville, Ca In article , GLORIA.C.VALLE@gte.sprint. com writes: > Not to start another GTE bashing, but the problem with Home Shopping > Network and GTE Florida was HSN's problem. They came into an area > built a huge center for their company, but did not bother to let GTE > Florida know they were doing it and then called for service as if they > were just any residentual customer. Imagine a company who's entire income is from telephone calls, locating it's business in an area without adequate phone service. I steer my telephone clients and radio clients AWAY from GTE areas because I know how bad it'll be and that it it'll cost them money. My clients aren't nearly as big as HSN and we still have BIG problems. One located in Signal Hill (Long Beach) in an industrial park. They've been told they can't order 10 more POTS lines because there is a building going up across the street and that all the pairs have been reserved for it. They've known about that building for a while, and have decided not to install any new cable, unbeleivable. GTE, the GREAT TELEPHONE EXPERIMENT. > Imagine a company that big coming into a small town that is set up > for local service. After the dust settled the courts had ruled that > HSN was at fault 100%. They were forced to pay all costs. They did get > the service and from what little I have heard there has been no other > problems. I had no direct knowledge other then what was in the media, > but I followed it very close. A company that big should go directly > to a LD carrier and site selection should be based on adequate > capacity and a decent local company too. > At least the telephone company did do something about it and they > did not make the developer pay for it which they could have. I believe they are required to provide service to anybody who wants it. I don't think it's done because they're being "nice guys". Did the company put in the prepackaged cable setup that allows only a certain number of pairs for each household and no easy way to correct this problem. Many GTE residential areas are blessed with this. They were still doing this last I checked. This arrangement would be fine assuming the sixties norms, a single line and a black rotary wall phone in the kitchen (maybe a Princess,er, Starlight, sorry ...) in the master bedroom. But GTE, we're not in the sixties any more! joe@mojave.ati.com "My Brain hurts!" Slow mail: P.O. box 1750, Helendale California 92342 Phone: (619) 243-5500 Fax (619) 952-1030 ------------------------------ From: carndt@nike.calpoly.edu (Chris Arndt) Subject: Re: GTE Of S. California and Intralata Calls Date: Thu, 11 Jun 92 15:56:16 PDT Paul Robinson, Contractor said: > Which brings up another point I wanted to raise. GTE is the wire > company for at least 1/4 of Southern California. I note it is the > non-wire Cellular carrier in San Francisco; I also note that GTE does > have an old Radiotelephone facility in Long Beach, to service the > people still using them. What I am wondering is why Pacific Bell ONLY > is the wireline carrier for Southern California. I am surprised that > GTE didn't make a stink about it. Same thing for Continental > Telephone (CENTEL) of California which operates in some rural areas > like Big Bear Mountain. Anyone know why only Pacific Bell is > operating the wire company cellular facility in all of Southern > California? I'm not sure where your definition of Southern California begins and ends, but GTE Mobilnet is the B cellular provider from the LA/Ventura County line up thru Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, all the way to the Bay area. Also, a good chunk of that, Ventura and San luis Obispo, at least, are PacBell wireline areas. I guess it all averages out. As a side note, that entire stretch of coastline, about 300 (?) miles or so, is all considered by Mobilnet to be the users HOME area. No roaming. ------------------------------ Date: 11 Jun 1992 11:03:37 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: Re: GTE of S. California and Intralata Calls In article FZC@CU.NIH.GOV (Paul Robinson) writes: > For those of you who live within GTE of California territory, if you > ever get to Southern California, a place to drive past is a > nondescript telephone switch building at the corner of 6th & Almond in > Long Beach. > This building contains the computer used for ALL 911 calls made from > any GTE exchange anywhere in Southern California. They have direct > lines from all GTE switching areas to this building. I'm not telling > anything secret; this was published in the paper. Gee, isn't that a common point of failure then? Doesn't seem too intelligent. "Gee!; No, GTE." 8) 8) [Moderator's Note: The great fire in May, 1988 in Hinsdale was in just such a scenario: an office with something for everyone, and little or no backup elsewhere. IBT learned the hard way! PAT] ------------------------------ From: asuvax!gtephx!bakerj@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Jon Baker) Subject: Re: List of GTD-5 Observations Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1992 18:20:44 GMT In article , joe@jhgrud.MsElectron.com (Joe Kelsey) writes: > I completely agree with John Higdon about the deficiencies of the > GTD-5 when compared to other available switches. I recently moved > from USWest service into GTENorthWest service and I don't like it at > all. For one thing, when you order call waiting from USWest, you get > *both* call waiting and cancel call waiting. In GTELand, cancel call > waiting does not come packaged with call waiting unless you either > order it specifically (for an extra $1.50 per month!) or buy the > entire SmartestPak service (which includes all sorts of useless > features like speed dialing (useless when most phones already have a > similar feature)). This has nothing to do with the GTD5's capabilities. Call Waiting can be configured for any particular DN, in any number of manners (office engineerable only, customer enineerable, etc.). How the local telco packages the features for marketing purposes has nothing to do with the GTD5. I agree, though, this sounds a little screwy. Seems logical that Cancel CW oughta come along with CW. Maybe if they packaged them together they'd just charge everyone $1.50 more? J.Baker !asuvax!gtephx!bakerj DISCLAIMER : I am not an official representative of anyone or anything, especially not AGCS or the general Telecom readership. ------------------------------ From: asuvax!gtephx!bakerj@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Jon Baker) Subject: Re: GTE/HSN Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona Date: Thu, 11 Jun 1992 17:54:02 GMT In article , GLORIA.C.VALLE@gte.sprint. com writes: > Not to start another GTE bashing, but the problem with Home Shopping > Network and GTE Florida was HSN's problem. They came into an area > built a huge center for their company, but did not bother to let GTE > Florida know they were doing it and then called for service as if they > were just any residentual customer. Imagine a company that big coming > into a small town that is set up for local service. After the dust > settled the courts had ruled that HSN was at fault 100%. Actually, GTEFL notified HSN several times over the course of months (or years) that HSN was experiencing significant blocking of call attempts, due to an insufficient number of trunks and operators; HSN repeatedly did nothing about it. Obviously, they felt they were making enough money already so why spend the capital for more trunks/stations? As I recall the CO serving HSN had some sort of outage, silencing HSN's lines for a while. HSN sued GTEFL, with an outrageous projection of revenue they lost due to the outage. Their projection was apparently based on the number of people who they thought attempted to call HSN during the outage. GTEFL countered with historical data on how many calls actually would have gone through, based on HSN's capacity. Altogether, it seemed like one big pissing contest to me -- I mean, GTEFL had an outage which probably did cost HSN some revenue, but then HSN had a totally unrealistic estimate of how much was lost. I was very surprised by the verdict -- not only did HSN end up paying legal costs, but some top HSN executives had to pay punitive damages to GTE in addition. It was appealed, then settled out of court soon thereafter. What was reported in the media, is that GTE actually lost a little bit of money on the whole deal. HSN lost a lot of money. J.Baker !asuvax!gtephx!bakerj DISCLAIMER : I am not an official representative of anything. ------------------------------ From: Date: 12 JUN 92 20:30 Subject: Re: GTE-Bashing In TELECOM Digest V12 #429, rms@miles.miles.com (Rob Schultz) writes: > On a side note, when requesting my service, I asked what type of > switch I would be on. The rep went to find out, and came back with > the answer: GTS-5. I asked if this was a 5ESS or similar, and all she > could tell me was that it is GTE's latest and greatest switch. Can > anyone help identify this? Wow! When I casually asked the switch type, the GTE reps acted like I was asking for nuclear launch codes! (I also inquired about CO tours, and that really got them tensed up!) [A repair person did tell me GTE has all GTD-5s in the area.] Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com If mail bounces, forward to postmaster@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #472 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa00314; 13 Jun 92 11:01 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19810 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 09:10:43 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04851 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 09:10:33 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 09:10:33 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206131410.AA04851@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #473 TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Jun 92 09:10:35 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 473 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Telex Prefixes (Was About 'Area Code' 710) (A. Alan Toscano) Area Codes 610, 710: The Word From Bellcore (David Leibold) For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About Area Code 710 (K. Abrams) Virginia 52x COs (Carl P. Zwanzig) Wanted: Schematics For Connecting Phone to Workstation (Jack Jansen) Receiving Caller-ID Bursts Through Modem (ldcong@ukpr.uky.edu) Question on ISDN Equipment (Tom O) Cordless Privacy (Benjamin Ellsworth) Sprint's Current Stupid Ad (John Higdon) Odd Panel on 2500 Set Shells (Mike Gordon) Area Code 909 Announced (Brad Horak) Bell Canada Applies to Limit Nuisance Telemarketing Calls (David Leibold) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: atoscano@attmail.com Date: Sat Jun 13 08:04:58 GMT 1992 Subject: Telex Prefixes (Was: About 'Area Code' 710) In TELECOM Digest V12 #468, Paul Robinson writes: > If one is sending a telex from a Western Union account to another > telex number in the U.S. that is seven digits and is not on Western > Union's system, one connects to the number by dialing 710 and the 7 > digit number. I suspect Mr. Robinson is confusing "710" with "71" and "310." [Note: Western Union's TELEX business was acquired by AT&T in January, 1991.] The correct prefix for addressing an IRC (International Record Carrier, ie, non-AT&T) TELEX terminal, from the AT&T TELEX I network, is "71" with no zero. This prefix is also required when sending a TELEX message from TELEX I to AT&T Mail. From TELEX II (TWX), you may use "310" to reach an IRC TELEX. From AT&T Worldcom TELEX (formerly ITT Worldcom) terminals and from AT&T Mail, you don't use a prefix for IRC TELEX numbers. Instead, you insert a "0" (zero) prefix when addressing TELEX I, in order to distinguish TELEX I numbers from IRC TELEX numbers. Speaking of AT&T Mail, its users with TELEX numbers will be getting new TELEX numbers in the very near future. These TELEX numbers currently consist of the digits "15" followed by the corresponding seven-digit mailbox account number. Soon, the "15" will be replaced by "40." It is my understanding that when sending to one of the new "40" numbers (which are not yet in effect), no "71" prefix will be required from any of the AT&T TELEX networks. The current "15" numbers will continue to be supported for about three months after the new "40" numbers become available. I suppose this can be thought of as a permissive dialing period. A Alan Toscano Voice: +1 713 236 6616 AT&T Mail: atoscano CIS: 73300,217 ELN: 62306750 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 23:23:52 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: Area Codes 610, 710: The Word From Bellcore I have a copy of the Bellcore discussion paper on the future of the numbering plan (courtesy Carl Moore). In a covering letter to this document, Vice President - Operations Technology George C. Via makes this comment: "To meet the need for NPA codes we have the following resources available to us. After the recent assignment of NPA code 210 for relief of the 512 NPA in Texas, two traditional N0/1X codes (810 and 910) remain available. In addition, we are pursuing the return of codes 610 and 710 which were assigned in prior years for special purposes. 610 is used for TWX and ISDN in Canada, and 710 is used by the United States Government for national security purposes. We have made offers to both Canada and the United States Government to "trade" 610 and 710 for N00 codes, but neither party has responded yet to our offer. Finally, we have the five remaining N00 codes; but, as indicated above, the industry prefers that the N00 codes not be used as geographic NPA codes other than as a last resort. Either way we have a total of seven codes available to us." The subsequent paragraphs explain how Bellcore expects that advancing the interchangeable NPA date to 1 January 1995 (ahead from 1 July 1995) should enable things to squeak by, with only two codes expected to be put into service by then (ie. the 810 and 910, one of which will likely split the Detroit, Michigan area 313 NPA). Hopefully the above will provide some official insight as to what 610 and 710 are used for, among other things. dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ From: kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) Subject: For National Security Reasons, Stop Talking About Area Code 710 Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 19:37:06 GMT In article Tdarcos@mcimail.com writes: > In short, the 'Area Code' 710 is used for U.S. Telex numbers on > Western Union and for connection to some other carriers, and is not > being used as a 'Government Service' number. > [Moderator's Note: A Southwestern Bell person disagrees with you and > says it is in use for 'special government services'. In short, all that glitters is NOT gold. I assure you that 710 in the North American Numbering Plan "belongs" to the Federal Government and it's use IS related to national security and defense. I work for Illinois Bell and that's all I can tell you. It's even hard for US to get information on this subject when we have a need to know. I STRONGLY suggest that you squash public discussion of this subject least someone with loose lips might lose their job (or worse). In article Paul Robinson writes: > If anyone has heard of anyone, anywhere, using area code 710 for > anything other than telex numbers, please tell me about it! I've posted this here before; guess it's been long enough that Pat has forgotten. 710 is indeed assigned for "Government Special" use. It's actual function is highly classified. Doesn't surprise me that you couldn't get any information without a need to know. I respectfully suggest that you not pursue the matter any further, least someone from the Government might start asking YOU a lot of questions!! Ken Abrams nstar!pallas!kabra437 Springfield, IL kabra437@athenanet.com (voice) 217-753-7965 [Moderator's Note: Next question: And isn't it true that people with a 'need to know' and/or use it have a 'flag' on their line at the CO so that dialing 710-etc from their telephone will go through, while those without 'the need' (like most of us) get an intercept? Many years ago (like thirty years ago) in Chicago, dialing 920-any.last.four from a few misprogrammed COs connected to something known as 'Kankakee (IL) Emergency Defense'. 710 must be similar. Which of you Bell System men would like to follow in the example Randy Borow set for us? :) (Sir William Walton's 'Crown Imperial March' playing in the background -- no Wagner today!) ... several new Digest subscribers from .gov and .mil sites on line in recent days; welcome folks! PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 23:25:13 -0400 From: Carl P. Zwanzig Subject: Virginia 52x CO's Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) writes: > I made a call from a pay phone in Arlington (Rosslyn area exchanges) > on 703-527 via C&P, and I got 703-527 ALEX (short for Alexandria) on > my May 1992 phone bill for the From part of that call. I realize that > the DC area call guides show Arlington/Alexandria for the Arlington > and Alexandria exchanges in Virginia, but little noises like this make > it more difficult to map an exchange to a more specific area (in this > case, Arlington/Rosslyn). It used to be that all of the 52x exchanges in Virginia were served from the Irving Street office, which contained two 5ESS's (tm, of course). This caused me hassles whenever I ordered more lines for my employer, as we had hunt groups on both switches, and they usually assigned the new lines to the wrong switch. BTW, the cable plant in that area (at the time) was twisted splices, not crimped. Whenever a data line went out (we had about 400 copper pairs for data, and 400+ ringdown private lines), the test board would drop ring voltage on the pair for a few seconds, there by blowing the crud off of the splices. Eventually we got a small ring generator and did it ourselves. Carl Zwanzig zbang@digex.com ------------------------------ From: Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl (Jack Jansen) Subject: Wanted: Schematics For Connecting Phone to Workstation Date: 10 Jun 92 13:47:00 GMT Organization: CWI, Amsterdam I want to connect the a workstation (either SGI Indigo or Sun Sparcstation) to the phone system, but I'm having trouble finding schematics of how to do so in a reasonably safe manner. A circuit that has audio-in, audio-out, ringer-out and a phoneline connection would be ideal. Oh yeah, just to make things clear: I'm not looking for a modem, I want to talk through the workstation! Please reply by mail, as I don't read these newsgroups on a regular base. Jack Jansen Jack.Jansen@cwi.nl uunet!cwi.nl!jack ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 10:23:16 EST From: LDCONG@ukpr.uky.edu Subject: Receiving Caller-ID Bursts Through Modem I hope that I'm not bothering you but, I was wondering if you could send me some information on how to recieve Caller-ID bursts on my modem. I read the information that you have posted to the Net on it but, the information on how to rig the modem so that it would pick up the burst of information and not pick up the phone was omitted. Any information that you can send me would be helpful. Alex Moderator's Note: Our discussion here concluded that it would not work with a regular modem, as the tones are different. PAT] ------------------------------ From: toconnell@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU (TOM O) Subject: Question on ISDN Equipment Reply-To: toconnell@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU Organization: California State University, Chico Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 23:32:34 GMT Our office is currently shopping around for ISDN handsets. We have been told the only companies which manufacture ISDN sets which will work with a 5ESS are AT&T and Fujitsu. Can anyone confirm/dispute this? TOM O, CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, CHICO TOCONNELL@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU ------------------------------ From: ben@hpcvra.cv.hp.com (Benjamin Ellsworth) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 00:30:03 GMT Subject: Cordless Privacy Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, OR, USA It is my understanding that cordless phone conversations enjoy less legal protections than to cellular phone conversations with regard to privacy -- especially warrantless eavesdropping by government agencies. Could someone give me precise references for the status of eavesdropping on cordless phone conversations and a contrast with cellular phone conversations? Since I imagine that this is common knowledge in this forum, an e-mail response is preferred. Benjamin Ellsworth ben@cv.hp.com All relevant disclaimers apply. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 00:24 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Sprint's Current Stupid Ad As one who was raised in a home where much emphasis was placed on the importance of proper language usage and on the ability to communicate, I take exception to Sprint's latest ad pushing business aggregation. The one of which I speak is that where Candice Bergen asks an economist or some such to explain the advantages of Sprint's "Clout". He explains using fifty-cent words rather the usual TV kindergarten- level language of advertising. As he concludes he says, "Any questions, Candice?" "Just one Glen. Why don't you get a life?", Ms. Bergen responds. This is a major pressing of a hot button for me. People of this nation wonder why the educational level of the population is steadily declining. For one thing, it is still not "cool" to speak efficiently and succinctly, using a vocabulary appropriate to the communication task. All throughout schooling, those who use the language properly and effectively are ridiculed. We are a nation of peer-enforced slang. I had no idea how pervasive this problem was until many years ago during the time I was an owner of a sizeable telecommunications company. A fellow owner and some clients were in the conference room and I was attempting to explain the operation of one of our systems. In the course of the explanation I used the word, 'quiescent'. My associate immediately became agitated and said, "What the hell does that mean?" I answered using such terms as 'idle', 'at rest', etc. His rebuke, in front of all and sundry, was, "Then just say that and don't try to impress everyone with fancy words nobody knows the meaning of." I was shocked, but from that time forward I have made it a point to notice the communications skills of those around me. What I have seen is depressing and alarming. And then I remembered back to my school days where speaking the "King's English" would generally reap the reward of ostracism. But school is out now. And what do we find? Yet another commercial that ridicules the notion that anyone would strive for excellence and at the same time speak standard English. So someone who speaks properly and uses adult words needs to get a life? Get a clue! And Sprint receives the Noisy Raspberry Award from me for perpetuating this deplorable nonsense. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 03:53:11 CDT From: 99681084@uwwvax.uww.edu Subject: Odd Panel on 2500 Set Shells This one should rank up there with the cotton-in-handset question, but here goes: Why is there a small removable panel under the cradle of 2500 sets? The piece I'm referring to is a 2 x 1 1/2 inch three sided section that is attached on the inside of the case by a single screw. Other than making it easier to mount a ringer switch, I can't figure out why this piece is removable. Mike Gordon N9LOI 99681084@uwwvax.uww.edu ------------------------------ Subject: Area Code 909 Announced Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 10:06:46 -0700 From: Brad Horak From this month's Pacific*Bell bill: "AREA CODE SPLIT - 714-909 Effective November 14, 1992, Area Code 909 will be introduced to serve all Pacific Bell customers in Western and Central Riverside and San Bernardino counties, as well as a portion of Eastern Los Angeles County. There will be a nine-month period during which callers can use either area code to complete calls." Brad ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 19:09:14 EDT From: David Leibold Subject: Bell Canada Applies to Limit Nuisance Telemarketing Calls From {The Globe and Mail} (there's a strike at {The Toronto Star} :-(), comes news that Bell Canada has abandoned its plans to charge telemarketers per-call local measured service for autodialers/autoann- ouncers, due to pressure from telemarketing groups such as CDMA (Canadian Direct Marketing Association). Now, Bell wants to have a "do not call" mechanism in place whereby people who do not wish to be called by such telemarketers can be put on a list, and no telemarketer is to call them. CDMA has an existing hot list of subscribers who are not to be called, but this list is only effective with respect to CDMA members, and those groups which decide to purchase CDMA's hot list. Even so, a CDMA spokesperson said that those on the current hot list are receiving "fewer calls from CDMA members" as opposed to a complete stoppage of such calls. The Bell proposal would provide greater enforcement of such an exclusion list. The issue is now before the CRTC which will rule on this proposal; Bell expects the widespread hot list system to be implemented in about a year subject to regulatory approvals. The new proposal seems to be an acceptable solution to both Bell and the telemarketers. Meanwhile, Canadians wishing to get their names removed from telemarketing lists can write CDMA, 1 Concorde Gate, Suite 607, Don Mills, ON M3C 3N6 (i.e. the current exclusion list for CDMA members and other companies that decide to use this listing to exclude subscribers from telemarketing calls). dleibold@vm1.yorku.ca ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #473 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09370; 13 Jun 92 15:12 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29902 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 13:10:14 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11306 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 13:10:07 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 13:10:07 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206131810.AA11306@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #474 TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Jun 92 13:10:08 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 474 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson SNET/NYNEX in Suffolk; New Massachusetts Service (Douglas Scott Reuben) Calling Rates From Germany to the USA (Juergen Ziegler) International SS7 Links - Vendors Equipment (Jon Alperin) CRTC Approves Unitel Long Distance Bid (Andrew M. Dunn) The Strangest Payphone I've Ever Seen (Kim Fosbe) AT&T's Ten-Number Restricted Calling Card (Michael Ho) Wanted: DID Fax Modem (Direct Inward Dial) (Andy Davenport) 909 Area Code Announcement (ratphun@hale.cts.com) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 12-JUN-1992 01:40:22.56 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: SNET/NYNEX in Suffolk; New Massachusetts Service Recently, I posted on the inability of SNET/LINX in CT to deliver calls to the NYNEX/NY Suffolk County, Long Island system. I made some further inquiries with both SNET and NYNEX, and they claim to be aware of the problem, now. SNET noted I was only the second person to call and report the problem. Apparently, SNET was under the impression that the first person who reported the problem was having some difficulty with his phone (even though he could receive calls elsewhere just fine), and thus did not bother to check out to problem too thoroughly. Thus, after I reported it, and ignored the usual "It's your phone that's broken" argument from NYNEX, someone actually looked into it, and talked to SNET about the problem. SNET technical service states that it may be a few weeks before the problem is corrected, so expect call delivery to work in Suffolk by July or so. I personally find this disturbing (and all too common) -- if you don't spend a good deal of time in reporting a problem and know exactly who to talk to, cellular problems go unresolved. I find it particularly disturbing for cellular networking and roaming, which can tend to get somewhat complicated, thus discouraging people from reporting problems and having the cell co. take timely action to correct them. If I were responsible for network management at a cell co., I'd be sure to solicit customer feedback, even if only a small percentage of the calls turned out to be legitimate network problems. (Of course no cellular company has offered me a job yet! :) ) As to other networking related news about SNET and NYNEX, the Pittsfield, MA system is now connected to SNET's system, so calls are automatically delivered to NYNEX's (incredibly small and static prone :( ) service area in Pittsfield. The call delivery is the same as it is for the New York Metro area, that is, callers hear a message to hold on while your phone is being "located". On the cellular customer's end, he or she will notice that the phone is immediately queried (prior to the announcement to the calling party), and if the phone is busy in Pittsfield callers will get an immediate (CT-based or SNET-based) busy, and not have to wait for a busy from the remote/roam system as one does with FMR for the B's or Nationlink for the A's. Moreover, SNET told me that they were planning on adding most of the other NYNEX (and potentially a few BAMS) sites as well in the near future. I just noticed that NYNEX/Boston will query and return busy (but not ring/page) if I am in their service area of Boston, Eastern seacoast of New Hampshire, and Rhode Island (SID 00018). The same goes for the "Star Cellular" system of Maine (SID 00482/4), both of with are part of what is called the "New England Supersystem". I also noticed the same behavior in NYNEX/Orange County-Newberg, and BAMS/Western New Jersey. Thus: System: Call "Delivery" Features: NYNEX/NYC (00025) Full call delivery, SNET returns busy in CT if phone in busy in 00025. EXCEPT Suffolk County, which should deliver properly in a few weeks. At present, the phone is only queried and returns busy. FMR is not available in 00025. NYNEX/Pittsfield (?SID) Full call delivery, SNET returns busy in CT if phone is busy it Pittsfield. FMR available, but it will *not* work for SNET customer for some unknown reason - has been that way long before automatic call-delivery. NYNEX/Boston (00018) Phone is queried/interrogated by Boston switch, but no call-delivery. SNET returns a busy in CT if phone is busy in Boston/New Hampshire/Rhode Island. This is new in 00018; prior to last week none of this occurred, but Call-forwarding worked, which it no longer does. FMR available. Star Cell/Maine(00484) Phone is queried/interrogated in Portland and Bangor (00482). SNET returns a busy in CT if phone is busy in either system. BAMS/W. New Jersey Phone is queried/interrogated in north-western NJ. If phone is busy in NJ, SNET returns a busy in CT. That's basically where I've noticed this work. It is similar to the "curious call syndrome" for Motorolas, yet does not suffer from the infirmity of incorrectly returning a re-order when the remote roaming party can not be connected to the caller. Of course since most of the above (all?) use AT&T Autoplex switches, AT&T would never come up with a Motorola-type name as the "curious call syndrome", rather, find some acronym which requires three pages in a switch manual to explain. :) So Suffolk County should be fixed in a few weeks, and expect to see increased areas of call-delivery in the near future. If anyone notices this happening elsewhere, please let me know ... Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 13:35 From: UK84@DKAUNI2.BITNET Subject: Calling Rates From Germany to the USA Calling the USA and Canada used to be quite expensive until recently. On May 1st the Government operated telephone administration TELEKOM lowered their calling rates from Germany to the USA and Canada by 37 percent. Not bad indeed. Before that price reduction calling cards from AT&T and MCI used to be an inexpensive way to call the USA and Canada. With the current TELEKOM rates these cards are virtual obsolete. You have to call at least approximately 20-30 minutes to get a better rate. This is not interesting for most calls. While TELEKOM lowered its rates it is hard to understand why AT&T and MCI have not reduced their rates as well. The reason for this is very simple. AT&T/MCI do not have a single wire within Germany. So whenever I call the operator in the States AT&T and MCI have to pay for the toll-free call from Germany to the US the standard rates. On the other side AT&T and MCI receive charges from TELEKOM for carrying the call within their US networks to the dialed number. Same is true for the operators of the international links between Germany and the USA. If I consider that AT&T and MCI made no losses with their rates from Germany to the USA, this makes sense since both companies offered and do still offer their calling cards to German customers, then a rate reduction should have AN effect on their rate calculation. This effect is not as high as the 37 percent rate reduction, but their must be an effect, no doubt about this. But both companies have not reacted until now. As a result their cards are nice to have if you travel to the USA. But for calls to the USA you will no longer get a better rate than by direct dialed calls. The 37% rate reduction is fine for businesses since there is no night/weekend rate. So even after this reduction calls to the USA from Germany are still very expensive for private persons. So it would make sense to give private callers an incentive to call the USA at a reasonable rate. But so far there is no reaction. This reduction looks to me like a subsidize of business calls from the private caller, since private caller will get no discound at all. Any suggestions? Juergen ------------------------------ From: jona@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Jon Alperin) Subject: International SS7 Links - Vendors Equipment Reply-To: jona@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Jon Alperin) Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 15:12:58 GMT I am hoping someone out here can help ... I am trying to find vendors of telecom equipment that can be used to connect to International SS7 networks. I understand that the connections between network support systems and the SS7 network in Europe use associated signalling on channel 16 of a 2Mbit trung (CCITT Q.702), and that some other countries use quasi-associated signalling between transmit exchanges and stand-alone STP's (so all channels of a 2Mbit trunck can be used according to CCITT Q.511, Interface A). What I need is a vendor who can sell me the necessary equipment to connect a UNIX system to these SS7 networks. Here in the US, we can use V.35, RS-449, etc. to connect to the STP's, but I have been told that these will not work internationally. Since I am obviously over my head in understanding this stuff, any information, help, or pointers is greatly appreciated. Supercomm is coming up next week, and I would like to get a feeling for what I should be looking for. Thanks in advance. Jon Alperin Bell Communications Research Internet: j.alperin@cc.bellcore.com Voicenet: (908) 699-8674 UUNET: uunet!bcr!jona * All opinions and stupid questions are my own * ------------------------------ From: amdunn@mongrel.uucp (Andrew M. Dunn) Subject: CRTC Approves Unitel Long Distance Bid Organization: A. Dunn Systems Corporation, Kitchener, Canada Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 22:27:22 GMT The Canadian Radiotelevision and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), which regulates communications in Canada, announced today that it had approved a bid by Unitel (formerly CNCP Telecommuncations) and BCRL to provide alternative long-distance service. CRTC Chairman Keith Spicer announced the decision today. He said the move would provide additional options and economies to business users, but that effects on residential consumers should be minimal. He said the CRTC would closely monitor the situation to prevent the kinds of problems experienced during and after telephone deregulation in the United States. Unitel is a subsidiary of Rogers Communications, the telecom giant which operates cable television and cellular telephone services in major centres. It was formed when Canadian Pacific's outstanding share in what used to be CNCP Telecommuncations was purchased by Rogers several years ago. It had previously bid unsuccessfully to have the monopoly broken up. The monopoly on long distance services in Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia and the Atlantic provinces was held up to this point in time by Bell Canada, a subsidiary of BCE Inc. It is unclear how the ruling will affect Bell, particularly in view of their recently- announced move to shorten the timeline for upgrading all service to digital facilities. However, Bell is unlikely to be pleased with the CRTC ruling. Implementation details and reaction from BCE, Unitel, and BCRL can be expected on Monday. I'll post any updates or further information as it becomes available. Andy Dunn (amdunn@mongrel.uucp) ({uunet...}!xenitec!mongrel!amdunn) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 21:30:50 CST From: Kim.Fosbe@ivgate.omahug.org (Kim Fosbe) Subject: The Strangest Payphone I've Ever Seen Reply-To: kim.fosbe%drbbs@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha I'm not a telephone whiz like most of you, but I know a bit about what goes on. Today I saw the most totally strange payphone ever. If anybody's seen the movie "Brasil" it looked like it could be a prop out of it. It was in the waiting room at an employment agency. Oh, no, I'm not looking, we just do some work for them. Now if you can imagine the old desk telephone with the receiver sitting crosswise on top, not vertical at the side. Now imagine one about a foot tall. The phone was ENORMOUS. But it looked kind of like a regular old desk telephone. On the top right was a coin slot fit to a quarter. The instructions said to insert a quarter, then dial the number, and then press a green button when whoever you're calling answers. It had instructions for long distance and credit card, but there was a sign taped to the receiver that said "Local only, five minute limit". The front panel was professionally printed, the phone itself looked professionally made but just plain ugly. Oh, I didn't try it. I know it said local only but I've got a feeling you could call Outer Slobovia for a quarter if they weren't looking. Also, I don't remember seeing a coin return slot. Anybody ever seen one of those? I'll take a better look at it next week. Are these legal? With the breakup and such, can anyone just buy a payphone and sell telephone calls? Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1 DRBBS (1:285/666.0) [Moderator's Note: Yes, those phones are legal, and yes, anyone can sell phone service. A liquor store about a block from my house has one like you describe. The touch-tone buttons are 'smart'; they are limited to seven digits except for 1-800 calls; 011, 976, 900 and other three digit codes selected by the owner can be blocked. You press the button to open the mouthpiece (and thus forfeit your money). They're very inexpensive, yet profitable COCOTS. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 16:13 PDT From: mikeho@seeker.mystic.com (Michael Ho) Subject: AT&T's Ten-Number Restricted Calling Card I just called AT&T and ordered one of the ten-number restricted calling cards; because I live on the West Coast and many people who need to reach me are on the East Coast, I opted for the multi-number card so that they'd be able to call at home or at work. You have to choose the numbers up-front, but you can change them by calling AT&T customer service. (I don't know how long it takes to actually execute the change ... I *expect* that they can just punch the numbers into a big databank and change everything on the spot.) The card also is valid internationally -- at least it would be if I had not answered "No, thanks" to the AT&T rep's question. That, too, can be changed with a phone call. (I will need that feature eventually ... but I shudder to think of what the phone bill would be for a calling-card call through USA*Direct from across the pond.) This should be interesting. I don't know how they do it, but I'll have to play with it and see if it works properly. Michael Ho, Pleasant Hill 94523 Internet: mikeho@seeker.mystic.com UUCP: ...!seeker!mikeho R/O Capable on RIME (DISNEY/QMAIL/WRITERS): Michael Ho -> WOL ------------------------------ From: andy@cbrown.claremont.edu Subject: Wanted: DID Fax Modem (Direct Inward Dial) Organization: Harvey Mudd College Date: 12 Jun 92 22:53:50 PDT I am looking for an external (ie not a PC card) fax modem that will receive DID (Direct Inward Dial) signals from the TelCo or PBX. DID is the means to directly dial an "extension" on a PBX system. A PBX may have 4000 extensions but only 100 circuits coming in from the phone company. The phone company can reserve a block of numbers (e.g. 714-555-5000 through 714-555-5999) for you and route all calls placed to those numbers to any one of your 100 circuits that happens to be idle at the moment. But how do you (or your PBX) know which of the 1000 reserved numbers was actually dialed ???? The answer is DID and the TelCo does it [I think] by sending DTMF dialing tones representing the last four digits of the number that was originally dialed to your PBX on the selected circuit. OK but here is why I want a fax modem that does DID: I will reserve a block of 100 numbers (e.g. 714-555-34nn) with the phone company and tell them to route calls for those numbers to any one of five circuits into my facility. I put five DID fax modems on the five circuits. When an incoming fax is received, the modem not only captures it, but knows which of 100 numbers it was directed to. I can give a different fax number to each of 100 individuals or groups and still only use 5 phone lines and modems to receive. My fax software can direct the fax to the correct recipient. Any ideas? Thanks. Andy Davenport Harvey Mudd College ------------------------------ Subject: 909 Area Code Announcement From: ratphun@hale.cts.com (Rat) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 22:25:31 PDT Organization: Hale Telecommunications San Diego CA For quite a while I have heard the roumer that the 909 area code would be assigned to Southern California. Well, here is the official word ... May 1992 A Message to Our Residential Customers from GTE California New telephone numbers are growing scares in Southern California's 714 Area Code, so on November 14, 1992, GTE California, Pacific Bell and Contel will be splitting the 714 Area Code and adding a new area code - 909. The new 909 area will include the western and central portions of Riverside and San Bernadino counties, and eastern Los Angeles County. Although the new 909 Area Code will go into effect on November 14, 1992, there will be a nine-month interchangeable dialing period to assist you in makeing the transition. This period begins on November 14, 1992 and ends on August 14, 1993. Durring this time, calls from outside the new 909 Area Code will go through as currently dialed or by useing the new way - 1+909 and the number. You can also call numbers remaining in the 714 Area Code as you do now, or by useing the new way - 1+714 and the number. -Rat- ratphun@hale.cts.com. HALE TELECOMMUNICATIONS - Public Access Node, San Diego CA 619/660-6734 HST ratphun@hale.cts.com (Rat) 12-Jun-92 at 10:35p ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #474 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa11194; 13 Jun 92 15:57 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05568 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 14:07:57 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22250 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 14:07:49 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 14:07:49 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206131907.AA22250@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #475 TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Jun 92 14:07:50 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 475 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number (Bill Berbenich) Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number (Carl Moore) Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number (Chris Ambler) Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Randy Gellens) Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Ken Thompson) Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted (Holly B. Papaleonardos) Re: Volunteering For Interop (Thomas Eric Brunner) Re: Volunteering For Interop (Mark Allyn) Re: The Purpose of the Three Tones (Randy Gellens) Re: TDD For Portable Computer (Curtis E. Reid) Re: Avoiding Distribution of Your Calling Data (Jim Gottlieb) Re: Squabbling Over Country Codes (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number Date: Sat, 11 Jun 92 11:11:34 BST From: Bill Berbenich Reply-To: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu The telco made an error and they would naturally like to correct it. I certainly don't argue their option of changing a customer to a new number as they wish, provided it is not done frivolously or capriciously. Based upon what we read, if I were on the PSC/PUC I'd vote in support of C&P. C&P even went so far as to reimburse those customers who weren't so lucky as to have had an error made in their behalf. These customers who are crying the loudest, I wonder if they would feel the same if the situation was reversed. Let's suppose that the customer made some costly addition to his phone line when he initially ordered service, not realizing his mistake. Some years down the road, the customer audits his bill and finally realizes his mistake. The customer then calls C&P to try and correct "his" error, but is rebuffed and is told that he'll have to live with it until C&P dies or moves away. Things then clearly move away from something that is initially a mistake to someone trying to be exploitative and unreasonable. Based upon the circumstances of this, as we read it, I don't think the customers will prevail at the PSC/PUC. Bill ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 9:59:48 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number Notice that some customers did want Ellicott City numbers, and they are getting refunds of foreign-exchange charges if they should have gotten Ellicott City numbers in the first place. But others are furious at the prospect of having to pay long distance to, say, Silver Spring. I guess there is some benefit of the doubt to the customer when something like this happens? "That exchange [Columbia] ... allows customers to call the Washington suburbs [sic] of Silver Spring as well as the metropolitan Baltimore area without an extra charge." Not quite right; this local area in- cludes Baltimore city and Silver Spring, but not all of the Baltimore metropolitan area. This does NOT refer to Columbia (Ellicott City service, which includes all of metro Baltimore) or to Columbia (Laurel service, which is local to Washington but not to Baltimore city). Ellicott City is part of "Baltimore metro" and, as the article says, is not local to Silver Spring. This is in the 410 area, with local calls across area code border (such as from Columbia to Silver Spring) being NPA+7D. Until November, this is also in the 301 area, with local calls, say, from Columbia to Silver Spring still dialable as 7D. ------------------------------ From: cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu (The Squire, Phish) Subject: Re: C&P To Revoke Telephone Number Organization: Fantasy, Incorporated: Reality None of Our Business. Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 09:21:53 GMT On the front of all Pacific*Bell confirmation letters are the words: Pacific Bell does not guarantee the assignment or permenancy of any telephone number. I wonder if C&P has this same message on theirs ... cambler@zeus.calpoly.edu Fubar Systems BBS (805) 54-FUBAR 3/12/24, MNP5, 8N1 FSBBS 2/FSUUCP 1.3 [Moderator's Notee: All telcos state in their tariffs and usually somewhere in the phone book that the 'customer has no property rights in his telephone number, which the Company is free to change as needed in the conduct of its business ...' PAT] ------------------------------ From: Date: 13 JUN 92 01:09 Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) writes: > Last time I checked, this was dependent on whether you have call > waiting active. If you don't have it or turn it off (prepend 70# to > your phone number), this 'service' doesn't work. I have two GTE lines, one with call-forwarding/three-way calling and one without. The call-own-number-ringback works from both lines. We discussed this GTE feature a few months ago. Turns out to be in all GTE switches as an aid to party-line subscribers. GTE is known for having the highest rate of party-line subscribers, because of their lack of sufficient outside plant. It doesn't work from hunt groups, however. A friend of mine had GTE service with two lines in a hunt group. Calling the last number from itself resulted in a busy. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com If mail bounces, forward to postmaster@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ From: Ken Thompson Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted Date: 12 Jun 92 14:11:19 GMT Organization: NCR Corporation Wichita, KS edg@netcom.com (Ed Greenberg) writes: > Pacific Bell offers this too. it's called "Intercom Plus." There are > three ringback codes, *51, *52 and *53. They produce, respecti And is tone service required? (more $$ !) Ken Thompson N0ITL ncr Corp. Peripheral Products Division Disk Array Development 3718 N. Rock Road Wichita KS 67226 (316)636-8783 Ken.Thompson@wichitaks.ncr.com [Moderator's Note: Normally, '11' (pronounced 'eleven' by the way -- not 'one-one') can be substituted for * on a rotary dial or ten-button touch tone phone. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hpapaleo@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Holly B Papaleonardos) Subject: Re: Call Own Phone Back Number Wanted Organization: The Ohio State University Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 01:54:49 GMT Here in Columbus the ringback number is related to the dialing number. It is: 955-xxxx where xxxx are the last four numbers of your telephone number, as well. So that yyy-1234 would be: 955-1234 (by the way, this doesn't work to call *any* other phone number. It returns a busy.) After dialing, one hears a dial tone. This is not a useful dial tone, but can be used to test the accuracy of the phone's dialing pad. One dials the digits one through nine, then zero. If one makes a mistake, a hollow buzz is heard momentarily, but if correct, the buzz is heard twice. Flashing will result in a loss of dial tone, and in its place, the hollow buzz is heard continuously. If one flashes two or three times, and then hangs up the receiver, the phone will ring. The hollow buzz is heard once one answers. Sooner or later after hanging up a normal dial-tone will return. The tricky part lies in knowing how long and how many times to flash. I was once unable to stop for fifteen minutes. Eventually my sister discovered the method and made it stop ringing, which was convenient since we were at some ordering lobby in a Sears store, and at least a dozen people were staring at the phone-gone-mad. Incidentally, dialing the operator and asking her to "please test the bell on this phone" works in the US as well as the UK. hpapaleo@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu Alexi Papaleonardos NetworKING BBS: +1 614 868 4793 Delphi: WTHUNDER Eastside Conn.: +1 614 755 2492 ------------------------------ From: brunner@practic.com (Thomas Eric Brunner) Subject: Re: Volunteering for Interop Reply-To: practic!brunner@uunet.UU.NET (Thomas Eric Brunner) Organization: Practical Computing Inc., Sunnyvale Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1992 20:45:07 GMT In article allyn@netcom.com (Mark Allyn) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 446, Message 9 of 9 > I am interested in getting involved with the volunteer work parties > for next fall's Interop. Interop is the big computer networking show > that takes place in the bay area near San Francisco each fall. I > recently learned through an article in the USENIX journal that they > have volunteer work parties to put together the network for the show. I'll have to write the USENIX board and put a stop to this. > I would like to know if you know of anyone who has personally > participated in any of these work parties because I would like to talk > with someone personally about their experiences and how much they got > out of it. I co-designed and co-lead the 1988, 1989, 1990, and 1991 InterOp shows in the Santa Clara Hall, then in the San Jose Halls, along with a group of people known to InterOp as the "core team", known amongst ourselves as the "White Knight Group". Will you get anything out of it? Yes. Will InterOp treat you decently? Not as often as you might like in exchange for free labor and free scarce intellectual talent. Some of us in the group dropped InterOp when they a) caused Peter DeVries to leave in disgust, most of us dropped them when they b) placed an absolute #$%^&*@! in charge of the network, who more or less told us we were non-pro and owned our professional status to their good offices, some of us (only two of the old core) worked on the 1992 WDC show, and a few (less than 5) I think are planning to work on the 1992 SF show ... A common thread amongst ourselves was that we cared to much about sucess or failure to work on something we had dimminishing control over, and where information hiding at design-time appeared to be increassing. > I am in a paculiar situation. My company will not send me to Interop > on their nickle because of cost reductions. If I go, I would have to > take vacation time and make my own travel arrangements. I live in the > Seattle, Washington area and I understand all of the work parties are > in the San Francisco bay area. Therefore, any decision to get involved > would mean significent monitary and vacation time expense for me and > naturally I want to be reasonably sure that I will get something out > of it. Unless you are involved with the design, which is unlikely given that your company isn't sinking serious bucks into a technology demo group, you'll not get a lot out of it in terms of in-depth focus on a single technology, though you may get a lot of co-slave contacts which are useful. Basic fact, you'll be part of a cable-dragging team doing the physical effort of hanging pre-assembled cable bundles (ribs and spines), for the first days, then dogging about either router configuration work or booth connection/luser hand-holding work for the next few days, then either idle or operatationally (same as previous lines of work), then back to the cable-dragging at tear-down. I don't recommend this except to someone who wants the benies InterOp offers, or to a company trying to score enough brownie points to get a better booth location in the subsequent show (and these people are usually paid by their employer anyway). > If you are in the Seattle area, I can be reached on 2 meter ham > radio on the 145.33 repeater (I am WA1SEY). One or two of the old core, and several of our friends-and-relations in past shows have been hams. If you do work for Michael Thorenos at InterOp, do remember to say "OVER" a few times; some after considerable delay, it is part of a joke. > Thank you very much for your comments! You are welcome! > [Moderator's Note: Calling Ole Jacobson! Are you awake and reading > this? Get in touch with Mr. Allyn please. PAT] I suppose Ole will write saying this is all scribble-scrabble, that the #$%^&*@! has been replaced by Margo (which is a big improvement), and that InterOp values and so forth its good-will and the volunteers. Personally I think InterOp has lost much of its focus as a show, in part due to the Ziff-Davis management and the desire to take the show down-market and maximize profits. I also think they erred in dismissing the WK offer to build future shownets in exchange for a revenue position, as now none of us in the WK group really cares if the show continues to exist, except in the same marketing sense we care about NetWorld or other competing trade shows. Since we can't build the show, we're just vendors vending our little heart's away. FYI, we asked for the roof revenue (drop fees of 1.5 to 1.2K$, depending on the show), and offered to bear all costs, including volunteer compensation. InterOp has elected to act as if no offer was made by a non-existant group, and they may very well have made the best bottom-line choice; I've been wrong about lots of things before. I'm relieved that they've also canceled our tutorial, now Ron and I can re-do our materials without having a claim to copyright exist on InterOp's part, finish (or start) our book, and offer our course(s) at something a bit more attractive than 15% of the gate. Hi Ole! Lunch one of these fine days? #include Eric Brunner, Tule Network Services uunet!practic!brunner or practic!brunner@uunet.uu.net ------------------------------ From: allyn@netcom.com (Mark Allyn) Subject: Re: Volunteering For Interop Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 05:37:27 GMT Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Thanks Pat for your note at the end of my article on Interop volunteering. I contacted Ole and he helped me get steered in the right direction. I got ahold of the Interop folks and am going ahead with it. Thanks!! Mark [Moderator's Note: Write an article on your experience afterward. PAT] ------------------------------ From: Date: 13 JUN 92 00:54 Subject: Re: The Purpose of the Three Tones varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) writes: > if you want to play SITs when ANSWERING your telephone, you are free > to do so -- just expect most callers to hang up right away. Years ago (long before telco voice mail), my outgoing message had a SIT tone: " You have reached , at the tone, please record your message." It was all in Jane Barbie's voice (courtesy of Aspen), the woman who did most of the intercepts. It was amusing and all, but I couldn't be called from most COCOTS -- when they heard the SIT they disconnected and refunded the money. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com If mail bounces, forward to postmaster@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ Date: 13 Jun 1992 11:53:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Curtis E. Reid Subject: Re: TDD For Portable Computer In a message received on 10 Jun 1992, mgrant@fedeast.Sun.COM (Michael Grant) wrote to TELECOM Digest V12 #468: > Does anyone know of a small portable, preferably battery operated TDD > that could be connected to a portable computer to turn it into a TDD? > It would be nice to find something that was acoustically coupled. I don't believe I've heard of such a beast. There is a modem that will convert TDD to ASCII to your computer and vice versa. The only limitation with this kind of modem is that it is capable of supporting up to 300 baud since Baudot cannot handle more than 45.5 wpm. Also, this modem is most likely direct connect. Curtis E. Reid CER2520@ritvax.isc.rit.edu Rochester Institute of Technology/NTID REID@DECUS.org (DECUS) P.O. Box 9887 716.475.6089 TDD/TT 475.6895 Voice Rochester, NY 14623-0887 716.475.6500 Fax ------------------------------ From: jimmy@tokyo07.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: Re: Avoiding Distribution of Your Calling Data Date: 13 Jun 92 07:41:19 GMT Reply-To: jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Organization: Info Connections, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, Japan In article nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes: > I was a bit suprised to see that PacTel was giving out this > information, and called the business office. The business office > admitted that they are giving out that information. They informed me, > though, that I could stop all distribution of billing info to > marketeers by requesting the "Customer Proprietary Network > Information" option. No charge for this option was mentioned. A related practice of Pac*Bell's really gets me angry. Here's what they do. Every six months or year, each P*B business customer (I don't know about residence) gets a little questionaire in the mail for each account. The choices are: Pacific Bell can give out info on my account to: 1) Unregulated Pac*Bell businesses. 2) Any business that asks for it. 3) Information may not be given out to anybody. Guess what the default is if you don't return the ballot. Yup! It's number 1. Even if you have previously sent this in asking that no info be given out, if you don't return the next one they mail to you, you're back to number 1. Talk about an unfair advantage! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 10:24:27 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Squabbling Over Country Codes "Country code" is actually a misnomer when dealing with "1", which covers U.S., Canada, and many Caribbean points. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #475 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14146; 13 Jun 92 17:15 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26007 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 15:17:11 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10571 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 15:17:03 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 15:17:03 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206132017.AA10571@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #476 TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Jun 92 15:17:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 476 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: What is "SLC-96"? (Alan L. Varney) Re: What is "SLC-96"? (Jack Adams) Re: What is "SLC-96"? (Michael F. Eastman) Re: What is "SLC-96"? (Ken Abrams) Re: What is "SLC-96"? (David G. Lewis) Re: What is "SLC-96"? (Jon L. Gauthier) Re: What is "SLC-96"? (John Rice) Re: What is "SLC-96"? (Fred Wedemeier) Re: Voice Messaging User Interface Forum Standard (Mark Phaedrus) Why a California Telephone Number For Israel? (Carl Moore) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 15:07:26 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: What is "SLC-96"? Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article jeh@cmkrnl.com writes: > I would like confirmation from someone that an "SLC96" is "Subscriber > Loop Carrier" -- the scheme that allows telco to multiplex two phone > "numbers" onto a single pair. "SLC-96" is a product of my employer, that falls into the generic "digital loop carrier" category. You can make the "SLC" stand for - subscriber loop carrier or - subscriber line concentrator or - subscriber loop concentrator depending on application. "SLC" by itself has been in use for all of the above over the past 20 years, but "SLC-96" is a product name all by itself. It's kind of like asking what ITT stands for -- it stands for itself, even though it might have had another meaning at one time. That said, the SLC-96 can be both a carrier and a concentrator, but it doesn't multiplex two lines (or numbers) onto a single pair, it multiplexes 96 lines onto two or more T1 pairs. If there are four normal T1 pairs provisioned, then there is no concentration involved. Automatic backup to a spare T1 pair can also be provided. It handles one/two party lines with ANI, multi-party with selective/semi-selective ringing, regular coin and dial-tone-first, FX, DDS and a PBX interface. Remote access for testing (even the coin stuff) is built-in. Range is 50 miles or so, with T1 repeaters each 6000 feet or so. And there are newer offshoots for fiber support, including SLC Series 5 and SLC-2000. {SLC-96, SLC-2000 and SLC Series 5 are all Trademarks of AT&T itself or subunits of AT&T.} ------- Historical note follows -------- There are two forms of Loop Carriers, Analog and Digital. Analog loop carrier is the oldest, usually built according to the REA specs for rural area service. Single Channel analog puts a voice channel "above" a normal voice channel on a single pair. The Western Electric SLC-1 (yes, '1') used 28 kHz for one direction and 78 kHz in the other for the "added" line. About 18 kfeet, without help. Multi-Channel analog used tighter specs and a 144 kHz bandwidth to put 4 to 8 lines on a single pair. Actually, 6 was the upper limit of maintainable hardware/facilities (for example, the S6A). Economic prove-in only out 6 miles and beyond. No wonder eight-party was so popular! Much less hardware ... Digital loop carrier used to come in two flavors, a strictly one- for-one line-to-channel version ("carrier") and a version with concentration ("concentrator"). Western Electric (pre-SLC-96) had a version of each: SLC-40 used adaptive delta modulation to put 40 channels on a special T1-like four-wire circuit. No concentration, and a channel 41 provided alarm/maintenance/signaling. At up to ten miles, this could be powered from the CO! Repeaters would get 50 miles, but then remote power was needed ... SLM (Subscriber Loop Multiplexer) used a tiny cross-bar switch to concentrate up to 80 lines onto 24 channels of a T1-like line that originated and terminated at the CO end. This loop connected up to six SLM units of up to 40 lines (but total had to be 80 lines or less), using delta-modulation in the PCM samples {cheaper, easier to adjust A/D electronics}. Real, distributed switching, using T1 as a bus ... Both could handle one- or two-party with ANI, various four-party schemes and pre-pay coin lines. SLC-96 was based on the same technology as the Western Electric D4 channel bank, developed at the same time/place. There is a great issue of the {Bell System Technical Journal} devoted to D4, and if I ever find out who stole my copy, I'll ... but it's pretty old technology, compared to, say, the BCM32000(tm), which can take two DS1 streams and compress the active voice channels onto a single DS1 stream, with digital echo cancellation if needed. Al Varney - just MY opinion. [Moderator's Note: ITT stands for International Telephone and Telegraph Company, the bakers of Holsom Bread Products among other things. What do you stand for? Higdon says he won't stand for it at all. PAT] ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26546-adams) Subject: Re: What is "SLC-96"? Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 20:16:34 GMT In article , jeh@cmkrnl.com writes: > I would like confirmation from someone that an "SLC96" is "Subscriber > Loop Carrier" -- the scheme that allows telco to multiplex two phone > "numbers" onto a single pair. SLC-96 (I believe) is a trademark of AT&T. Fundamentally you are correct, but the capacity of the system is 96 subscriber loops. In some literature, you will find systems such as SLC-96 referred to as "pair gain" technology. The more generic term used by telephone companies (non-brand specific) is Universal Digital Loop Carrier, or UDLC. These systems, of which SLC-96 is a member, introduced in the 1970's, gives OTCs an economical alternative to deploying long feeder routes. The system consists primarily of a Central Office Terminal (COT), one or more DS1 spans (T-1 carrier), and a Remote Terminal (RT). The COT interface presented to the switch is identical to the metallic pair interface of a normal POTS loop. The COT performs encoding/decoding according to PCM principles and passes signaling and loop supervision as part of the DS-1 bit stream. At the other end the RT performs the inverse function to support the characteristics of a metallic subscriber loop. The newer Integrated Digital Loop Carrier (IDLC) is even more economical when used with digital switches such as AT&T's 5ESS(tm) or NTI's DMS-100. IDLC takes advantage of the fact that the switch fabric delivers signals in their digital format so that no codec functionality is required. Jack (John) Adams Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 18:07:00 EDT From: mfe@ihlpm.att.com (Michael F Eastman) Subject: Re: What is "SLC-96"? Organization: AT&T A SLC 96 unit uses two or four T1 lines + one switchable spare, to service 96 remote customer lines. At the remote end, the two or four T1 lines terminate at a channel back which demultiplexes each T1 into 24 channels. Each channel card handles either one line (if you had fully equipped the SLC with four T1 lines) or two lines (if the SLC only had 2 T1 lines), i.e., 4 X 24 2 X 48 = 96 lines. The "switchable" T1 allowed the operating company to havbe a spare T1, in case one of the active T1 lines was disabled. The spare T1 could be used for any of the active T1 lines. If you lost two or more T1 lines, the first T1 lost was the one that "got" the spare T1. This unit was designed for higher quality transmission when the CO was out of range for a two-wire customer line. Since I haven't done much work with these in the last six years, suffice it to say there have been upgrades in this technology; e.g., to expand the number of customer lines served, allowing ISDN on these remote customer lines, etc. Hope this helps. Mike Eastman att!ihlpm!mfe (708) 979-6569 AT&T Bell Laboratories Rm. 4F-328 Naperville, IL 60566 ------------------------------ From: kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) Subject: Re: What is "SLC-96"? Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 19:03:11 GMT In article jeh@cmkrnl.com writes: > I would like confirmation from someone that an "SLC96" is "Subscriber > Loop Carrier" -- the scheme that allows telco to multiplex two phone > "numbers" onto a single pair. Close. SLC stands for Subscriber Loop Carrier and the 96 stands for 96 "lines" per system. If memory serves me correctly, it muxes the 96 lines on 4 pair. Ken Abrams nstar!pallas!kabra437 Springfield, IL kabra437@athenanet.com (voice) 217-753-7965 ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: What is "SLC-96"? Organization: AT&T Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 13:29:21 GMT In article jeh@cmkrnl.com writes: > I would like confirmation from someone that an "SLC96" is "Subscriber > Loop Carrier" -- the scheme that allows telco to multiplex two phone > "numbers" onto a single pair. Well, partially correct. The abbreviation is right -- SLC does indeed stand for Subscriber Loop Carrier. The function is wrong, though -- a SLC-96 multiplexes 96 individual phone lines onto four DS1 carriers, or eight pairs. (A partially-equipped SLC-96, of course, can carry less lines on fewer DS1s, with 24 lines per DS1.) (To be correct, I should be writing "SLC-96 (TM) subscriber loop carrier system; SLC is a trademark of AT&T"... SLC-96 is AT&T's trade name for one of our digital loop carrier systems (DLCs).) DLCs are usually mounted in cabinets on poles or pads or in CEVs (Controlled Environment Vaults -- underground equipment bunkers, basically) -- they're not typically located on customer premises (at least, not residential customers). David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ From: exujlg@exu.ericsson.se (Jon L. Gauthier) Subject: Re: What is "SLC-96"? Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc. Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 14:10:25 GMT In article jeh@cmkrnl.com writes: > I would like confirmation from someone that an "SLC96" is "Subscriber > Loop Carrier" -- the scheme that allows telco to multiplex two phone > "numbers" onto a single pair. Nope! The SLC-96 multiplexes 96 subscribers (normally taking 96 twisted pairs) onto one, two or three (depending on the operating mode) digital T1 lines operating at 1.544 Mbps. Each T1 uses two twisted pairs. So you eliminate 22-90 pairs of wires. Doesn't sound like much, but when those subscribers are five or more miles out from the central office, that much copper can amount to a lot of money. Two-, Four- and multi-party lines are probably what you are thinking of. On two- party lines, the CO usually applies ringing voltage to the 'tip' side of a pair when ringing one customer, and on the 'ring' side when ringing the other. Four- and multi-party lines usually use harmonic or decimonic ringers (ringing voltage at different frequencies for each subscriber. Each telephone has a frequency selective ringer that only rings when a specific ringing frequency is applied). Regards, Jon L. Gauthier Ericsson Network Systems, Inc EXU/IS/TP Systems Programmer P.O. Box 833875 +1 214 997-0157 Richardson, TX 75083-3875 Disclaimer: "My opinions are my own - my employer would take the 5th on everything I say." Surely it's been said before!... [Moderator's Note: The phones which were not being rung selectively would still have a very slight vibration from the bell when *someone else* on the party line was being called. Snoopy old biddies wanting to know their neighbor's business would sit their phone instrument on or inside a galvanized washtub. The sound of the very slight 'ticks' from the phone when a party line neighbor was being called were made much louder when the washtub would vibrate also. Remember, these were the original desk phones; metal casing, no ringer adjustment, etc, circa 1915-25 but some in service in the 1960's. Hearing the rattles, the biddies would pick up the receiver to silently listen to the others talking. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: What is "SLC-96"? Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 13:35:54 GMT SLC-96 is a 96 channel Digital Concentrator. It is not a 'two channel' multiplexing scheme for a single pair. John Rice K9IJ "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was rice@ttd.teradyne.com MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially (708)-940-9000 - (work) Not my Employer's.... (708)-438-7011 - (home) Purveyor of Miracles,Magic and Sleight-of-hand ------------------------------ From: fcw@pioneer.telecom.ti.com (Fred Wedemeier) Subject: Re: What is "SLC-96"? Organization: TI Telecom Systems, Dallas Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 16:15:30 GMT To get all the details, order TR-TSY-000008 from Bellcore (1-800-521-CORE). To summarize: Each "shelf" of a SLC-96 multiplexes 24 subscriber pairs onto a T1 span. Four of these things are grouped into a channel bank (hence the 96: 24 * 4 ). The result is not just a D4 channel bank, since the T1 framing bit pattern is modified to form a data link between the channel bank (usually remoted from the CO) and corresponding equipment in the CO. This data link is used to send alarm info between the remote terminal and CO. A fifth T-span, called the "Protection" span can be provisioned to take over from one of the other four in case of some kind of failure: The indication to switch is given in the data link. Thus, fairly high availabiliy can be assured to each individual subscriber. The thing has another mode of operation in which 48 subscriber pairs can be concentrated into a single T1, or 96 subscribers onto two T1s. In this mode, the 25th subscriber to come off-hook gets blocked ... When a subscriber comes off hook, messages go back and forth between the remote unit and CO equipment. The equipment negotiates which T1 channel to use for the call, and optionally can test the channel to ensure that its working ok. When everything checks out ok, the audio path is established and the subscriber gets dial tone. Sort of the mirror image happens to terminate a call to a subscriber. This mode has a protection span as well. There's also a third mode that's used with pay phones, but I've not had the need to look into the details of how this mode works. Fred Wedemeier pho: 214-997-3213 fax: 214-997-3639 timsg: fcw inet: fcw@pioneer.telecom.ti.com ------------------------------ From: phaedrus@cs.washington.edu (Mark Phaedrus) Subject: Re: Voice Messaging User Interface Forum Standard Organization: University of Washington Computer Science Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 22:49:09 GMT Obviously, there's not much of a standard at work here, since my U.S. West voice messaging service uses keys almost completely different from the previous poster's: While listening to a message: After a message finishes: 1 2 3 1 2 3 Rewind* Pause/ Fast Resume Forward* 4 5 6 4 5 6 Slow Speed Replay Down Up 7 8 9 7 8 9 Normal Increase Erase Save Volume Volume * 0 # * 0 # Skip Quit Help Message *(For Rewind/Fast Forward, one press rewinds/advances the message by ten seconds; two presses moves to the start/end of the message.) Now that I see them laid out on the telephone keypad, I see why they don't do that in the instruction pamphlet; the key assignments look even less sensible this way. :) Mark Phaedrus, Computer Science Major, Univ. of Washington, Seattle, WA Work: phaedrus@cs.washington.edu Play: phaedrus@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 10:10:07 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Why a California Telephone Number For Israel? I noticed the following in TELECOM Digest: > Edwin Slonim, Intel Software Products, Haifa, Israel > 972-435-5910, fax +972-435-5674, voicemail 916 351-2005 I called the voicemail number and, sure enough, such California number had a recording which mentioned Haifa. Why the California number alongside the Israel telephone numbers? [Moderator's Note: Probably because so many good things have been said about telco service in California in this forum, he felt it was very important to have an FX line for his customer's convenience. :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #476 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa17056; 13 Jun 92 18:42 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08251 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 16:43:54 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA11761 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 16:43:45 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 16:43:45 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206132143.AA11761@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #477 TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Jun 92 16:43:35 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 477 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Steven S. Brack) Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Laird P. Broadfield) Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Bob Frankston) Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking (Alan L. Varney) Re: Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? (Jack Adams) Re: Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? (Alan L. Varney) Re: Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? Thanks to All (Jim Langridge) Re: Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? (Jon L. Gauthier) Re: Government Taking Inventions (Steve Forrette) Re: Government Taking Inventions (Mark Fulk) Re: Newly Dialable Points (Henry Mensch) Re: Newly Dialable Points (John R. Levine) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 13 Jun 1992 12:07:19 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking In article TELECOM Moderator noted what owens@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Christopher Owens) had written: > [Moderator's Note: Clever retort! Touche, and all that. Still, we live > with *70 as a toggle for one call only. Would you have it that *70 > turned off Call Waiting and something else turned Call Waiting back on > -- provided you did not forget? PAT] In the strictest sense of the term, *70 cannot be considered a toggle. After using *70 to cancel call waiting, hitting it again will not reenable call waiting, and, further, disconnecting the current call will return the status of the line to a known state. Additionally, having Call Waiting cancelled when you believe it to be activated, or vice-versa, will not have as great an effect as will giving your number (and hence name and address) to someone when you want, or need to maintain privacy. The question of feature interaction does arise. With Call Waiting and Three-Way Calling, can you use *70 as a true toggle? That is, can a person flash to get new dialtone, use *70 to cancel CW, then, later on, flash again, *70 again, and reenable Call Waiting? BTW, if someone would like to talk about the engineering aspects of feature interaction, I think that would make an interesting topic, especially with the number of features available, and the number of new features being introduced. I remember the good old days, when all a phone could do was make and take calls. *sigh* 8) ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 17:52:02 GMT In owens@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Christopher Owens) writes and TELECOM Moderator notes: >> [Moderator's Note: Next thing you know, we will be hearing complaints >> from people about *77 being a toggle. ...] > After a while, some combination of the incessant wailing of his > neighbor's burglar alarm and the Wagnerian Sturm und Drang > reverberating around his office began to wear on Townson's sanity. > Something finally snapped, and he adopted the bizzarre opinion that > toggles without feedback were acceptable user interface design. > [Moderator's Note: Clever retort! Touche, and all that. Still, we live > with *70 as a toggle for one call only. Would you have it that *70 > turned off Call Waiting and something else turned Call Waiting back on > -- provided you did not forget? PAT] Absolutely. (This topic has gone on far too long, but ...) at least with discrete on and off codes I can be *assured* that if I dial *yz then ID is (desired-state). Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ From: Bob_Frankston@frankston.com Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking Date: Fri 12 Jun 1992 09:29 -0400 I won't complain about the lack of a synthesized voice -- just the opposite. I want my computer (or modem) to be able to report back all information it finds be they stutter dialtones, SIT codes or simply bird calls, that have some meaning so I can handle it. Of course, in the world of ISDN there should be a full protocol, but until then, I'll have to settle for the "ear" of the modem. Hmm, since the voice messages are stylized ... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 07:45:59 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: More on Caller-ID Block-Blocking Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article psw@vibes.mitre.org (Phil Wherry) writes: > I'm a caller ID subscriber in the Virginia suburbs of Washington DC, > so I tried out the *77 caller ID block-blocking feature. It worked, > but it's not implemented as a toggle without feedback -- at least not > in my CO. The code *77 caused me to be routed to a recording which > said that anonymous call blocking was now on. A second invocation of > *77 yielded the same result. I tried *87, which gave me a recording > saying that anonymous call blocking was now off. > I wasn't able to exercise the feature further, since caller ID > blocking via *67 is not available in Virginia. I intend to find out > if/when this feature will be available in Virginia, and will let the > group know what I find out. The Bell Atlantic AVP that "demonstrated" the "blocked call" announcement in Chicago (by playing it back from a pocket recorder) stated he was in the same situation. He lives in Virginia, where the PUC says "no blocking", so he had to use *77 on his home telephone, then go to Maryland, where the PUC says "provide per-call blocking", dialed *67+home number and recorded the announcement. Note this is in the same LATA, with SS7-equipped COs. I wouldn't plan on *67 in Virginia any time soon. And for the record, Bell Atlantic states that they intend to "return supervision" on calls reaching the *77-induced announcement, which implies that you will be charged for those times when you forget/didn't-know to un-toggle a blocked line or dial *67 in error. Al Varney - just MY opinion. ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26546-adams) Subject: Re: Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 20:37:44 GMT In article , jlangri@relay.nswc. navy.mil writes: > I have been asked for a set of Erlang tables by someone in my office. > Can anyone tell me where to find them? Are they updated as time > passes? What ever anyone can tell me would help. The main one they > need is Erlang C. While the Bell System is no more, the book "Engineering and Operations in the Bell System" in its second edition (Probably third printing by now) exists and does a nice treatment of the Erlang Blocked Calls Delayed model (or Erlang C formula) and Blocked Call Cleared model (or Erlang B formula). I'm not sure whether the chapter on Traffic in which the Danish mathematician's landmark work is summarized contains any of the tables (My copy of the book is at work and I'm not!). They should be easy to locate in any engineering library and no, they are not *updated* periodically. Jack (John) Adams Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {JAQS VOICE} (908) 336-2871 {JAQS FAQS} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 16:22:12 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article jlangri@relay.nswc.navy.mil writes: > I have been asked for a set of Erlang tables by someone in my office. > Can anyone tell me where to find them? Are they updated as time > passes? What ever anyone can tell me would help. The main one they > need is Erlang C. For telecom background material of this type, I start with: "Engineering and Operations in the Bell System", AT&T CIC Select Code 500-478, ISBN 0-932764-04-5, Second Edition (1984). (The 1977 edition had some amazing historical stuff that did not survive to the second edition, however.) This book covered the history, theory and formulas associated with Erlang B and C, but no tables. So on to the old standby: "Reference Manual for Telecommunication Engineering", by Roger L. Freeman, Wiley (1984), ISBN 0-471-86753-5. In spite of the 1400+ pages being done by Wordstar(rg.tm) on a PC, you know this is a meaty book when the Erlang B tables start on page 15!!!. This is a wonderful collection of material from many sources, including GTE, AT&T and the ITU. Just looking at the various topic headings will make anyone realize just how much science and engineering went into making the telephone and telephone networks function. Just be sure to use the right Erlang tables, and read every one of Mr. Freeman's "Assumptions" to be sure they fit your usage. > "I wonder what kind of thread this could start???" Almost all telecom questions of a "where do I find information on" nature can be answered by walking to Dewey Decimal section 621.38 and 621.385 of a technical library (that's "TK-5102" if your library is a "congressional" one). Of course, PAT wouldn't have a lot to do then ... Al Varney - just MY opinion. ------------------------------ From: exujlg@exu.ericsson.se (Jon L. Gauthier) Subject: Re: Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc. Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 14:14:08 GMT In article jlangri@relay.nswc.navy.mil writes: > I have been asked for a set of Erlang tables by someone in my office. > Can anyone tell me where to find them? Are they updated as time > passes? What ever anyone can tell me would help. The main one they > need is Erlang C. > "I wonder what kind of thread this could start???" Any textbook on Telephony Traffic Engineering has them. Try "Digital Telephony" by John C. Bellamy, Wiley-Interscience ISBN 0-471-08089-6. Jon L. Gauthier Ericsson Network Systems, Inc EXU/IS/TP Systems Programmer P.O. Box 833875 +1 214 997-0157 Richardson, TX 75083-3875 Disclaimer: "My opinions are my own - my employer would take the 5th on everything I say." Surely it's been said before!... ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 09:32:29 edt From: jlangri@relay.nswc.navy.mil Subject: Re: Erlang Tables, What? Where? How? Thanks to All I would like to thank everyone who replied to my cry for help to find Erlang tables and formulas. NEVER underestimate the power and resources of the Digest, Let alone the NET. Below I am including (with the author's permission) a script that makes things easy. I received it from Martin Weiss as part of his response to my cry for help. Thanks again everyone. Jim Langridge jlangri@relay.nswc.navy.mil (703) 663-2137 ------------ #include /* The Erlang-C function can be computed using the Erlang-B. */ /* This Erlang-B implementation is recursive, so it doesn't */ /* require double precision numbers for large numbers of channels. */ /* Thus, this program quickly computes both functions. */ /* This program was written by Martin Weiss, University of Pittsburgh */ /* Pittsburgh PA 15260. Electronic mail: mbw@pitt.edu */ float B(c,a) int c; float a; { float blocking, b; if ( c > 0 ){ b = B(c - 1, a); /* one function call is better than two */ blocking = (a * b) / (((float) c) + (a * b)); /* compute */ return(blocking); } else { return(1.0); /* Stopping value: the blocking probability */ /* must be 1 when no channels exist. */ } } main() { int c; float a, b, C, rho; printf("\n%s", "Number of Channels: "); scanf("%d", &c); printf("%s", "Traffic (in erlangs): "); scanf("%f", &a); rho = a / ((float) c); /* This is the average channel utilization */ b = B(c,a); /* This is the blocking probability */ C = b / (1 - rho * ( 1 - b ) ); if ( C > 1.0) { /* The Erlang-C is not assymptotic */ C = 1.0; /* to 1, so truncate values > 1 */ } printf("\n\n%s %f \n", "The Erlang-B value is: ", b); printf("%s %f \n\n", "The Erlang-C value is: ", C); } ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Government Taking Inventions Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 21:02:29 GMT In article Banisar@washofc.cpsr.org (David A. Banisar) writes: > Under the Invention Secrecy Act, it is possible for the government to > step in and classify an invention and order the inventor to not > discuss it with anyone. This has occured many times in the last 40 > years, mostly for equipment that has cryptography. I personally know someone who this happened to. When in college (>10 years ago) there was some contest to create better encryption algorithms. He thought of one that was extremely hard to crack, so much so that some government types showed up (NSA or others) to talk to him and his professor. They were told not to publish the algorithm, nor to distribute it or talk about it, etc. (I think that what he found is pretty obsolete by today's standards.) Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com, I do not speak for my employer [Moderator's Note: I wonder if anyone who has experienced this demand that they remain silent about their work has ever forced the issue by demanding to be sued and have a judgment entered. That's what I would do: tell the Government to take a hike until/unless it were willing to sue me and have the whole thing -- secret invention/formula and all discussed in open court; after all, we still don't have secret trials in the USA -- everyone is invited to attend including the newspapers. Sometimes the Government won't sue because things would be discussed it would rather not talk about. And once I got the hint they were going to sue, I'd be chattering my head off to all the media until the moment they arrived to hand me legal service with a pre-trial restraining order attached ... and I'd probably appeal that before agreeing to obey it. PAT] ------------------------------ From: fulk@cs.rochester.edu (Mark Fulk) Subject: Re: Government Taking Inventions Organization: Computer Science Department University of Rochester Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 13:45:38 GMT In article David A. Banisar writes: > seventies (78, I believe) the government classified an invention > called ?the Phaserphone? which would have provided voice encryption This is right, although Phaserphone encryption was trivially breakable. > More recently, in 1986, the NSA tried to classify research done by > Adi Shamir at the Weitzman Institute in Israel. They backed down ^^^^^^^^ Weizmann > after this became public. I was at STOC '87 in New York when this was a big issue. Dana May Latch, the local arrangements chair, had to deal with a lot of the spooks. At one point in the conference, AFTER Shamir's talk, an exhausted Dana sat down with me to discuss the affair. According to her, it was not the NSA at all that was trying to classify Shamir's invention (a secure credit card) but rather the Army was. The NSA folks were on the side of the angels, trying to talk the Army out of it. Shamir's paper (with Ulrich Feige and Amos Fiat) appears on page 210 of the proceedings (ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, New York City, 1987; published by the ACM). > I'm sure there are many other instances where this has occured. Anyone > else have examples? I know of one non-cryptographic example, which I cannot discuss. For the record, I believe that the classification of THIS example is a good idea, although a dear relative should be being compensated for its use. Bye now -- Mark [Moderator's Note: Not to hassle you about it, but did a FEDERAL JUDGE ever enter an order saying you can't discuss it? That's all that counts; what the FBI/CIA/DOD wants in and of itself means nothing. PAT] ------------------------------ From: henry@ads.com (Henry Mensch) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 16:02:27 -0700 Subject: Re: Newly Dialable Points Reply-To: henry@ads.com John R. Levine wrote: > {Newsbytes} reports that AT&T says that as of June 15th, they will > offer direct dial service to these points: > Antarctica, Casey and Scott Bases I wonder what the country codes for these will be (for those who don't know, Antarctica is divvied up among several nations ...) # henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc. / ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Newly Dialable Points Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 19:44:24 EDT From: John R. Levine Henry Mensch wrote: >> Antarctica, Casey and Scott Bases > I wonder what the country codes for these will be (for those who don't > know, Antarctica is divvied up among > several nations ...) No need to wonder, I called AT&T's International Information Service, who told me that they'll both be using 672, the code for Australian External Territories, already used for Cocos, Norfolk, and Christmas Islands. In case you have friends way down south, here are the dial rates. The rates are unchanged from the operator assisted rates, but you don't have to pay for a person-to-person call if you don't want to. Period 1st min extra min 5P-11P 5.04 3.36 10A-5P 4.60 3.00 11P-10A 4.16 2.77 Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #477 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19412; 13 Jun 92 19:55 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05237 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 17:40:48 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00564 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 17:40:39 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 17:40:39 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206132240.AA00564@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #478 TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Jun 92 17:40:45 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 478 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Remaining Area Codes (Linc Madison) Re: Remaining Area Codes (Carl Moore) Re: Updated List of USA/Canadian Area Codes (Linc Madison) Re: Updated List of USA/Canadian Area Codes (Alan L. Varney) Re: Updated List of USA/Canadian Area Codes (Joshua Hosseinoff) Re: LATAs Crossing State Lines (George Mitchell) Re: LATAs Crossing State Lines (David Leibold) Re: Squabbling Over Country Codes (Bill Squire) Re: Leading 1's and Toll Calls (Carl Moore) "International" Phone Numbers? (D. V. Henkel-Wallace) New Notes for Georgia (Carl Moore) Re: Forbes on National Directories (Wolf Paul) Re: *69 Results in a Beating (James Hartman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 02:13:17 PDT From: linc@tongue1.Berkeley.EDU (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Remaining Area Codes Organization: University of California, Berkeley In article Michael M. O'Dorney (mmo2273@aw2.fsl.ca.boeing.com) writes: > Also, about three years ago, I heard a rumor that Nova Scotia would > lose the 902 area code and be absorbed into another area code (709 or > 506). Is this technically (enough available exchanges) or politically > (area code covering two provinces) possible? The 902 was to be given > to western Washington outside Seattle. Area Code 902 currently covers two provinces -- Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. It and 809 are the only examples in the NANP of area codes crossing state-level boundaries (states, provinces, or nations). (Well, I guess I should include 403 (Alberta) and 819 (Quebec) which include portions of the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories.) According to the original NANP list posted here a few months ago, 902 also originally included New Brunswick. So politically it is possible. As for the technical feasibility, I don't know for certain, but I'd doubt it. There are very likely duplicated prefixes; even if they could all be moved to new prefixes, it would be a shortsighted move to unsplit an area code that was split so long ago. In short, I highly doubt it. On the subject of area codes, I saw a batch of new SoCal directories from GTE-land the other day, all clearly marked 714/909. The area code map inside showed the 714/909, 512/210, 404/706, and 212/718 splits, but did not mention the 416/905 split. The number that the radio station announced that I mentioned in an earlier article, by the way, was for the Rainforest Action Network, 1-200-989-RAIN. They have now corrected the number to 1-800-989-RAIN, but I'm still curious why I get different behavior dialing 1-200-xxx-xxxx than, say, 1-500-xxx-xxxx. I don't know of any use of 200 for test purposes here in Pac*Bell land. Of course, I only think to try it at 2:15 a.m. and other weird times when no one would answer even if it were a real business number. Linc Madison (MASTER of Science, May 1992) == Linc@Tongue1.Berkeley.EDU Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are gospel truth. Period. ;-) [Moderator's Note: A good candidate for this splitting would be 401 in Rhode Island ... a very underused area code. Ditto 702 in Nevada, with many prefixes idle and unlikely to be used anytime soon. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 9:40:38 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Remaining Area Codes I had never before heard of Nova Scotia possibly being absorbed into another area code. 902 already covers Prince Edward Island, not just Nova Scotia. 206 area, where you (mmo2273@aw2.fsl.ca.boeing.com (Michael M. O'Dorney)) are located, has already had to prepare for N0X/N1X prefixes, so you have to dial 1+206+7D to call long distance within 206. There has been no word of a split of 206; information on splits gets disseminated rapidly here once it gets out. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 12:49:46 PDT From: linc@tongue1.Berkeley.EDU (Linc Madison) Subject: Re: Updated List of USA/Canadian Area Codes Organization: University of California, Berkeley In <06-11-92.1@eecs.nwu.edu> Paul Robinson (TDARCOS@MCIMAIL.COM): > Note 8. Reports are that the area code 909 will be assigned to Canada. > I am unable to confirm this at this time as the three major > interexchange carriers do not show it assigned for anything. This is incorrect. Area Code 909 has been assigned to southern California, roughly Riverside and San Bernadino Counties, effective in November 1992. Area Code 714 will be reduced to approximately coincide with Orange County, give or take a few edge effects. This information is all official and final, and folks in that area have now received their May 1992 phone books indicating Area Code 714/909. Linc Madison == Linc@Tongue1.Berkeley.EDU ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 16:56:13 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Updated List of USA/Canadian Area Codes Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL Paul Robinson wrote: > Recent reports indicate that most of the available unused area codes > will be used up within a few years. At least two area codes were made > available when Mexico was separated from the United States into an > international number. Some time could be gained by such methods as > moving area code 809 to an international code, and moving Canadian > provinces to international code. Paul, You are pretty free with the forced removal of Canada, etc. from World Zone 1. But the problem is that the USA does NOT "own" the NPAs assigned to Canada and the 809 area. And we won't exhaust before "interchangable" NPAs are available, according to Bellcore. > This might buy some time, but the obvious "solution" is to extend > area codes by making the middle digit of an area code be any number > from 0 through 9. This would add hundreds of new area codes but it > might mean having to dial 10 digits to call someone across the street, > as is currently the situation in the metropolitan area of Washington, > DC. The expanded NPAs are supposed to be supported throughout World Zone 1 by mid-1995. Before that, New York City is supposed to get NPA 917 as an "overlay" NPA code -- that is, it will geographically coincide with 212, and you will have to use 1 + 917-NXX-XXXX to reach such a number. Along with this method of preventing the further "splitting" of NPAs, Bellcore also recommends that: 1 + 10-digit be accepted everywhere, even for non-toll "local" calls, and the new "overlay" NPAs allow only 10-digit dialing (1+ would be permitted, but seven-digit dialing would not be allowed). Later, all areas would switch to ten-digit dialing (1+ would disappear, even as a "toll alerting" indication). Al Varney - just MY opinion. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 09:20 EST From: JOSHUA HOSSEINOFF Subject: Re: Updated List of USA/Canadian Area Codes You listed 917 as a New York area code, but my new NYNEX phone books have splattered on every page that the new area code for the Bronx will be 718 and not 917 as was mentioned before. I called 917-555-1212 and got NYTEL directory assistance so the area code is active. It looks like 212 will now be Manhattan and all NYC cellular phones and pagers. 718 will be the other boroughs of NYC. [Moderator's Note: 917 is for pagers and cellular phones in NYC. PAT] ------------------------------ From: george@tessi.uucp (George Mitchell) Subject: Re: LATAs Crossing State Lines Organization: Test Systems Strategies, Inc., Beaverton, Oregon Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 22:15:53 GMT Has anyone mentioned how appropriate it is that the LATA encom- passing area codes 508 and 617 is numbered 128? George Mitchell [Moderator's Note: No George, no one has mentioned that. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 1992 21:34:35 -0400 From: Dave Leibold Subject: Re: Latas Crossing State Lines From: de@moscom.com (David Esan): > Attached are all the LATAs in the NANP that I am aware of, and the > states and NPAs in which they are. The information is derived from > the BellCore V&H tape, but errors are generally my fault. I have > skipped the LATAs in the 809 area code. There is a second LATA in the Officially, LATA isn't really meaningful in Canada in a regulatory or telco sense as competition is not yet approved (though noises are being made about the Unitel/BCRL decision being a "few weeks away"). Perhaps the numbers are just for Bellcore to put something in their LATA number field for now ... > The format is LATA: NPA (State) > 840 :403 (AB) > 842 :604 (BC) > 844 :204 (MB) > 846 :506 (NB) > 848 :709 (NF) > 850 :403 (AB), 819 (PQ) This sounds like the "LATA" numbers are ordered according to provincial/territory alphabetical order: Alberta (840), British Columbia (842), Manitoba (844), New Brunswick (846), etc... 850 looks like the Northwest Territories which uses 403 (west end) and 819 (east end) ... not Alberta and Quebec as such. > 852 :902 (NS) > 854 :416 (ON), 519 (ON), 613 (ON), 705 (ON), 807 (ON) > 856 :902 (NS) 852, 856 are both in 902; if alphabetic order is assumed, the 856 would likely be Prince Edward Island (PE), while 852 is Nova Scotia (NS) > 858 :416 (ON), 418 (PQ), 514 (PQ), 519 (ON), 613 (ON), 819 (PQ) 858 sounds a bit weird with some Ontario and Quebec exchanges, but it seems to represent Quebec "LATA". But how they go listing 416 and 519 which are far from the Quebec border is a mystery. 613 is explained by the presence of Ottawa-Hull exchange and a bit of Ontario-Quebec border activity. Some explanation of the bizarre listing in 858 is still in order, however, as 854 already covers all of Ontario. > 860 :306 (SK) > 862 :403 (AB) Note that 840 and 862 are both 403; it's a good guess that 862 represents Yukon territory rather than Alberta as such (since Yukon bums NXXs off 403). Dave Leibold - via FidoNet node 1:250/98 INTERNET: Dave.Leibold@f730.n250.z1.FIDONET.ORG ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Squabbling Over Country Codes From: bill@hacktic.nl (Bill Squire) Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 19:19:41 WET/D Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes: > Does anybody happen to know what other countries (if any) are "unhappy > with the numbers assigned to them" and are lobbying the ITU for new > codes. Finland of course! They got 358 and think they are big enough for a two digit code. They were offering "big bucks" for the former DDR's 37, but since there are plenty of new countries they just are not likely to get it. Perhaps making 7 as a European code (including the part of the former USSR technically in Europe) will open upto nine two digit codes, or fewer two digit and alot more three digit codes. The Asian part of the former USSR could get codes with an 8. If these changes were made, Greenland and the Faroe Islands (CC 299 and 298 resp.) could get a real European code and not feel the stigma of a "2" code. Next: Subdividing the numbering zone "1", looks like a must soon, with area codes like 310, 510, etc. and now talk about N11 codes, its going to happen. Hawaii is already on a technical basis considered 18, Canada 11, everybody else ... anyone know? Bill ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 10:06:54 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Leading 1's and Toll Calls As you probably know, N0X/N1X prefixes (and the later change to NXX area codes) is forcing a change, in some areas, in the meaning of that leading 1. That leading 1, in such case, will have to mean "what follows is an area code"; if it is still to mean "toll call", then you'd have to dial 1+NPA+7D for long distance within your own area code, as is done in 301 (and 410) area in Maryland. 215 in Pa. had 1+7D for long distance within it, but most of that area has already gotten rid of it (exceptions at Denver and Adamstown, and they are noted in the history.of.area.splits file in the archives). ------------------------------ From: gumby@cygnus.com (D. V. Henkel-Wallace) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 16:50:30 EDT Subject: "International" Phone Numbers? A co-worker always writes phone numbers in the form +1 ABC DEF GHIJ. He says this is some sort of ISO standard for phone numbers ("+" followed by what it would take to call the number from outside the country, with the groups separated by spaces). Is this the case? Is there some standard, and if so is that a correct description? Thanks. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 11:19:53 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: New Notes For Georgia Changes to history.of.area.splits file affecting Georgia: I have changed the remark about long-distance within 912 from "optional in" to "also applies to", based on what I have seen in the December 1991 Greater Atlanta call guide. That same call guide, in discussing the 404/706 split, said that "It's been 38 years since Georgia added an Area Code." ------------------------------ From: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul) Subject: Re: Forbes on National Directories Reply-To: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf N. Paul) Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 13:09:08 GMT In article jongsma@esseye.si.com (Ken Jongsma) writes: > - PhoneDisk USA sells a national white pages listing for $1800. > Later this summer they expect to sell it via mail order for around > $200. The two CDs will contain 90 million listings, with addresses and > zipcodes. Listings will be encrypted such that reverse searches or > neighbor searchs will not be allowed, however wildcard searches based > on partial numbers will be allowed. (PhoneDisk is based in Bethesda, MD) So who's to stop anyone from running a script with lots of wildcard searches until on has obtained all of the data in plain text, which can then be used for ANY type of search? Sure it would take lots of disk space and CPU time but these are not that difficult to come by ... Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center wnp@rcvie.co.at Alcatel-Elin Research Center +43-1-391621-122 (w) Ruthnergasse 1-7 +43-1-391452 (fax) ------------------------------ Subject: Re: *69 Results in a Beating From: unkaphaed!phaedrus@cs.utexas.edu (James Hartman, Sysop) Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 23:05:51 GMT Organization: Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy TELECOM Moderator noted, in response to niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) who had written: > [Moderator's Note: Great. Something new to blame on telco. The only > thing wrong with your story is that *69 merely reconnects the parties; > unlike Caller-ID it does not say WHO is being connected. [...] There is a quick way to get a telephone number (at least in our area) if you have call return and call blocking. Just wait for someone to dial you, then add them to call blocking using the "last call" feature. Then ask call blocking to read you back your blocked list. It worked for me when I had continuous "hang ups" on my answering machine. I came home one day to a machine full of hangups. I blocked the "last call" and then tried to find out who was calling me. I finally found out that the number was a business; apparently, my number is close to something else important, or perhaps someone just likes my silly answering machine messages. Either way, I haven't had the hangup problem to the same degree since. phaedrus@unkaphaed.UUCP (James Hartman, Sysop) Unka Phaed's UUCP Thingy, (713) 943-2728 1200/2400/9600/14400 v.32bis/v.42bis [Moderator's Note: Good try. Close, but no cigar. In some (most?) places -- and definitly here in IBT-land -- the addition of 'last call received without knowing the number' to the Call Screening list results in a 'private entry' on the list when the list is read back. Here we punch in a code to add that call to the list, and thereafter the system refers to it as 'private entry' to protect the privacy of the unwanted caller I guess, since that is a Socially Responsible thing to do. And *69 does not read back numbers to us either. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #478 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21363; 13 Jun 92 20:43 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25043 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 18:39:42 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05652 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 13 Jun 1992 18:39:34 -0500 Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 18:39:34 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199206132339.AA05652@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #479 TELECOM Digest Sat, 13 Jun 92 18:39:33 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 479 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (Ken Abrams) Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare (Andrew C. Green) Re: AT&T's Ten-Number Restricted Calling Card (Steve Forrette) Re: AT&T Ship Sets Trans-Oceanic Cable Installation Record (David Lesher) Re: Ground Plane Cell Antenna (Ken Abrams) Re: Help in TV Remote Control History Needed (Bill Squire) Re: Influencing PUCs (Andrew M. Dunn) Re: Avoiding Distribution of Your Calling Data (Henry Mensch) Re: Forbes on National Directories (Wolf Paul) Re: What Causes Lack of Dial Tones? (Nick Sayer) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) Subject: Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 16:03:55 GMT In article Steve Forrette writes: > up in the records. Then they said that Pacific Bell could not > initiate a call to any IXC because of His Honor, and that Sprint would > have to call them. Back to Sprint, who said that they would waste no One of the unfortunate side effects of divestiture is that (in many cases) it forces the customer to become an arbitrator between the LEC and LD carrier but there is a point at which the customer's respon- sibility ends. The above statement from the PAC Bell "supervisor" is simply, totally and blatantly untrue. As Pat pointed out, the LECs can and do communicate with the carriers every hour of every day. This kind of situation is one where the LEC employee needs to be re-trained or demoted. A call (or threat of) to the executive offices or the PUC should have stratghtened this out rather quickly. If it hasn't been too long ago and you still have the person's name, an executive complaint might still be in order. It might help others in the future. Ken Abrams nstar!pallas!kabra437 Springfield, IL kabra437@athenanet.com (voice) 217-753-7965 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 09:57:04 CDT From: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Re: AT&T Billing Nightmare Our Moderator notes: > [Moderator's Note: I've found I can usually get messages from AT&T to > Illinois Bell by simply asking the one to fax a message to the other. > I've done this when there was a problem getting Reach Out installed on > my line (with IBT doing the billing for AT&T, etc). PAT] On the rare occasions when I find myself stuck in the middle of a finger-pointing dispute between two billing entities, I just use my Conference Calling feature. Call the first party, get them briefly up-to-speed on the dispute that we've been talking about, then ask them to hold for a moment. Call the second party, do the same for them, then punch the FLASH button and we're all together. After a moment or two of stunned silence, they can usually resolve their differences fairly quickly. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 [Moderator's Note: To paraphrase a writer from earlier today: So this requires three-way calling? That means extra $$ for telco! :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: AT&T's Ten-Number Restricted Calling Card Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sat, 13 Jun 1992 20:53:50 GMT In article mikeho@seeker.mystic.com (Michael Ho) writes: > I just called AT&T and ordered one of the ten-number restricted > calling cards; because I live on the West Coast and many people who > need to reach me are on the East Coast, I opted for the multi-number > card so that they'd be able to call at home or at work. > This should be interesting. I don't know how they do it, but I'll > have to play with it and see if it works properly. It does NOT work properly, at least here in Seattle. There is a security "hole" when dialing intra-LATA sequence calls. All of the AT&T handled calls restrict properly, but there's a problem with intra-LATA calls that US West handles (possibly other LECs have the same problem, but my impression is that some do it correctly). The problem is that the US West calling card system validates the card number only on the first call. So, you can call a number that's on the "okay" list for the resticted card, and as soon as you hear "thank you," hit #. Then, you can dial any other intra-LATA call, and it will go through. The US West calling card system is programmed such that since it just got a "valid" indication from AT&T a moment ago for this calling card number, that it most probably still is valid, so why bother checking? It is not aware that the "validness" may be affected by changes to the called number, even when the card number stays the same. Note that this may not be a problem for you -- if Pacific Bell handles this correctly (try it!), then you're okay. If all of the "okay" numbers are in Pacific Bell territory, then you're covered, as it would not be possible for someone in US West territory to get ANY call validated to that number, as the initial call to a number on the list would be inter-LATA, and therefore handled by AT&T, which does the right thing for sequence calls. I've reported this to AT&T, but they seem very dis-interested in the whole situation. Their attitude is "who would ever do that?" and "Well, you're giving the card to your friends or family members, and they wouldn't try to defraud you, right?" I of course then explain that if they could be trusted, I'd just have given them my unrestrited card in the first place. The whole point of the restricted card is that you give it to people who you *don't* trust. I finally got in touch with someone who was familiar with the problem, and said that they're working on it, but basically US West has to fix it in their calling card system, and it could take several months. Last time I checked, it was still broken (or should I say "working?" :-)) And, the bad charges do appear on your bill -- the AT&T computer doesn't disregard them as invalid calls. Perhaps they will get tired of me calling every month to get my test calls deleted from my bill and get it fixed one of these days. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: AT&T Ship Sets Trans-Oceanic Cable Installation Record Date: Sat, 13 Jun 92 17:31:26 EDT Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Lakeside Terrace I just talked to a guy whose son is a electrician on one of Ma's cable/fiber laying ships out of Baltimore. He's getting rich. They are working full tilt, and a new ship is under construction, too. They are headed out to install a {lightpipe, line, cable, fiber -- what DO we call it anymore ;-?} between NZ land and Hawaii, if I heard him correctly. Hope they leave room in that pipe for lots of NetNews ... wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu ------------------------------ From: kabra437@athenanet.com (Ken Abrams) Subject: Re: Ground Plane Cell Antenna Organization: Athenanet, Inc., Springfield, Illinois Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1992 16:37:57 GMT In article hpubvwa!tad@ssc.wa.com (Tad Cook) writes: > hayward@gargoyle.uchicago.edu (Peter Hayward) writes: >> I wish to turn an unused trunk mount cell antenna into a permanently >> mounted ground plane antenna to use on my house in rural Maine for the >> (quite often) times that the phone lines go out. What is the proper >> length for the radials? > there is really that much concern about having the best performance at > the rural site, buy one of those little cellular Yagis and aim it at > the nearest cell site. "Those little cellular Yagis" were not really designed for use with cellular phone service. Using one of them close to a major metro area (an area with more than one cell site), might cause real problems for the cellular switch since you might present a useable signal to more than one cell site. Use of any device that produces an effective radiated power that exceeds seven watts is technically illegal (ie prohibited by FCC regulations). Multiple cell site areas are even adversely affected by "rural" five db gain antennas when used in town. Ken Abrams nstar!pallas!kabra437 Springfield, IL kabra437@athenanet.com (voice) 217-753-7965 ------------------------------ From: bill@hacktic.nl (Bill Squire) Subject: Re: Help in TV Remote Control History Needed Date: 13 Jun 92 04:24:36 GMT Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine jguerrer@mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx writes: >> I have only received a few replies to my request for help >> in tracking down information on the history of remote >> control technology. > I've known that the first Remote Control Unit RCU for Television was > intended using sound at high frequency, over 20 KHz, so you can not > hear it. > The first functions were very simple. Turn on, Turn off, Volume Up, > and Volume Down. > The RCU transmitter was only an oscillator that runs on different > frequencies depending on the function requiered. The receiver was a > single tone detector, after high frecuency audio amplified an > aconditioned. I hope it'll be helpfull. Sorry if you have ran across > it. An old RCA TV my grandparents purchased in the sixties used a mechanical clicker that actually struck one of three tuning forks: volume up, volume down ... off and change channel one of 12 (VHF only) and standby. As kids we discovered several ways to fake it out: a toy xlyophone, opening a certain curtain, sometimes even a toilet flush or running water at the right rate. Being only four or five, I could actually hear the notes if I clicked it in my ear. The controls were all motor driven (true, some people like this sixties hightech today) and the "off" was some mechanical thing that pulled in on the volume control. The set was 100% tube if I remember right. Don't know the model number, but I saw one recently on CNN on one of their :55 past the hour stories. It was a "great mystery" in some Midwest trailer park how this toy piano acted as a strange remote for the TV and shure enough it was a similar model to my grandparents ... this whole thing really brings back some nice memories! As a brief historical technical perspective I'll present this. The first remotes were just a phototube and a relay, where the u