Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08127; 22 Aug 92 23:20 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29519 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:22:13 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA10444 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:22:02 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:22:02 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208230222.AA10444@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #651 TELECOM Digest Sat, 22 Aug 92 21:22:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 651 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (John Higdon) Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (David Lesher) Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (William J. Vajk) Re: Telephone Company Tone Service Charges (Leonard Erickson) Re: Internet Access in Italy (Bill Pfeiffer) Re: My Email Address (Warren Burstein) That Email Address (Jerry Leichter) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 23:32 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies On Aug 21 at 22:51, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: Well, I work for a living also, but I don't know > anyone who is really worth all they get paid. But with inflation and > economic conditions as bad as they are right now, how could we work > for less? Allegedly, an employer hires an individual with the expectation that he/she will produce more value for the company than that person is paid in wages. In this day and age, the employer also has to factor in taxes, regulations, benefits, and other perks in the total expenditure. If the person is NOT worth MORE than he is being paid, then the employer is a fool. I ought to know; I have been in that position (employer/fool). But I did take exception to the comment about "corporate welfare". As an independent contractor/consultant, I have absolutely no W2 income. All of my sustinence is derived from what can best be described as "odd jobs". This tends to preclude "just sitting back drawing a paycheck". While I collect money from some big corporations, those checks are written for services rendered and if the service was not satisfactory or beneficial, I would not expect any repeat business. If I charge a company $1000 for a project which ends up saving thousands of dollars a month, then I certainly consider my services worth what I am being paid. As an employer, I came across many who had no concept of the value of their work. Their standard for wages was how much they needed a month to live on. I had a salesperson who in four months managed to sell not one dollar's worth of equipment. This was after training classes, sales classes, and other seminars (all provided at my expense) and a considerable amount of personal help from other successful salespeople. The unpleasant day came when she had to be told that we could no longer continue her draw. Her response? "I have been at my desk every morning at 8 AM sharp. I have stayed until 5 PM every day with only a 30 minute lunch. I have a family to support and rent to pay. How can you be so insensitive?" Yes, I am happy that many companies have hired my services over the years. But I am not "grateful" to them; we had a business relationship where value was exchanged for value. They did not "give" me any money. They did not "feed" me. I did that myself by exchanging something I had (expertise) for something they had (money). I would hope that those in the job marketplace keep that in mind, particularly in these recessionary times. As long as an employee is of value to the employer, he will not be laid off. And whose responsibility is it to make sure the employee's services remain of value? I leave that as an exercise for those who have figured out how to keep their jobs. This has a counterpart in the discussion of monopolies. When a company is assured business because of regulation, its incentive toward maintaining efficiency and value is diminished. If its fortunes are dependent on the quality of the job done, then the quality and value remain maximized. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: David Lesher Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 8:11:48 EDT Reply-To: wb8foz@skybridge.scl.cwru.edu (David Lesher) Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers - Beltway Annex PAT said: > I meant those monopolies which got that way through the hard work, > effort and brains of the company founder, and which continue to remain > a monopoly despite *completely obeying the law*. In other words, I > supported AT&T intact before the breakup and Standard Oil before it > was divested at the turn of the century. I do not support gangsters > who maintain a 'monopoly' by force, threats and violence. I *REALLY* had to choke on this PAT example. IMHO, Old Man Rockefeller invented the concept of Monopoly by Force. You sold his gasoline at your store, or else bad things happened. He was infamous for his treatment of employees, too. A late friend related the story of his uncles, who worked for John D. long before Sherman. They were pipeline walkers. In other words, they started at one end of, say, one hundred miles of pileline, and hiked to the other end, looking for leaks. {Now, this is done weekly by air.} They stayed at houses enroute. A trip took many days, of course. Then they started over. [And you thought YOUR job was boring ...] Well, they did this for decades. Then one day, just when they were reaching pension age, they were fired. Period. The excuse was there was a leak at the other end, and if they had really been there a few weeks before, they'd have seen it. [Of course, there was NO chance it had started leaking SINCE then, was there?] So clearly, they were not doing their job. This was, of course, far before Social Security. They died penniless. The easements for many of those lines are, ahem, interesting also. One of the ones I worked on was built in a big rush during WWII. (This was post-breakup, but old habits die hard.) Of course, there was no problem getting the farmers to sign, as the pipeline was part of The War Effort. While I never read them myself, the foreman who had to knock on the doors told me the important parts were: 99 year duration $1.00 rent {the kicker} If the line EVER needed to be moved, the landowner paid. This last one meant, for example, when a city wanted to build a park, they ended up spending bucho bucks, and I don't mean on trees and benches. So Mr. PAT, I submit that Standard OIl is a pretty poor example. Do you have another one, perhaps? wb8foz@skybridge.scl.edu [Moderator's Note: The examples you gave are anecdotal at best. Can you supply any actual names, dates, or places for these events? And if those things occurred, are the circumstances truly as you have described them? Now let us consider some things that John Rockefeller did do which are plainly evident today. He gave the original endowment to start the University of Chicago. He continued to give huge sums of money to the University until his death and UC today, a century later is still using the interest on Rockefeller's gifts, having not touched most of the principal in many years. During his lifetime he was the patron of one of America's best known liberal reformers and thinkers of this century: Harry Emerson Fosdick and his Riverside Church in New York City. He endowed Rockefeller Memorial Chapel here in Chicago. Standard Oil in Chicago continues to give large gifts to needy organizations, and Exxon is a substantial corporate sponsor to National Public Broadcasting. JDR was okay. I've got a rare photo of him walking with William Rainey Harper (first president of UC) along 59th Street in Chicago, circa 1893. I'd love to have met him. PAT] ------------------------------ From: learn@speedy.acns.nwu.edu (William J. Vajk) Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 12:42:58 GMT > [Moderator's Note: By 'legal, lawfully maintained monopolies', I did > NOT mean monopolies started by or protected by the government. I meant > those monopolies which got that way through the hard work, effort and > brains of the company founder, and which continue to remain a monopoly > despite *completely obeying the law*. In other words, I supported AT&T > intact before the breakup and Standard Oil before it was divested at > the turn of the century. I do not support gangsters who maintain a > 'monopoly' by force, threats and violence. I agree, the free market > should be the only consideration. PAT] Then you fail to understand the essential nature of the beast. Rockefeller was removed from the state of Texas under court edict that he never return under penalty of death. The same court mandated that Standard Oil never ever be permitted to do business in the state of Texas again. Thus it was that Humble Oil, the longtime holding company for ESSO (now known as EXXON) did business in Texas. Even the name change in the 1960's from ESSO to EXXON was part of the remaining business of the Standard Oil divestiture as both the Standard Oil of New Jersey (Eastern Shore Standard Oil) as well as Standard Oil of Indiana (AMOCO) insisted that they had a right to the Standard Oil name. What you REALLY fail to understand, Pat, is that your statement above equates to saying you support bullies so long as they don't maintain being a bully by force, threats, or violence. Big business invariably becomes big through the very means which you decry. Each of the oldtime largest corporations in this country grew using underhanded means, and has been steadily shrinking since we, as a nation, have taken care that our businessmen remain businessmen, no longer accepting thuggishness as an ordinary business tactic. The railroads have shrunk to the competition from airlines and trucks. AT&T is shrinking and is headed for demise based on their internal failures to become efficient in a competitive marketplace (it will take quite a while ... they have so much money and momentum.) There was a time when Standard Oil (meaning EXXON) was in contention for the world's largest corporation. There was a time when RCA was thought to be untouchable (yet has been "raided".) Each of these three firms, in their heyday of growth, had a propensity to resolve issues in some rather "not so very nice" ways. But in those times, judges were more understanding, and many of our modern day laws to prevent corporate activities of questional moral and ethical value were not in place. Corporate shields protected individuals from responsibility for their actions. Either one accepts the modern view that robber barons did bad things which would probably make them into ordinary criminals today, or one suports the sort of actions which built what was euphamisticaly called "a natural monopoly" by those quite willing to rape the economy and the public at large. What's wrong with the implication that a clever businessman can improve his firm's standing by cleverness is that there are plenty of other clever businessmen out there, all ready to jump in and take part of the pie. The only thing which permits untoward growth by one to the exclusion of others in any marketplace is the exclusion of others by some means. My personal conclusion, in concert with many other people I've discussed this with over the years, is that some underhanded tactic, perhaps chargable though undetected, is at work in all cases where one company completely outdistances all others in a given business segment. "Natural monopolies" simply aren't. Bill Vajk [Moderator's Note: How curious to see you are still reading the Digest, Bill. I thought you had given up on me long ago. PAT] ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Telephone Company Tone Service Charges Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 17:11:51 GMT David Sangurima writes: > I'm curious about the touch-tone monthly service charges that telcos > apply to most of their users. Is it necessary to request the tone > service or is this some abuse on the part of the telcos? In Washington and Oregon, you had to specifically *request* touch-tone. A few years ago US West filed to drop the charge and make touch tone service universal on their lines in Oregon. I believe they did something similar in Washington. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: wdp@gagme.chi.il.us (Bill Pfeiffer) Subject: Re: Internet Access in Italy Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 17:35:35 CDT In a recent Telecom Digest alfredo@quickt2.it12.bull.it (Alfredo Cotroneo) writes: > Does anybody know how to get possibly_free Internet (email, news, > ftp, etc.) access via dialup lines from Italy? (or from any other > location in Europe? e.g. Germany, Switzerland, ...) Since you requested the Internet Radio Journal from me, a month ago, every attempt at e-mail to you has bounced. I am only using this forum because all else has failed. If you have a diferent address, write to me at wdp@airwaves.chi.il.us and I will start sending your Broadcasting digests. William Pfeiffer Moderator - rec.radio.broadcasting - Internet Radio Journal ------------------------------ From: warren@worlds.COM (Warren Burstein) Subject: Re: My Email Address Date: 22 Aug 92 17:02:44 GMT Reply-To: warren@nysernet.org Organization: WorldWide Software Bryan King writes about his email address that comes out of DEC MAILworks. I'd like to point out that in addition to the very strange address which many mailers are not willing to even consider sending to, there is another problem with this mailer, or at least many installations of it. Notice how his article starts: >From: NAME: BRYAN P. KING / VSS-SPE SYSTEM MANAGEMENT > TEL: DTN: 293-5677 > ADDR: BXB1-1/J11 (BOXBORO) and the text of his letter follows: Now to a human who normally scans thru a page of mail headers before getting to the article that's no problem. To one who has a mailer that ignores certain header lines, it's still not so bad to see three more. But to the UNIX Listserv program (one of which I happen to be the keeper of, on nysernet.org), it matters that messages like this have a blank line between the end of the header and the "From: NAME:..." line. This blank line means that these three lines aren't part of the header, they're part of the message itself. So someone who sends a one line message to listserv@nysernet.org saying INDEX or HELP has actually sent a five line message. Since the entire body gets fed into the command parser, and since there doesn't happen to be a command called "From", the user gets back a message saying "Invalid command: FROM - the rest of your commands have been discarded" and gets very confused. I think that there may some way to convince this mailer to refrain from inserting these lines. I've noticed that people who I correspond with about these problems tend not to be mail gurus, and I've never gotten a definitive answer on whether it can be worked around, or how. The users usually ask if I could manually add them to the listserv. I usually decline, on the basis that I don't want to discourage them from complaining until this gets fixed (and thereby have to manually process their commands forever). Someone may ask, why doesn't the listserv just go on reading lines when it finds one it doesn't like? The answer is that I've gotten letters, in human language, of several pages, sent to the listserv instead of to one of the lists that it manages. > If people send me mail via king@msbcs.enet.dec.com it will still get > to me as I have forwarding set on VAXmail. Wouldn't everyone's life be so much easier if this mailer just put out this nice address rather than the mess of colons? warren@nysernet.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 10:54:42 EDT From: Jerry Leichter Subject: That Email Address There've been several totally confused postings on the issue of Mr. King's Email address. Some facts; these all refer to DECnet Phase IV, which is in use today and has been for something like ten years. 1. DECnet address syntax uses "node::" as a prefix. This syntax is used in many places, not just mail - access to the network is built into the file system, so you can refer to a remote file as NODE::THAT.FILE. 2. In general, just as in TCP/IP, you can refer to any node from anywhere. That is, you just use "node::" from any node on the network. The mechanism used is like the old HOSTS. table; it is possible to set up a machine that doesn't know everyone's name. This was common in the old days when machines were small. To get around this, you can, in most cases (it depends on the network service involved) use "poor man's routing", a holdover from DECnet Phase II: You use a syntax like "node1::node2::something". What this really does is just send "node2::something" off to node1; you hope it knows who node2 is. (There is another reason to do this which I'll come back to later.) 3. DEC's Enet actually supports two different mail systems over the same physical network. a. MAIL-11, also known as VAXMAIL, comes standard with VMS. Addresses are just user login names. To get to PERSON on node THERE, you send mail to THERE::PERSON. MAIL-11 supports poor man's routing; the return address will show the entire route (which may or may not be needed to get back). You have to know the node someone has an account on, and their login name (which might not be their English name), to send them mail. b. ALL-IN-1 MAIL (which also goes under other names these days) can be set up in many ways. On DEC's Enet, it is set up so that addresses have the form "English.Name@Location", where Location is a three- letter site code, the same one used for sending intra-company mail. Engineers use VAX MAIL; managers use ALL-IN-1 MAIL. (These are broad generalizations.) VAX MAIL and ALL-IN-1 MAIL are about as closely related as UUCP-based mail and SMTP-based mail. Exactly as for UUCP vs. SMTP, there are various gateways provided that connect the two systems. Exactly as for stuff that crosses the UUCP/SMTP boundary, the return addresses can get very convoluted, and they can sometimes be unusable. There are also gateways that connect VAX MAIL to Internet mail. Needless to say, messages that have crossed through BOTH an ALL-IN-1 MAIL to VAX MAIL gateway, AND a VAX MAIL to Internet mail gateway, are even more likely to have strange-looking addresses. 4. Just to add to the confusion, DECnet Phase IV has run over its design limit of about 65,000 distinct nodes. (Keep in mind that 32-bit IP addresses are becoming a limiting factor, too, and that DECnet Phase IV pre-dates TCP/IP.) This gets worked around by a hack: Some node numbers, by convention, are reserved for "hidden areas", and never propagated network-wide. (This is done by abusing some of the software.) Since a hidden node H can't be seen directly, it always has to be reached by poor man's routing through some gateway node G, as G::H::. Many individual workstations are set up this way. As far as I know, you never have to pass through two gateways - there are no "doubly hidden" nodes. Since G is usually a "well known" node at the site where H lives, the difference between G::H:: and the Internet @H.G is more apparent than real. Jerry ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #651 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09877; 23 Aug 92 0:17 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12507 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:26:28 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18577 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:26:20 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:26:20 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208230326.AA18577@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #652 TELECOM Digest Sat, 22 Aug 92 22:26:20 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 652 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: CPSR and Class: Rebuttal to Forrette, Harrell and Higdon (John Higdon) Re: Switching Systems (John Higdon) Re: Cellular Telephone Eavesdropping Scandal in Minnesota (Scott Dorsey) Re: No Information For 900 Numbers (Steven S. Brack) Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem (Steven L. Johnson) Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards (David R. Zinkin) Re: 710 and ABCD? (Keith Furrow) Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool (Michael A. Covington) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Paul A. Valin) Re: Pounding on an Octathorp (erik@pdnfido.fidonet.org) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Michael A. Covington) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Dave Niebuhr) Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Alan L. Varney) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 11:02 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: CPSR and Class: Rebuttal to Forrette, Harrell and Higdon gast@CS.UCLA.EDU (David Gast) writes: > Suppose that were many local loop providers instead of just one. In > that marketplace, I would go with the one who promises not to use SS7, > and not to implement CNID. Since I don't have choice, I favor a > regulatory requirement. I believe this sums up your entire rebuttal. I do not wish to put words in your mouth, but what you seem to say is that you, personally, do not like this particular telecommunications advancement (SS7 and CLASS). Therefore, you do not want any part of it. Since it is integrated into the network, you are forced to deal with it. Therefore, you would like to see the technology banned so that no one could use it. To justify this position, you feel the need to convince others of the universal harm that will come from this technology. After all, if you are telling everyone to do without, you have to give them good reason to agree with you. You may be interested to know that your argument was once applied to the basic telephone. By the way, you will need to turn the clock back further than SS7, since SS6 also has calling number delivery capability. Endless commentary describing alternatives to CLASS features does not provide effective argument against the technology. One can make similar arguments against almost any product of the twentieth century. For instance, we all have to breath the air that is polluted by automobiles. Horse-drawn carts will take you where you need to go. Why not go back? Or how about the fact that on an ocean liner you can party, eat, sleep, and do all kinds of fun things. There is no need for aircraft. Airplanes crash. Let us ban them. IMHO, your arguments against modern telephone technology are a textbook example of the usual public resistance to anything that is new or poorly understood. I would think that someone who participates in computer forums would operate at a slightly higher plane. I have an alternative suggestion to your point of view: perhaps you should disconnect your telephone and be simply personally inconvenienced rather than attempt to deprive the rest of society of developments that you have deemed harmful and unnecessary. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 12:01 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Switching Systems On Aug 19 at 2:09, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: I thought the original 213-464 (back then, in the > 1940's it was known as HOllywood) exchange was panel. I guess I am > mistaken. PAT] I had friends who were served out of that office, which was SXS until the eighties. There was much joy when it was cut to 1AESS. Remember, it was a most unusual occurance to find SXS and Panel in the same city due to the inherent incompatibility. Much of the Los Angeles area was SXS, both GTE and Bell. But remember, Los Angeles was not the city it is now back in the thirties. Panel was only installed in MAJOR cities of the thirties, which is why San Francisco (a "major" city since the time of the Barbary Coast days) had Panel and LA did not. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: So with panel and SXS being incompatible, how were calls handled between those offices? PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Cellular Telephone Eavesdropping Scandal in Minnesota Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:30:59 GMT In article jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell (KD4CQY)) writes: > We had a interesting case here in Virginia where somethin similar > occured with the Governor, and the person who intercepted, and > recorded, and then disclosed Cellular communications was convicted; I > forget what he was sentenced for. He was sentenced under the communication act of 1934. He was not sentenced for any violation of the ECPA, which I found quite interesting. The ECPA was specifically enacted for such instances, but no one has yet been convicted (or even accused) under the law. I suspect this is because the law is too weak to be useful. You can thank your legislators for passing another worthless law that just takes up space on the books. scott ------------------------------ Date: 22 Aug 1992 15:44:29 -0400 (EDT) From: sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) Subject: Re: No Information For 900 Numbers In article cantor@star.enet.dec.com (Dave Cantor) writes: > I tried to get 900 directory assistance tonight from Nashua, NH > (603-888). I got the following intercept: > "Due to a change in network architecture, the 900 information number > has been disconnected. This is no further information available > at this time." I just tried 900 555 1212, and I got an AT&T live operator intercept. It apparently dropped into her panel as if I had dialed "00," as she did not answer as an intercept operator. She did, however, have the record that I dialed *1* 900 555 1212. She didn't know why a 1+ call would drop into her position. Steven S. Brack sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu 2021 Roanwood Drive STU0061@uoft01.utoledo.edu Toledo, OH 43613-1605 brack@uoftcse.cse.utoledo.edu +1 419 GR4 1010 MY OWN OPINIONS sbrack@maine.cse.utoledo.edu ------------------------------ From: johnson@tigger.jvnc.net (Steven L. Johnson) Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem Organization: JvNCnet Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 20:00:27 GMT Hans Ridder writes: > In article spencer@phoenix.princeton. > edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes: >> FYI, two people have mailed me to say that the ATDT >> ,,, does work. So there's no need to >> rush out and get a BellSouth beeper or whatever it was :-) > I'd like to point out that in my experience this type of "open loop" > paging is probably not something you want to "bet your business" on, > as it is not very reliable. There are ways of making it more reliable, such as using the "wait for quiet answer" option available on some modems. Checking call progress status for no-dialtone, busy, no-answer and retrying also helps. I'm lucky that my pager is on the same CO as my computer and the answer times are very consistent. No pager is reliable. The radio portion can be much less reliable than the telco portion of the link. In order to close the loop, the system needs to retry the page until the intended receipient acknowledges the initial condition that caused the page. And if it is a bet your business emergency, you'll want an escalation procedure that doesn't depend on one person and one beeper. > I'd suggest using one of the dial-up paging protocols which actually > get an acknowledgement from the paging system, thus "closing the > loop." This doesn't close the loop as the paging system isn't the intended receipient. It can make one portion of the loop more reliable. Does anyone have a feel for the percentage of paging systems that can handle IXO protocol messages for digital beepers and will allow their customers access? I believe that my service only allows this for their alphanumeric beepers. Steve steve@johnson.jvnc.net ------------------------------ From: drz@po.CWRU.Edu (David R. Zinkin) Subject: Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 19:28:23 GMT Question: what does SDN stand for anyway? And what makes it different from standard long distance service? David R. Zinkin (drz@po.cwru.edu) Rochester General Hospital Radiology Dept. SUNY Buffalo School of Medicine Class of '96 (The sesquicentennial graduating class!) ------------------------------ From: keithf@pacifier.rain.com (Keith Furrow) Subject: Re: 710 and ABCD? Organization: Pacifier BBS Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 05:29:36 GMT In article fff@microplex.com (Fred Fierling) writes: > In article fff@microplex.com (Fred > Fierling) writes: >> In article James.VanHouten@f544. >> n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) writes: >>> Radio Shack supposedly has one. Model # 43-139. >> ^^^^^^^ Wrong!! > Abject apologies; it appears I am responsible for some of the noise > that netters complain about. Model 43-139 does NOT have the ABCD > keys. A respondent to my original posting and I had a misunderstanding. Well from what I heard and read (In old phreak newsletters) you can modify them to generate the extra tones. The chip can do all 4x4 rows, but normally the keypad doesn't come with ABCD (Why?). Keith ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 04:34:12 GMT In article rop@hacktic.nl (Rop Gonggrijp) writes: > Guess this does show what 'capable minds' set up the technology that > we are supposed to trust. Yet in the eyes of US law enforcement, we > would have been the criminals for experimenting with this (using > 555-XXXX numbers), and AT&T the poor victim. When you "experimented," you _did_ impose false charges on somebody, didn't you? Why _aren't_ you the "criminals" then? Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Aug 92 15:35:00 EDT From: Paul (P.A.) Valin Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp Well according to proper CCITT-speak, thou shalt call the key to the right of the zero the 'square' key (Recommendation E.161). Rumour has it that at recent Geneva meetings 'square' key narrowly won out over 'tic-tac-toe' key. Oh, and the key to the left of the zero is called the 'star' key. Paul Valin Tel: + 1 613 763 7394 Bell-Northern Research Ltd. Email: pavalin@bnr.ca P.O. Box 3511, Station C Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 'only my opinions...' ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octathorp Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 14:41:31 EDT From: erik In article mc/G=James/S=Arconati/ OU=0105390@mhs.attmail.com writes: > In Telecomm Digest V12 #632, Spencer talks about the pronounciation of > the # symbol used on DTMF pads. > When I worked for Mother, some 'official' publications said that it > was called an "octothorp." > Seems to me that "pound sign" is readily understood by most North > Americans. > [Moderator's Note: We covered this in excruciating detail in a special > edition of the TELECOM Digest back in 1989. "Octothorpe" (with an \e\ > on the end) seems to be the designated name. In another message in > this issue, a reader asks if pounding off at the end of certain > dialing sequences is a normal, acceptable thing to do. PAT] Just because I am on vacation, my mind wanders ... I suppose it would be OK to "pound off" at the end of a dialing sequence only if they were dialing one of those 1-900 numbers you see on late night TV. Just my mind ... /* Erik */ [Moderator's Harrump: Trying to keep a straight face; trying to keep from smirking. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 04:36:20 GMT Is Octothorpe related to Oglethorpe, who founded the great colony of Georgia in 1733? Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 07:31:39 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp A few years ago, a supposedly computer-literate person called our Operations Group and asked for assistance. It seems there was a message on a screen with the words "Press Any Key to Continue." The very plaintive (and frustrated question was) "I can't find the ANY key." If PAT doesn't put this out, I don't mind. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Note: That's *sooo* old ... I think the first time that was published in the Digest was back in 1985 ... it seems every company has one or more of those people working for it. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 16:42:42 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article jhenderson@pomona.claremont. edu writes: > On a dialing instructions booklet I received from AT&T recently, it > suggests to dial a # after the last digit on international calls, so > the call can be completed quicker. > Since then, I've been dialing a # after the last digit on all my long > distance calls, both domestic and international, and they all seem to > complete faster. Is this just my imagination, or is the # really > helping? My LD company is MetroMedia, in case it makes a difference (I > have no idea why AT&T sent me the booklet, they've never been my LD > carrier.) I can't speak for MetroMedia, but Bellcore's recommendation is that all Country Codes (other than "1") be treated as variable-length, since they no longer want to bother sending out the updates every time CCITT decides to alter the fixed length of some country's numbers. It was a hassle to administer after divestiture, and getting it "wrong" leads to a lot of customer complaints. So (I believe) they are all set for the maximum range (7-to-12)? of valid CCITT numbers. So, yes, use "#" on International calls to stop the digit timing that otherwise occurs -- unless the number is already 12 digits. Note that "#" can do funny things to some phones (that change from pulse-to-DTMF on "#" or "*") and could have other meanings for some other CPE, such as PBXs. If MetroMedia is using FG-B access or 10XXX# cut-through, digit timing is up to them (or the real carrier acting for them, if that applies). If the CO is collecting all the digits and using FG-D access, the digits are timed at the CO and sent to the IXC with MF, terminated with an 'ST' digit. In most COs, a '#' on a domestic "1+" call is ignored by the CO, because it already knows it's received the last digit and has dropped the DTMF receiver. > [Moderator's Note: In Metromedia's case, I think pounding off in the > middle of a call will reset the dial tone for you, and allow another > call to be dialed. At least that's my experience with that carrier. I > think maybe AT&T allows this also on calling card calls, no? In the > dialing sequence, the # acts like a carriage return and forces the > processing to begin on what has already been dialed without waiting > for a timeout. "#" does speed up processing here -- maybe digit analysis doesn't get the digits until the Operator system has collected all the digits, either by time-out or "#". > I don't think it makes any difference with domestic calls since 11 > digits is expected and you have entered that many when you pound off. > It also matters on the few variable-length dialing situations we > have in the USA; Likewise, service codes like 72 and 73 process faster > with the # appended, but will work without it. PAT] (From memory -- I'm not at work ...) The evolution of Custom Calling access started with two-digit codes, followed by "#" to end timing. The number space for these included the "7X" codes for feature access, plus the "X" (X=2-9) and "NX" (N=2-4 & X=0-9). The two-digit codes on either side of the "7X" area were reserved. And, of course, Centrex was different, because of prior usage of "9" and "8". The next wave of planning recognized that the original Custom Calling features might be only a start, and changed to a "*XX" form of access. Speed Calling didn't change, so "#" was still useful there. Backward compatibility forced "72#", etc. to still be accepted, and required that "11XX" would serve as "*XX" for the (still-majority) telephones. Neither the "*" nor "11" form require timing for more digits, so "*72#" isn't helpful. Divestiture allowed Bellcore (with a lot of old Bell System folks) to re-examine the Access-to-Features issue. Thus "#XX" for service access and "*XX" for feature access (or maybe the reverse). Anyway, "#56" became the Switched-56 access code, and "#XX" was reserved for others. No dial-pulse equivalent was chosen. And most new features only briefly, if at all, mention "11XX" as an alternative to "*XX". Some areas/vendors don't support the older "72#" form, and others don't yet support the "*72" form. Bellcore is attempting to mine a few more feature codes by using the form "*1XX" and "*0XX" to add about 200 more codes. I haven't seen any mention of "111XX" being permitted. By the time they exhaust, they hope to have something even better for feature access -- maybe a multi-level menu with prompts!! Al Varney -- just MY opinion ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #652 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13727; 23 Aug 92 1:48 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15721 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:58:06 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA22329 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:57:58 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:57:58 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208230457.AA22329@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #653 TELECOM Digest Sat, 22 Aug 92 23:58:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 653 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator (Arthur L. Rubin) Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator (Vance Shipley) Re: Bell Canada Response to CRTC Announcement (Bob Blackshaw) Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? (Toby Nixon) Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem (Tony Safina) Re: Analogue Problems With Digital Switches (Vance Shipley) Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! (John Higdon) Re: GTE Thinks I Live in 213 (Steven H. Lichter) Re: Call Return vs. Call Forward (Mark Baker) Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Howard Pierpont) Re: What CLASS Features Are Available? (Jack Adams) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) Date: 22 Aug 92 15:15:56 GMT Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) In waugh@rtpnet05.rtp.dg.com (Matthew Waugh) writes: > Note that having a message waiting light or stutter dial-tone is an > either-or option; you can't have both. The people who administer your > PBX will have to switch each line from stutter dial-tone to message > waiting light as you equip the phones. Our system here at Beckman Instruments is a ROLMphone (R) with ROLM PhoneMail (R), and I have both a flashing light and a stutter dial-tone if I have new messages. (They did program the wrong light, though; it's the one next to the "CONF" button.) I have no connection with Rolm other than a (usually) satisfied user. Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal) My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer. ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:14:08 GMT In article add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda V. Dasgupta) writes: > At work we have a Meridian-1 PBX system with Voicemail facilities. > The problem is that if I have a new Voicemail message I have no way of > finding out unless I lift the handset. If I have any message(s) I get > a breaking dialtone, otherwise a normal one. I wish to find a > solution so that I can see a little lamp on my phoneset glow when I > have messages. Simple, change your class of service to visual message waiting! Depending on how old your switch is you may or may not need an additional power supply for the message waiting lamps. The telephones are common and cheap. Or you can just add the proper neon lamp to your current set. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ From: cos!bob1@uunet.UU.NET (Bob Blackshaw) Subject: Re: Bell Canada Response to CRTC Announcement Organization: Corporation for Open Systems Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:03:04 GMT I didn't copy John's post simply to save bandwidth, but I would like to make a couple of points. John referred to the cost of local service as having remained below the inflation rate. The last stats I saw claimed a 300% rise in local rates since divestiture, God, I didn't realize that inflation had been that bad :-/. He also mentioned the two billion figure and laughed it away. What was forgotten was that the CRTC mandated that Bell Canada pay 70% of the interconnection costs and the new carriers pay only 30%, and in addition that their contribution to local rate subsidies would be about half of what Bell now pays. This is rather like having someone come into town and saying that he wants to start a business just like you have and expecting you to build his store. Frankly, the percentages should be the other way around. As to a more responsive repair service, I would not doubt it. In Canada (at least when I was there), a repair visit was a flat $25. Hell, the TV, Appliance, etc. repair people charged that much just to get to your house. Now that you own all your wiring, I imagine they can charge similar amounts here (I wouldn't know since I never call them -- after 33 years in the business, I figure I know as much as the guy in the C&P truck :-) ). No, the CRTC really screwed this one up, but then Keith Spicer always was a strange one. Bob ------------------------------ From: "Toby Nixon" Subject: Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? Date: 22 Aug 92 03:54:33 EDT Organization: Hayes Microcomputer Products, Norcross, GA In article , jpc@avdms8.lambda. msfc.nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark) writes: > Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a > documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals. > If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with > respect to the other? According to CCITT Recommendation V.11 (I don't have a copy of 422 handy, but V.11 is equivalent), if the voltage at A minus the voltage at B is less than or equal to -0.3 volts, then it is a "1". If the voltage at "A" minus the voltage at B is greater than or equal to +0.3 volts, then it is a "0". Translated into English, I guess this means that if B is more positive than A, then it is a "1". The chairman of the TIA TR-30.2 committee in charge of RS-422 is Fred Lucas of General Datacom. His email address is "flucas@attmail.com", and he does check it regularly in case you'd like to pose this question directly to him. > Send mail, I'll summarize. I tried, but it was bounced at ames.arc.nasa.gov. Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice +1-404-840-9200 Telex 401243420 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: disk!tony@uunet.UU.NET (tony) Subject: Re: How to Trigger a Pager From a Modem Organization: Digital Information Systems of KY Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 01:55:13 GMT spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu (S. Spencer Sun) writes: > I guess you need a modem that's capable of dialing the # sign (let's > NOT get into a thread on how to pronounce that) ... my Dad had three The # sign? The POUND sign! At least according to my bank -- they say, "Enter the amount and then press the POUND sign." Well, I know they aren't referring to the asterisk ... so IT must be the POUND sign. Tony Safina -=- disk!tony@uunet.UU.NET ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: Analogue Problems With Digital Switches Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 01:28:46 GMT > Anyway, I performed a quick test, which proved that there is no CPC > through the analog line ports of the Northern PBX switch.... > ... We looked in to converting the affected lines to E&M trunks, > with E&M to loop start converters (Northern says that the analog > trunks, as opposed to lines, do have CPC.), but at $500 or more per > line for the converters. Why not loop start trunks, instead of lines? > No ring voltage! oh well. In the end, Corporate has had to install a > bunch of CO lines to the affected lines. Meanwhile, they have > promises from Northern for a fix "soon". Well it is true that the SL-1 (or M-1 if you prefer :)) does not provide CPC on the 500 lines Northern have tried to help out in the short term with a software fix. A new class of service provides for the return of dial tone after the calling/called party has disconnected. This may be less than what we really want but I take it that the existing line cards would not support a line reversal type CPC signal. Since CO lines do not always provide CPC many manufacturers of CPE equipment such as answering machines and voice mail recognize that the return of dialtone signifies a disconnect and these will work well with the new SL-1 feature. In article rickie@trickie.uucp (Richard Nash) rants: > DONT HOLD YOUR BREATH!!! You will turn red, then blue, then black > doing so:) :) :) > Soon means sometime this or next year, or perhaps after somebody real > important has leaned on them real hard threatening all sorts of > litigation! :) :) They don't give a damn about accounts less than a > couple million clams! :) :) :) :) NT as well as any company makes mistakes. Most like this one are done because no one put it in the design spec, the engineer doesn't know what we'll do with it when he's through :). That's for people like us. Disclaimer: I don't work for NT and I speak solely for myself. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ...uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 01:00 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) writes: > In article msb@pegasus.att.com (Michael > Scott Baldwin) writes: >> My grandmother is in need of one of these infamous devices. > I'd be a bit careful about this one -- you want very high reliability. A member of my family needed one of these things. As we sat through some of the sales pitches, I could not help but think that there would be cheap and dirty ways of accomplishing this. But it all came down to monitoring: who would always be able to summon help twenty-four hours a day? Well, it turns out that very good arrangements can be made through local agencies and hospitals. The Santa Clara County Council on Aging provides an excellent unit with the little pendant and all for $30 per month. There is no up-front cost and the fee includes rental and monitoring. The agency takes all the information that the expensive late night TV outfits do: people to call in an emergency, doctor's name and number, etc. Unless you intend to sleaze it (remember that monitoring), I would shop around in your area for organizations that provide these things. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: GLORIA.C.VALLE@gte.sprint.com Date: 22 Aug 92 09:22:00 UT Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213 It seems that Mr. Higdon only has negative things to say about GTE. I had thought that the GTE Bashing things was put to an end. I don't think that GTE always misses or loses things. My job with GTE California is to install Hi-Caps. I have yet to miss a date because of a GTE problem. We have had problems when the customer was not ready with the building or one of his contractors did not do his job. I install for LA Cellular, PacBell Cellular, MCI, AT&T, Sprint, and government agencies including the 15th Air Force at March AFB. I have many commendations as do others on our crews. I have worked with people in other areas and see the same commitment to getting the job done and done right the first time. I sometime ago had Mr. Higdon contacted by our Thousand Oaks Corporate Office and was told that the problems he had been having were all in the past and there was no current problems. All big companies have their problems. I can think of a couple of time where PacBell has caused us to miss or almost miss a due date. In fact I have seen Mr. Higdon bash PacBell on a lot of subjects including wanting to appear the PUC order on CID. He claims he has been in the business for 25 years. I believe he has. I'm sure he knows, but I wonder has he ever missed a date? I would like to see some other comments on this from other GTE people who I know are out there, but stay out of the threads as I have for a few weeks because I really don't want to argue to try to defend GTE with him since it will do no good. We have a Smart Park in Moreno Valley and another in Rancho, California and from what I have heard evey customer is very happy with his service. Mad Dog (Steven) Sysop: Apple Elite II -- an Ogg-Net BBS UUCP: steven@alchemy.UUCP (714) 359-5338 1200-2400 bps 8N1 Steven H. Lichter GTE Calif. COEI ------------------------------ From: mcb@ihlpf.att.com Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 07:33 CDT Subject: Re: Call Return vs. Call Forward Sorry to be a bearer or bad news (or good news depending on your viewpoint), but Call Return, aka Automatic Callback or Automatic Recall, attempts will not complete if the called line has Call Forwarding Variable active or Call Forwarding Busy Line and is busy. BellCore TR-TSY-000215, section 3.8 "Interactions" states that: "An AC request should be denied (i.e., the short term denial announcement [reorder]) if the called line has Call Forwarding Variable active or SCF [Selective Call Forwarding] in effect for calls from the AC customer." "AC attempts should be allowed to lines with Call Forwarding Busy Line, but call setup should only be attempted when the base station is idle." The TCAP message that is returned contains a indication that the DN is call forwarded in addition to the busy/idle status of the line. Mark Baker - just my opinion ... AT&T Network Systems ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 05:50:27 PDT From: HOWARD PIERPONT Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News In Telecom Volume 12 : Issue 648 chiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) wrote about cable shows. TELECOM Moderator noted: < [Moderator's Note: Yeah, but not true with the Jukebox Channel or < whatever it is called. I will defer to Bill Pfieffer here since he < knows more about the one in Chicago, but I think you 'put money in the < jukebox and make your selection' via a 900 number; eventually (a few < minutes or so later) whatever you selected is played. If two or more < people selected the same thing, then like with a regular jukebox it < still plays one time and lets each paying party assume *they* are the < one who is paying. :) When (whatever you picked) is played, all < pending requests for the same song are cleared from the stack. PAT] In Rhode Island the cable company has always played every request in the order received. [The same Madonna video every second or third video. The cable company houses the equipment but "rents" the channel to an independent. They are both making big $$. In upstate NY the cable company was told you play every request that was paid for or refund all monies collected so far. They used to clear from the stack, too. Now we get the same video over and over. Some folks never learn. Howard Pierpont DEC All disclaimer apply [Moderator's Note: I believe they pop the stack with multiple requests for the same music once the selection starts playing and if someone then requests it again two seconds later it goes back to the bottom of the stack once more. So if they play the same video every third or fourth time around, they may actually be getting two or three times as many calls for that video as they are actually playing. Five people ask for it while something else is on; once it starts all five requests pop the stack; then a couple others are selected and three more ask for the first one again ... PAT] ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: What CLASS Features Are Available? Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 13:18:58 GMT In article , hps@sdf.lonestar.org (Holt Sorenson) writes: > Hi. The switches that are digital in my NPA are #1 ESS, #5 ESS, and ^^ 1A perhaps? > DMS-100. I was wondering what CLASS features are available for these > switches. I've heard of the SS7 switch. How does it fit in with the > above and what are it's capabilities? Thanks in advance. Assuming you mean 1A, then all of the above are CLASS (trademark of Bellcore) compliant. SS7 is not a switch but a high speed packet switching network which routes call control signals between network elements (for the most part, switches). You need switches like the ones you've mentioned plus you need the SS7 connectivity between them. A more important issue however, is the tariffing of any or all of these services. The best answer on this is to contact your local telecommunications local exchange carrier and ask. Very often, some CLASS services get mired in public policy and legal debate (witness the state of Pennsylvania and Caller-ID) and thus may never be offered. 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 #653 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15447; 23 Aug 92 2:19 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27089 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:28:53 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18338 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:28:45 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:28:45 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208230528.AA18338@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #654 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 00:28:45 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 654 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? (Hans Ridder) Re: Mag-Stripe Reader Phones (John R. Levine) Re: What Are People Using For "Telnet" (John Rice) Re: Are Online Phone Books Available? (Stewart Rowe) Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? (Kevin W. Williams) Re: 25 Years of 800 Service (Leonard Erickson) Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator (Mickey Ferguson) Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II (Vance Shipley) Re: Peculiar Event During Phone Call (Andrew C. Green) Last Laugh! Re: Deterioration of POTS (Aaron Barnhart) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Hans Ridder Subject: Re: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 15:44:58 GMT [Moderator's Note: He asked for mail, but it bounced. PAT] In article jpc@avdms8.lambda.msfc. nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark) writes: > Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a > documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals. > If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with > respect to the other? From EIA-422-A 1978: "The signalling sense of the voltages appearing across the interconnection cable are defined as follows: a. The A terminal of the generator shall be negative with respect to the B terminal for a binary 1 (MARK or OFF) state. b. The A terminal of the generator shall be positive with respect to the B terminal for a binary 0 (SPACE or ON) state. Note that MARK/SPACE refer to *data* circuits, and OFF/ON refer to *control* circuits, and that "binary 1" is *OFF* for a control circuit. > I know this has been a controversial topic in the past, with one > vendor doing one thing and another the opposite, but what is the > current thinking? I've never heard of any controversy. It's pretty clear in the standard. Don't they let you NASA guys have this stuff? Hans-Gabriel Ridder Digital DECwest Engineering ridder@rust.zso.dec.com Bellevue, Washington, USA {pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Mag-Stripe Reader Phones Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 22 Aug 92 19:49:21 EDT (Sat) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) In article is written: > I noticed a magstripe-reader SW Bell phone ... I wondered what the phone > would read if I swiped my AT&T Univeral Card thru it -- the regular MC > number, and bill it as an MC charge, or the AT&T calling card number, > [and it used the MC number] There is a fairly straightforward technical problem here. The contents of the magnetic stripe on the back of a credit card are well standardized (there are ANSI and ISO standards defining them) and there is only provision for a single credit card number on the stripe. There are three tracks on the stripe with the number recorded three different ways for historical reasons, but they all have the same card number. You can't change it without changing the millions of existing credit card readers found in businesses around the world. If AT&T has enough muscle, they might be able to get themselves assigned MC and Visa card prefixes that would identify the card as a telco calling card. It's my impression that the banks were rather upset when AT&T got into the bank card business using a rather peculiar little bank that does nothing but process charges for AT&T Universal cards, so I doubt that the MC and Visa organizations would do AT&T any favors. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: What Are People Using For "Telnet" Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 00:53:57 GMT > I got the latest and greatest from NCSA and went to Clarkson to get > the "packet drivers", and found a "This Stuff is Outdated" file in > Clarkson's telnet directory. I went back to our overworked networking > person to ask why NCSA has two different versions of Telnet for the PC > and Mac (2.3, and 2.5), and he suggested using the Clarkson packet > drivers only on the PC version of Telnet (version 2.3). > Someone else is looking into the Mac version. Well, here I am with > limited access to either a PC or a Mac, needing Telnet for others who > do have PCs and Macs to use to reach us. What configurations are in > use around the net? > jmoore@pixel.kodak.com, PROFS: EKSMTP(JMOORE) VMS: UX047A::JMOORE Since you enclosed a VMS sig, I assume you have VAXs and DEC access. I might suggest a look at DECs Pathworks TC-PIP package. The licenses aren't too expensive @ $100 per machine and they have both MAC and PC packages. We use both and they're stable and reasonably user friendly. We use them to connect MACs to SUNs, PCs to SUNS, HPs and both occasionally to our VAX cluster (although we're more likely to use Pathworks/DECNET or LAT for that, but it works). It might require that you have a Pathworks License for a VAX to get the PC/MAC pricing (I'm not in that loop so I don't know), but can't hurt to check. John Rice K9IJ "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially Not my Employer's.... rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ From: bg055@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Stewart Rowe) Subject: Re: Are Online Phone Books Available? Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 01:53:20 GMT Compuserve has two files, one (PhonFile" for residential users and one (Dun's Yellow Pages) lists business phones. Not cheap. Phonfile will run about 50 cents a name, DYP nearly $2.00 (but it also gives a bit of business information, if I remember). Stewart Rowe usr2210a@tso.uc.edu srowe@igc.org ------------------------------ From: williamsk@gtephx.UUCP (Kevin W. Williams) Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? Organization: gte Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 22:14:15 GMT In article , hgschulz@gaia.cs.umass.edu (Henning Schulzrinne) writes: > Just curious: how much does a CO switch cost? I realize that this > question is about as precise as asking "how much does a car cost", but > I'm interested in any examples, be it a small rural switch or a large > tandem switch. I'm trying to get some feeling for the costs of > switching bandwidth. A lot. Depending on size, configuration, trunking, features, etc., prices may vary by nearly 100%, but think several hundred dollars per line for a switch operating near the design center for the switch. I doubt any manufacturer (including my employer) would be willing to give detailed pricing schedules to anyone that wasn't actually considering buying one, but there are features of pricing that are fairly widespread in the industry: 1) A Base cost. This is the cost for the amount of hardware it would take to get the first line operational. 2) A per line cost. This is the price for each line added to the basic system. 3) Various per unit costs. Systems have growth increments where additional hardware must be added to expand the internal network size. 4) Office wide Right to Use fees. CLASS features are priced this way by a number of makers: the telco has to pay a given price to offer CLASS services to subscribers. 5) Per Line right to use fees. A feature like Calling Number ID could be charged on a per line basis from the manufacturer to the telco. 6) Miscellaneous common equipment costs. How many biling tape drives does the site need? How many administrative terminals? How many little DC-AC inverters to power 110 VAC equipment from a -48V supply? Depending on the market the maker is attempting to address, the ratio between these costs will vary, and can frequently be tweaked around for different sizes of office. If small line size switches are being sold, the the base cost would tend to be small, and the per line cost relatively high. If the target market is monster switches, the base cost can be boosted pretty high, but the per line cost would be lowered. Features are sometimes priced with different options to a telco. An office with only ten Centrex lines may choose to pay a per line charge, while one with 25,000 Centrex lines may choose to pay a flat rate that allows it to offer unlimited Centrex service (analogous to per-processor software license and site-wide software license). In general, the smaller the switch, the more it will cost when broken down on a per-line basis. A large urban area that uses switches with 100,000 lines only has to pay for one administration software package, one center stage for the network, one of any number of things, but gets to apply them to 100,000 lines. A mom-and-pop has to buy the exact same things, but only gets to apply them to 2000 lines. It is quite a design and marketing juggle to figure out exactly how to address a particular market size. Kevin Wayne Williams UUCP : ...!ames!ncar!noao!asuvax!gtephx!williamsk ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: 25 Years of 800 Service Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 17:21:18 GMT Thomas Lapp writes: > (the rest of this section talks about AT&T is facing competition > from other LD carriers, as well as from resellers who sometimes > use AT&T's name when making sales, causing headaches from > purchasers who think that they are getting AT&T follow-up > service as well. It mentions how the local companies are > getting into the act as well for intrastate (sic) phone > service (I think they actually meant intra-LATA?), since > Delaware has a huge credit-card banking industry which > relies heavily on 800 service.) No, Intra*state* calls require only dealing with the LECs and with the State PUCs. But since LATAs seem to cross state lines as often as not, they probably *aren't* doing specificly "Intra LATA" service. > Finally, a side article discusses how small businesses are using 800 > service by profiling several of the companies. However, the headline > is somewhat ironic, since the title is "With 800, Business Has Got > Your Number" (followup page says "Call 800: Business Has Your > (toll-free) number"). I was looking to see if there was anything in > the article about how businesses can get call detail on their 800 > numbers, thus getting ANI from callers. But not a word about it. I > guess they didn't want to scare off the 800-using population too > much. :-). More likely, that aspect of it never even occured to the staffer. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 12:05:14 PDT From: mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com (Mickey Ferguson) Subject: Re: Monitoring Dialtone for Voicemail Indicator Organization: Rolm In TELECOM Digest V12 No. 646 (item 10) Matthew Waugh writes: > Sounds like your company balked at paying $25 for replacing your > phones with new phones with message waiting lights. What you need to > do is retro-fit your phones with lights. You can do this in many ways, > places like Graybar will supply just the LED, or a new faceplate with > the LED installed, or gadgets with modular jacks that will plug into > your phone line. All these will respond to the 90 to 130VDC that the > PBX will put on your line when you have a message waiting. First, it probably isn't just as simple a matter as installing the new phone, and then expecting the technicians to update the phone configuration to know that you now have the message waiting light. It probably requires a different line card. Remember that the PBX has to supply additional current to power the light. Of course, I can't speak for any specific PBX. > Note that having a message waiting light or stutter dial-tone is an > either-or option; you can't have both. The people who administer your > PBX will have to switch each line from stutter dial-tone to message > waiting light as you equip the phones. Again, I won't speak for a particular PBX, but at least with Rolm, having the message waiting light and broken dialtone is not an either-or option; we always give the broken dial tone, whether the phone has a message waiting lamp or not. You should check with your particular vendor. Mickey Ferguson -- Rolm -- FergusoM at scrvm2 -- mickeyf@vnet.ibm.com ------------------------------ From: vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II Organization: SwitchView Inc., Waterloo, Ontario Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 13:09:46 GMT In article schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) writes: > Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what new features > it has ... Does it support CLASS? I have an AT&T 1337 that I bought a year ago. I'm quite happy with it but now I would like a machine that uses CLID information to stamp the calls. Any one now of one? I'm hoping the new AT&T machine does. Vance Shipley vances@xenitec.on.ca vances@ltg.uucp ..uunet.ca!xenitec!vances ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 12:03:25 CDT From: Andrew C. Green Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Re: Peculiar Event During Phone Call Bryan King writes: > During the conversation his line went silent a couple of times. It was > as though I was on the 'waiting' end of call waiting. The line has > call waiting but no calls came in during our conversation. [...] > I'm curious what would cause this and what the problem is? Has he also got three-way calling? I had the same problems a while back, caused by a loose line connection in my phone. Pulling a bit too hard on the phone momentarily broke the line, which the system naturally interprets as a "flashed" switchhook. At that point it would put the incoming call on hold and give me a new dialtone. When I figured out that I was putting Party A on hold, not cutting them off, another flash on the switchhook would bring them back. I'm not sure that having three-way calling is strictly necessary for this, but the ringing you heard at one point was your caller thinking he'd lost you altogether and hanging up his phone, at which point it began ringing to remind him that he had (unknowingly) got you on Hold. Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ From: barnhart@netcom.com (Aaron Barnhart) Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 01:19:02 GMT Organization: Netcom Reply-To: barnhart@netcom.com > [Moderator's Note: But do you remember the Anti-Digital-Dialing League > which formed in Berkeley, CA in the early 1960's to fight the > conversion of named exchanges into three digit numbers? PAT] "The Let's All Call Up AT & T And Protest to the President March" sung to the Michigan Fight Song (? how would I know, I went to Northwestern ?) by Allan Sherman 1962 (from the "My Son, the Celebrity" L.P.) It's the Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march Can you see him smirking and smiling Cuz he's got us all digit dialing It's the Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march So protest (So protest!) Do your best (Do your best!) Let us show him that we march in unity If he won't (If he won't!) Change the rules (Change the rules!) Let's take our business to another phone company! So Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march Let us wake him up in his slumber Get a pencil, I'll give you his number Which is 3 1 8 5 2 7 3 0 8 7 4 2 9 DASH! 5 1 1 4 9 0 6 7 4 0 8 5 2 HYPHEN! 1 1 4 6 2 0 5 7 9 hyphen dash 0 3 And now that you're on the right road Don't forget his area code Which is 5 1 8 2 4 7 9 0 5 hyphen dash 9 4 ! Where are the days of auld lang syne? (BUtterfield 8! PLaza 9!) Let's keep those beautiful names alive! (CRestview 6! RAmses 5!) Get ready to fight before it's too late! (CEntral 2! MUriel 8!) Let's let him know that this means war! (GInsburg 3! BLumberg 4!) Hoo-rayyyyyy! And millions of telephone subscribers, will erect a triumphal arc For the Let's all call up AT & T and protest to the President march! Aaron (Barnhart@netcom.com) -- posting from Evanston, Illinois [Moderator's Note: I'd forgotten about Allan Sherman! Thanks for digging that up. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #654 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02959; 23 Aug 92 11:50 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA25669 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 09:54:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA08796 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 09:53:56 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 09:53:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208231453.AA08796@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #655 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 09:53:45 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 655 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Telecom Calendar (William Degnan) Motorola 'Secure Clear' Cordless Phones (Tim Tyler) Computer Privacy Digest (comp.society.privacy) (Dennis G. Rears) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: William.Degnan@mdf.FidoNet.Org (William Degnan) Date: 22 Aug 92 21:44:00 Subject: Telecom Calendar Vol. 2 No. 1 (and electronic edition 2.1) Aug 22, 1992 Copyright 1992, Communications Network Solutions (All rights reserved) ============================================================================ This is our compilation of events calendars for various aspects of the telecommunications industry, published from time to time by COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK SOLUTIONS, - Independent Consultants in Telecommunications, Austin, TX. Send calendar items, requests to distribute/reprint or comments to: Private Line, Calendar Editor, P.O. Drawer 9530, Austin, TX 78766-9530, or EMAIL to calendar@mdf.attmail.com, or calendar@mdf.fidonet.org Paid subscriptions are available. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Aug 29-Sep 3 National Association of State Telecom Directors Directors Annual Conference Baltimore, MD 606 231-1895 Aug 31-Sep 2 Southeastern Telecom Association Orlando, Fl 803 731-5640 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Sep 1-3 International Mobile Comm. Expo/Fall Georgia World Convention Center Atlanta, GA 303 220-0600 800 525-9154 Sep 8-11 OE/Fibers '92 Boston, MA 206 676-3290 Sep 9-11 ComExpo Poland Marriott Hotel Warsaw, Poland 703 527-8000 Sep 10 Tennessee Telecom Users Association Nashville, TN 615 367-7676 Sep 10-12 Pacific International Expo (PIE) Clark County Fairgrounds Vancouver, WA 800 624-2569 Sep 13-17 Texas Telephone Association Houston, TX 512 343-0850 Sep 14-18 NTCA FAll Conference Chicago Marriott Chicago, IL 202 298-2300 Sep 20-23 Rocky Mountain Telecommunications Association Downtown Radisson Hotel Denver, CO 707 578-5580 Sep 21-23 Nevada Annual Conference Carson Valley Inn Gardnerville, NV 702 827-0190 Sep 21-23 NCF '92 Hayatt O'Hare Chicago, IL 312 938-3500 Sep 21-24 American Voice Input/Output Society Minneapolis, MN 408 248-1353 Sep 21-25 Tele-Communications Association Convention Center San Diego, CA 818 967-9411 Sep 21-25 Mobile Communications Marketplace Moscone Center San Francisco, CA 202 467-4770 Sep 22-23 USTA Operator Services Conference Los Vegas 202 835-3100 Sep 22-24 RF Expo/East Tampa Conv. Ctr. Tampa, FL 303 220-0600 800 525-9154 Sep 22-31 Phil Telecom '92 International Convention Center Manila, Philippines 415 573-6900 Sep 22-30 Bureau '92 Park Des Exposition Brussels, Belgium 415 573-6900 Sep 27-30 National Telephone Cooperative Association Fall Conference Nashville, TN 202 298-2300 Sep 28-30 ASIC '92 Riverside Convention Ctr. Rochester, NY 716 328-2310 Sept 28-Oct 1 BICSI Workship Windam Resort Paradise Valley Scottsdale, AZ 801 581-5809 Sept 29-Oct 1 PETE '92 Orange County Fair & Expo Ctr. Concord, CA 800 525-7383 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Oct 1 Fiber Fair '92 WA State Convention Ctr. Seattle, WA 206 277-1240 Oct 2-4 (or Oct 7-9?) CaribeCom '92 Caribe Hilton Hotel San Juan, Puerto Rico 305 670-9444 Oct 4-8 Intelec '92 JW Marriott Hotel Washington, DC 908 221-0013 Oct 5-8 (also reported as Oct 5-7) Unicom '92 North American Telecommunications Association (NATA) Sheraton Washington Washington, DC 800 538-6282 Oct 5-8 USTA National Convention New Orleans, LA 202 835-3100 Oct 5-8 Carolina-Virginias Fall Meeting Grove Park Inn & Country Club Asheville, NC 919 592-5751 Oct 6-8 NorthCon '92 Seattle Center Seattle, WA 800 421-6816 Oct 7-9? (or Oct 2-4?) CaribeCom '92 Convention Center San Juan, Puerto Rico 305 670-9444 Oct 11-14 MilCom '92 Sheraton Harbor Island San Diego, CA 619-534-3096 Oct 12-15 FOExpo Jacob K. Javits Convention Ctr. New York, NY 203 794-0444 Oct 12-17 Europas Telecom 92 Hungary Expo Center Budapest, Hungary +41 (22) 730-5444 Oct 18-21 CompTel Fall Business Conference Scottsdale, AZ 202 296-6650 Oct 19-21 CMA '92 Communications Managers Association (CMA) Telecom '92 New York Hilton NY, NY 800 CMA-EXPO / 908 766-3624 Oct 20-22 ComExpo Czechoslovakia Intercontinental Center Prague, Czechoslovakia 703 875-8620 Oct 26-28 Electronic Messaging '92 Fairmont Hotel San Francisco, CA 703 875-8620 Oct 26-30 Digital Cellular Telecom Seminar George Washington University Washington, DC 800 424-9773 Oct 26-30 Interop 92 San Francisco, CA 800 468-3767 Oct 27-30 9-1-1 Conference Holiday Inn Decatur, IL 217 782-4911 Oct 30-Nov 4 ExpoComm China '92 International Exhibit Center Beijing, China 301 986-7800 William Degnan, Communications Network Solutions -Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology- P.O. Drawer 9530 | wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org | mfwic@mdf.fidonet.org Austin, TX 78766-9530 | !wdegnan@attmail.com | Voice +1 512 323 9383 [Moderator's Note: Thank you very much for sending this calendar of events along to the Digest, and I hope you will send them on a regular basis. I used to prepare these here a couple years ago but it took too much time and I had to quit doing it. I'm glad to see you involved. PAT] ------------------------------ From: tim@ais.org (Tim Tyler) Subject: Motorola 'Secure Clear' Cordless Phones Organization: UMCC Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 00:16:32 GMT "Cordless phone eavesdroppers are everywhere" says pro golfer Lee Turino, spokesman for Motorola. "But with my Motorola Secure Clear~ Cordless Phone, my private conversations stay private." So says a glossy brochure (# BA-81) that Motorola's Consumer Products Division (telephone # 800/331-6456) distributes to promote their new 'secure' cordless phone product line. When I first read the cover of the brochure, I said to myself, "Wow, I wonder what sophisticated technology it must use?" Motorola has been developing and selling secure voice and data systems, from DVP and DES up to the current 'FASCINATOR' algorithm for classified military and federal government secure voice for many years. Page Two of the slick brochure provides some rhetorical questions and answers: ***************************************************************** Why Motorola Cordless Phones? Q. What is meant by Secure Clear? Secure Clear is an exclusive technology that assures you no eavesdroppers will be able to use another cordless phone, scanner or baby monitor to listen in to your cordless conversations. Q. How difficult is it to eavesdrop on someone's cordless conversation? It's not difficult at all. Simply by operating a cordless phone, scanner or baby monitor on the same channel as you're on, an eavesdropper can listen in. Security codes alone DO NOT prevent eavesdropping. Q. What are security codes and what do they do? Security codes allow the handset and base to communicate with each other. With the Secure Clear cordless phone, one of 65,000 possible codes are randomly assigned every time you set the handset in the base. This means that a neighbor cannot use his handset to link with your base and have phone calls charged to your phone number. Q. Describe the basic difference between Secure Clear and security codes. Secure Clear protects against eavesdropping. Security codes prevent the unauthorized use of your phone line. Usually all cordless phones have security codes, but not both. Q. What is the purpose of the Secure Clear demo? The Secure Clear demo is a unique feature of Motorola phones that allows you to actually experience what an eavesdropper would hear when trying to listen to your conversation. By pressing the SECURE DEMO button on the Motorola phone, you and the person on the other end will hear the same scrambled noise an eavesdropper would hear. ***************************************************************** Hmmm ... I went to the Motorola Secure Clear cordless phone display at a Sears store, took a deep breath, and hit the demo button in order to hear what the "scrambled noise" which would protect a conversation from eavesdropping sounded like. White-noise like that of a digital data stream? Rapid analog time-domain scrambling? No, the scrambled "noise" sounded like inverted analog voice. That's right, they're using the 40 or 50 year old (3kHz baseband) speech inversion system -- the same one which they stopped marketing for their commercial two-way radio gear about a decade ago -- to make Lee Turino and other ignorant people's "private conversations stay private." For those of you not familiar with speech inversion, it simply flip-flops the voice spectrum so that high pitched sounds are low, & vice versa. It sounds a lot like Single Side Band (SSB) transmissions, although an SSB receiver will not decode speech- inversion scrambling. Prior to 1986, several companies -- Don Nobles, Capri Electronics, etc. sold inexpensive kits or scanner add-ons which could be used to decode speech inversion. Several electronics magazines also published schematics for making your own from scratch, at a cost of about $5. After the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, it became illegal to decode or decipher encrypted communications which you weren't a legitimate party to, so the standard practice of selling these quasi-legal products as 'experimental kits' or 'for educational purposes only' became common. Today, some companies will not specifically sell a 'speech-inversion descrambler,' but instead market a 'speech inversion scrambling system' which means the kit will encode as well as decode speech inversion, although most people buy them simply to hook up to their scanners and monitor the few public safety agencies and business that (still) use speech-inversion scrambling. Yes, technically, it is a felony for you to use a speech- inversion descrambler to monitor these Motorola 'Secure Clear' cordless. Or for that matter, the new Radio Shack DUoPHONE ET-499, cordless phone which also depends on speech-inversion for privacy protection. The public utility of the ECPA has been argued about ever since before it was enacted. It is rather obvious that the ECPA was pushed upon the ignorant, money-hungry Congress by the powerful (& wealthy) Cellular Telephone Industry Association (so the CTIA could propagate misinformation to the public, but that's another story ...). I also realize that the 46/49MHz cordless phone channels are apparently allocated for analog-voice only. Despite the ECPA, it is unconscionable to me that Motorola -- who surely knows better -- would produce the slick brochure and specifically market the 'Secure Clear' line as being invulnerable to eavesdropping. Their wording unequivocally gives the impression that the 'Secure Clear' conversations are secure, not only from other cordless phone & baby monitors, which have several common frequencies, but also against communications hobbyists with scanner radios. It is bad enough that many public safety officers still think that by using the 'PL' ('Private Line~,' also known as CTCSS) setting on their Motorola two-way radios, no one else can listen in. While the 'Private Line' fiasco might be attributable to misconception on the part of the radio users, in my opinion, Motorola's Consumer Products Division has to know that there are thousands of scanner monitors who have the technical ability to defeat the speech-inversion 'Secure Clear' system. A Motorola representative at the 1992 Summer Consumer Electronics Show in Chicago confirmed this to me, with a smirk on his face. There's a big difference between Motorola's aforementioned wording and that of Radio Shack's on page 3 of their 1993 catalog: New! Voice-Scrambling Cordless Telephone DUoFONE ET-499. Cordless phones are great. But since they transmit over the airwaves, your private conversations could be monitored. Now you can enjoy cordless convenience with voice scrambling for *added* [emphasis theirs] privacy protection -- frequency inversion makes transmissions between the handset and base unintelligible... It's not "Motorola should know better." Motorola DOES know better. Otherwise, they wouldn't be spending time or money on true 'secure' (based on current technology, of course) communications and transmission security systems. I sure am thankful that our federal government and military users of secure-mode communications systems don't rely on Motorola's marketing department to provide factual information as to the level of security provided by Motorola equipment. Too bad that for the most part, the public does. For anyone looking for a cordless telephone that offers a decent level of privacy, take a look at some of the new cordless phones which use 900MHz. Most of the new ones not only use CVSD digital voice for the RF link, but also direct-sequence spread spectrum. By no means are these phones secure ('encoded,' yes, but 'encrypted,' no), & the Tropez 900 actually seems to generate a very weak analog harmonic in the 440MHz spectrum, but you'll be a lot better off than poor old Lee Turino. Tim Tyler Internet: tim@ais.org MCI Mail: 442-5735 C$erve: 72571,1005 P.O. Box 443 Packet: KA8VIR @KA8UNZ.#SEMI.MI.USA.NA Ypsilanti MI 48197-0443 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 07:58:44 EDT From: Dennis G. Rears Subject: Computer Privacy Digest (comp.society.privacy) Hi. This is an announcement of the Computer Privacy Digest which is gatewayed to the comp.society.privacy newsgroup. I am posting this here because several people have mentioned they are unaware of the forum. The Computer Privacy digest was created for discussion of the effect of technology on privacy. This forum of which I am the moderator started out as the Telecom Privacy digest three years ago and at the beginning of the year changed to the Computer Privacy Digest. At that time the comp.society.privacy newsgroup was created. The Digest is gatewayed into the newsgroup. This Computer Privacy Digest was established to provide a forum for discussion on the effect of technology on privacy. All too often technology is way ahead of the law and society as it presents us with new devices and applications. Technology can enhance and detract from privacy. The name of the digest should actually be the Technology and Privacy Digest but due to the USENET Hierarchy naming scheme the word Computer is instead. Topics include but are not restricted to: o Telecommunications - Caller-Id, ANI, monitoring of phones calls (cellear/cordless), tracking people's locations. o Cryptology - enhances citizens rights to safeguard their information. o Data Bases - Big Brother is here but it is not just the Government. It is also Corporate America. The advent of mailing lists has now reach an extremely high level. Consider the Social Security Number. o High Tech Surveillance Devices - ranging for sophisicated (SP) bugs, viewing devices, and audio devices. o The boon in video cameras and private citizens taping events; e.g. Rodney King episode. Video as well as photographic information can be forged. o The effect of technology on privacy in the legal arena (e.g admissibilty in court of items produced by new and old technology). o Misc - National Identifier Numbers, Bar coding currency, electronic toll devices mounted on autos, etc. This group is not intended for the overall issue of privacy, (e.g should a rape victim have their name published). Submissions go to comp-privacy@pica.army.mil and administration stuff to comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil. Dennis G. Rears MILNET: drears@pica.army.mil UUCP: ...!uunet!cor5.pica.army.mil!drears INTERNET: drears@pilot.njin.net USPS: Box 210, Wharton, NJ 07885 Phone(home): 201.927.8757 Phone(work): 201.724.2683/(DSN) 880.2683 Moderator: Computer Privacy Digest & comp.society.privacy [Moderator's Note: The Computer Privacy Digest begas as Telecom Privacy and had its origin here in TELECOM Digest as a result of a huge overflow of messages on Caller-ID. Dennis has done a great job with it since the beginning and I thank him for handling the task very well. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #655 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa29061; 23 Aug 92 23:24 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA09356 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:32:00 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23900 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:31:40 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:31:40 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208240231.AA23900@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #656 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 21:31:22 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 656 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: GTE Thinks I Live in 213 (John Higdon) Re: GTE Thinks I Live in 213 (Leonard Erickson) Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II (Michael Schuster) Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II (Greg Jumper) Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool (Rop Gonggrijp) Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool (John Gilbert) Re: Deterioration of POTS (Leonard Erickson) Re: Deterioration of Pots (vs. Monopolies) (Alan L. Varney) Re: Make Mine Extra Dry, Please, and Hold the Olive (Jack Adams) Re: What are Personal Communication Services (Jack Adams) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 01:02 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213 Steven H. Lichter GTE Calif. COEI writes: > It seems that Mr. Higdon only has negative things to say about GTE. I > had thought that the GTE Bashing things was put to an end. As far as I am concerned, I hope it is never allowed to end until GTE at least gives lip service to cleaning up its act. To date, there has been no evidence that I can see anywhere that this is the case. > I don't think that GTE always misses or loses things. No, maybe not ALWAYS. But it seems to ALWAYS lose the first report of trouble. In the past five years I have yet to have anything repaired as a result of the first call, or even the second. > My job with GTE California is to install Hi-Caps. I have yet to miss > a date because of a GTE problem. We have had problems when the > customer was not ready with the building or one of his contractors did > not do his job. There is that blaming someone else again. You obviously do not work in any areas of northern or southern California in which I am forced to deal with GTE. Long Beach will soon be history, thank God. > I install for LA Cellular, PacBell Cellular, MCI, AT&T, Sprint, and > government agencies including the 15th Air Force at March AFB. I have > many commendations as do others on our crews. I have worked with > people in other areas and see the same commitment to getting the job > done and done right the first time. You take my criticisms of GTE personally. Obviously you know not of mine, my associates', and my clients' very numerous miserable dealings with GTE. No company is perfect and I understand that. But GTE goes beyond all reason in its crummy performance. As I said, you apparently were not on any of the hundreds of jobs that have been botched super-royally by GTE. Be thankful that I have not asked PAT to devote several digests to a detailed list of GTE screwups in just the past couple of years! > I sometime ago had Mr. Higdon contacted by our Thousand Oaks Corporate > Office and was told that the problems he had been having were all in > the past and there was no current problems. Well, that turned out to be a big horse laugh. If anything, it has all gotten worse. It got so bad that our Long Beach client had to move or throw in the towel. When a city starts losing its commerce because of excrementally bad telephone service, I would hardly call that "no current problems". > All big companies have their problems. I can think of a couple of > time where PacBell has caused us to miss or almost miss a due date. Yes, Pac*Bell has missed dates and screwed up orders. No company is perfect. But there are two major differences: 1) Pac*Bell readily admits it error and offers "deals" to compensate (GTE always denies any culpability and blames everything on everyone else); 2) Pac*Bell has more successes than failures by a wide margin (GTE almost always turns the simplist job into a major pig fornication). > In fact I have seen Mr. Higdon bash PacBell on a lot of subjects > including wanting to appeal the PUC order on CID. I have major disagreements with the corporate practices of Pacific Telesis. I will do whatever I can to keep that corporation from ripping us all off. I have made no secret of that. But regular readers will also tell you that I have very high praise for the men and women who provide my Pac*Bell service. They are professional, responsive, and treat me as a valued customer. GTE treats me, and most everyone else like garbage. Pac*Bell goes to major effort to provide service properly and timely. GTE does not appear to give a bowel movement about anything except bill collection. > He claims he has been in the business for 25 years. I believe he > has. I'm sure he knows, but I wonder has he ever missed a date? I not only claim it, I can prove it. Have I missed a date? Many times. Have I copped to it with the client? You bet. Nothing enhances credibility like straight talk and a forthright manner. I have never lost a client admitting to mistakes. But I have seen plenty of others in this business get sacked trying to sweep things under the rug or trying to divert blame. > I would like to see some other comments on this from other GTE people > who I know are out there, but stay out of the threads as I have for a > few weeks because I really don't want to argue to try to defend GTE > with him since it will do no good. No, because actions speak much louder than words. I am sure there are many GTE people who would like to punch out my lights and defend their company. That does not change the truth of the matter. The best way to change my mind about GTE (and say nice things about the company) would be for the service to do an about face and have the company act like a real telephone company for a change. I can guarantee you that pleasant experiences from GTE would send me to the keyboard just as fast as pleasant experiences from Pac*Bell. And I am on record praising Pac*Bell when it was warranted. > We have a Smart Park in Moreno Valley and another in Rancho, > California and from what I have heard every customer is very happy with > his service. As I have said before, somehow, somewhere there are a few people that like GTE -- for whatever reason. If "every customer" is happy with his service, then the credibility score is low. No telco provides that level of service. It may say something about the "telecom knowledgeability" of the customers. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: GTE Thinks I live in 213 Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:43:17 GMT john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) writes: > aimla!ruby!rudholm@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Rudholm) writes: >> Can't somebody put GTE out of our misery??!!! > Well, you could always do what a major client of mine is in the > process of doing. Ignoring advice to not locate a billing center in > GTE area, this outfit took space in a Long Beach industrial park. For > the past year the GTE horrors have been non-stop. > So next month Long Beach will lose a thriving company and Anaheim will > gain one. Is it any wonder that the Town Council of Los Gatos passed a > resolution condemning GTE? I wonder if it'd be possible for a large group of business and residential customers that have been shafted by GTE to somehow file a class action suit against GTE? If it is, and you win, I'll settle for .1% of the total judgement! Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 11:41:58 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC In article vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) writes: > In article schuster@panix.com (Michael > Schuster) writes: >> Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what new features >> it has ... > Does it support CLASS? I have an AT&T 1337 that I bought a year ago. > I'm quite happy with it but now I would like a machine that uses CLID > information to stamp the calls. Any one now of one? I'm hoping the > new AT&T machine does. Apparently is is identical to the 1337 except for time-day stamp. Even has the same limited 8-minute recording time. The Panasonic KX-T8000 seems the way to go although it, too, does not support special line services. Mike Schuster NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: schuster@panix.com | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ From: jumper@spf.trw.com (Greg Jumper) Subject: Re: AT&T Digital Answering Machine II Organization: TRW Sensor Data Processing Center, Redondo Beach, CA Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 00:07:21 GMT In article vances@xenitec.on.ca (Vance Shipley) writes: > In article schuster@panix.com > (Michael Schuster) writes: >> Now I see the AT&T 1339 being advertised and guess what >> new features it has ... > Does it support CLASS? I have an AT&T 1337 that I bought a year > ago. I'm quite happy with it but now I would like a machine that > uses CLID information to stamp the calls. Any one now of one? I'm > hoping the new AT&T machine does. I got the new 1339 about six weeks ago. As far as I know (not having had a 1337), all the 1339 adds is time-and-date stamp, voice announcement of number of messages, and more memory. There is no (mention of) CLASS capability. Greg Jumper TRW Signal Processing Facility jumper@spf.trw.com ------------------------------ Subject: Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool From: rop@hacktic.nl (Rop Gonggrijp) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:35:03 WET/D Organization: Hack-Tic Magazine mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes: >> Guess this does show what 'capable minds' set up the technology that >> we are supposed to trust. Yet in the eyes of US law enforcement, we >> would have been the criminals for experimenting with this (using >> 555-XXXX numbers), and AT&T the poor victim. > When you "experimented," you _did_ impose false charges on somebody, > didn't you? Why _aren't_ you the "criminals" then? If we did not experiment, we sould never have found this trick. AT&T would say their system was totally secure. YOU would trust a system this stupid. I did not use this system to make calls, I used it to show that it could be done, and I have done some testing to see what you could and could not do with it. As a reporter that is into these things, that is what I have to do. You may not appreciate it, but I'm doing you a favour. Believe me, AT&T can live with about thirty to fifty dollars in "losses". They should have "lost" a few hundred thousand dollars through this hole, as far as I am concerned. Knowing that this kind of thread can go on for ever, and is likely to become a shouting match, I will not respond to any further posts on this subject. One thing: I hate to have to explain why I do things every second posting I make. Can my motivations be included in the FAQ for this newsgroup? ;-) ------------------------------ From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: ABCD as a Phreaking Tool Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:00:44 GMT > I remember that phreaks used to use ABCD to hack directory assistance. > Without getting into the specifics, you could use certain combinations > during a call to DA, and you would be put in a trunk from which you > could actually answer information calls. Ten years ago calls such as these to 555-1212 in some areas would allow certain test modes. One of these was a loop around test. Two people could call 555-1212 at a prearranged time and talk without charge. This method is so old and well known that if it still works, someone must want it that way. Most loops that previously passed the full audio bandwidth now only pass a 1 KHz test tone. ATT at one time had a set of loops available to equipment manufacturers that required a person to talk simultaneously onto both ends of the loop to set it up. After this, the full audio bandwidth was available. This technique worked effectively to prevent these loops from being used as a phone phreak meeting place. John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:51:52 GMT mdw@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (mark.d.wuest) writes: > I think another side effect of the break-up is the shift away from > pure research at Bellcore. They're laying off more people as I type. > Bell Labs is rumored to be headed toward a market-driven approach to > development (but *that* rumor's been flying around for awhile now ...). > Who know what the end result will be? That "rumor" was essentially *confirmed* in an article in {Scientific American} a few months back ... Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 11:50:06 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: Deterioration of POTS (vs. Monopolies) Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article lauren@vortex.COM (Lauren Weinstein) writes: > The point of my original message was that the fragmentation of phone > service has caused problems for non-techie users, who have not been, > are are unlikely to become, the beneficiaries of most of the > competitively driven advances in telecommunications technology. Lots > of fascinating alternatives and services will be opening up for > business users, but nobody really wants to spend a lot on the > residential POTS market (since it is mostly all regulated > services) -- and things are getting tougher for exactly that segment. > And contrary to some opinions we've seen, I do feel that it is > important for the technologists (that's us!) to watch out for "Aunt > Martha" and her needs as well. Most of the arguments about the break-up center over the differing needs of business and residential service. The needs of large businesses center over price and day-to-day quality. Residential users are usually willing to pay more if they can just ignore the damn thing -- just make it work. Thus the hand-holding attitude of the old Bell System; they over-stocked the limited selection of things to be able to respond quickly to unanticipated demand, and over-hired for the same reasons. But if the goal is universal service, I can't think of any alternative that would have reach the same level of SERVICE. In today's environment, the businesses benefit (and "large" home users), but one can't easily say "just make it work" to anyone, even for a higher price. Al Varney - just MY opinion [Moderator's Note: I have a deteriorated pot I bought many years ago in which to cook carrots and peas. Today when I looked at it, it had gotten a crack in the bottom so I threw it out. Maybe I should send it to Judge Greene and ask for a new pot if he can't make this one work right again. I'll demand that he rule the deterioration of pots has to stop immediatly even if Tru-Value Hardware has to be divested in the process. PAT] ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: Make Mine Extra Dry, Please, and Hold the Olive Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:33:00 GMT In article , coleman@twinsun.com (Mike Coleman) writes: > I was sitting in traffic behind a PacBell repair van and noticed two > large weatherproof socket covers (the kind of thing you see on outdoor > power receptacles) on the upper rear of the van. One was labeled > "DRY" and the other "WET". I'm puzzled; anyone know what these are? Not really sure of this instance, but I'll render an opinion (after all, any clod can have the facts 8^)! Wet and dry are slang for whether or not a trunk has a battery and ground feed (Wet, or the line contains "juice") versus a circuit without battery and ground feed (Dry, sorry, no olives!) 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 (26070-adams) Subject: Re: What are Personal Communication Services Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:45:32 GMT In article , perl@dwrsun4.UUCP (Robert Perlberg) writes: > I have seen mention in many industry magazines of Personal > Communication Services (PCS). ...stuff deleted > ... How is PCS different from/better than cellular? The common usage of PCS around here, NEW BUZZWORD ALERT -> NOMADIC SERVICES!, is to establish a single number for each person, allowing the intelligence of the network to figure out where to route it to (home, macro cellular, micro cellular, etc.) Visionaries also view PCS as not simply single phone number, but seemless service as well. i.e., voice mail on busy/don't answer, call park and page, plus all the services operating uniformly no matter where the customer happens to be. 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 #656 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa01184; 24 Aug 92 0:20 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26231 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:30:36 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12070 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:30:26 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:30:26 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208240330.AA12070@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #657 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 22:30:30 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 657 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (Brett G. Person) Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies (Bob Kupiec) Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! (Leonard Erickson) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Dan Danz) Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards (John R. Levine) Re: NYTel LATAs (John R. Levine) Re: What Does This "Western Electric" Box Do? (David S. Wise) Re: Ameritech Complete MasterCard (Jerry Greenwood) Re: Switching Systems (John Higdon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:15:10 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article mrapple@quack.sac.ca.us (Nick Sayer) writes: > Our Moderator Notes: >> I've no complaints about it at all. I have NOTHING against >> competition. But I have NOTHING against legal, lawfully maintained >> monopolies either. [ RBOC comments deleted } > Government has proved time, and time, and time, and time again that it > cannot hope to be as clever at regulating RBOCs as the RBOCs are at > evading regulation, bribing regulatory officials and ripping off the > public. The answer is not government. The answer is free markets. > [Moderator's Note: By 'legal, lawfully maintained monopolies', I did > NOT mean monopolies started by or protected by the government. I meant > those monopolies which got that way through the hard work, effort and > brains of the company founder, and which continue to remain a monopoly > despite *completely obeying the law*. In other words, I supported AT&T > intact before the breakup and Standard Oil before it was divested at > the turn of the century. I do not support gangsters who maintain a > 'monopoly' by force, threats and violence. I agree, the free market > should be the only consideration. PAT] Some of those so-called 'lawfully maintained monopiles' that you so admire got that way by fear, threat, intimidation, bribery and sundry other tactics that run the gamut from unethical to unlawful. Kinda depends what the laws are at the time and whose ethical standards are being applied. Personally, I've always considered 'business ethics' to be somewhat of an oxymoron. Hard work and effort (is there a difference?) is usually only part of the story and often a minor part. Cleverness can be more important and cutthroatness doesn't hurt sometimes. These types of advantages are even more important if we harken back to the glorious days of yesteryear -- the age of the Robber Barons -- when many of the monopolies (mostly now metamorphasized into oligopies) that our Moderator so admires were an economic and ethical scourge on society. Also, you are a little skewed in your thinking about what a free market is. If the benefits of a free market flow from competition and the market forces it applies to a company, then by definition, a monopoly will not be best for society because a monopoly will not be subject to such forces. Of course some concensions to property rights must be made in the interests of innovation, hence patent monopolies, but anti-trust laws exist because it has been demonstrated that some business practices which also lead to monopolies do not have a societal benefit and often have the opposite effect. Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: plains!person@uunet.UU.NET (Brett G Person ) Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Date: 23 Aug 92 23:25:38 GMT Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network PAT, you are citing examples of charity, NOT employee/corporatee relations which is the key to why Standard was broken up. Getting back to the original thread. AT&T was just too damned big. It was THE PHONE CPMPANY. Tell me, would you want to buy gas from only Mobile, cars from only Ford, clothes from only JC Penney? How 'bout if the only television station you had was WGN? I'm sure the details of the breakup are somewhere in the archives. I'll look them up before I log out tonight. I may agree with you after I have read the details. But right now,I don't think I can say that I do. There is just something wrong about having only one service provider. The comparison with IBM is Dead Wrong. IBM is big, no doubt, but there are at least other choices. What other choices besides AT&T were there before the breakup? Brett Person Guest Account North Dakota State University person@plains.nodak.edu || person@plains.bitnet [Moderator's Note: There were lots of choices prior to the breakup. MCI was selling long distance service ten years before the breakup as was Sprint. The catch was the inconvenience in using their service with the extra digits one had to dial and the extra cost their customers had to pay in the form of local phone message unit charges to the competitor's switch. Repeat: I have nothing against any form of competition. I believe AT&T should have been ordered to interconnect with the others in a fair way at arms-length. They should have been ordered to include the newcomers in the Separations and Settlements process and let the local Bells handle the billing and collection for some fee like they do now. PAT] ------------------------------ From: olwejo!root@uunet.UU.NET (Bob Kupiec) Subject: Re: Our Moderator and Monopolies Organization: Olwejo - Private UNIX System Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 05:53:30 GMT In , the Telecom Digest Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: You are correct. I live in a different world than > many of the readers here. I live in a dirty, very impoverished, crime- > ridden and rapidly dying inner city. I've seen you write how much you dislike the city many times, and if you don't mind me asking, what is keeping you there? I don't think that I would have lived in those surroundings for very long, I would have packed my bags and gone somewhere else. Bob Kupiec - Olwejo System Admin. - N3MML !: uunet!cs.widener.edu!olwejo!bob UUCP: olwejo!bob@cs.widener.edu Internet: kupiec@hp800.lasalle.edu School: LaSalle University, 20th St. & Olney Ave., Philadelphia, PA [Moderator's Note: Very simple. I do not have the cash reserves I feel I would need to live somewhere else for a month (or two or three?) while looking for employment without being a burden on my new community in the process. The current economic recession is a real killer. I can barely keep my bills current. The idea of going somewhere else without pre-arranged employment and housing is very scary to me. PAT] ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: I've Fallen and I Can't Get Up! Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 14:19:08 GMT toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) writes: > In article msb@pegasus.att.com (Michael > Scott Baldwin) writes: >> My grandmother is in need of one of these infamous devices. > I would think the best solution is to have the autodialer go into > speakerphone mode after making the connection so the callee can try to > listen and/or talk to the caller. Also I would want an alarm so your > grandmother knows when it's dialing, rather than silent operation, so > she can abort any false alarms. You probably DO NOT want to directly > call the emergency services due to the "boy who cried 'wolf'" > syndrome. It wouldn't surprise me if they start totally ignoring > automated calls and/or charging big bucks for false alarms. In many jurisdictions, it is flat out *illegal* to have an automated system directly dial the police or fire department. These laws came about for exactly the reasons you cite above. (It's amazing what you pick up by reading the stuff enclosed with things like alarm systems.) Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) [Moderator's Note: I got a system like that for my mother. It goes through an answering service which is trained to handle those calls; they in turn call her neighbors, the doctor, the police, etc. I pay $30 per month for it to some company in Colorado. PAT] ------------------------------ From: dan@quiensabe.az.stratus.com (Dan Danz) Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp Date: 23 Aug 92 18:30:13 GMT Reply-To: dan@tucson.az.stratus.com As a former technical writer, I was blessed with an editor who adamantly refused to allow phrases like: "Hit the return key" (Too violent) and "Depress the return key" (Too depressing, we have HAPPY keys) I wonder what she would have done with: "Pound the return key" or "Pound the pound key". L. W. "Dan" Danz VOS Mail: Dan_Danz@vos.stratus.com Sr Consulting Software SE NeXT Mail: dan@az.stratus.com Customer Assistance Center Voice Mail/Pager: (602) 852-3107 Telecommunications Division Customer Service: (800) 828-8513 Stratus Computer, Inc. 4455 E. Camelback #115-A, Phoenix AZ 85018 ------------------------------ Subject: Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 23 Aug 92 15:19:50 EDT (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > Question: what does SDN stand for anyway? And what makes it different > from standard long distance service? It's Software Defined Network. In Olden Days when long distance rates were much higher than now and switching was relatively much more expensive than it is now, large companies usually rented lots of fixed leased lines among their various facilities to carry intra-company traffic. This saved money relative to toll rates and also sometimes avoided problems of not being able to get through at peak hours. But now leased lines have become an anachronism, because the modern network is much better at providing bandwidth on demand, so long distance companies provide various billing hacks to give modern equivalents of leased lines. Once such hack is the "virtual private line" which is a long distance ringdown circuit -- whenever you pick up the phone at one end it quickly calls the other end to give you pretty much the same effect as a leased line but at lower cost since they don't need to provide bandwidth when you're not asking for it. SDN is basically a bulk calling plan for large businesses that replaces networks of leased lines. One dials 10732 to make an SDN call (and gets a message saying to call your account rep if it's not a line assigned to an SDN account) but as far as I know the calls are carried just like other AT&T calls. Then there's the matter of Tariff 12. AT&T, still being the dominant long distance carrier, still has regulated rates which means that they have to offer the same terms to everyone. When dealing with large customers, though, the only way a carrier can keep their business is to create a package deal that meets their particular needs. When AT&T makes a package for a large customer, e.g. DEC, they file it as an offering under Tariff 12 which means that if you happen to need exactly the same service as DEC does, you can order it at the same price. But filing under Tariff 12 is expensive and slow so it doesn't make sense to do it for other than the largest accounts. To fill in this gap, there has arisen a bunch of grey-market AT&T resellers. There is an SDN offering that covers multiple locations and sends each location its own bill, but with a price based on the total volume, which many companies use when each location handles its own overhead expenses. The resellers buy this service and resell it to smaller businesses, and AT&T then bills each of the smaller businesses directly. I'm not sure how the resellers make money, whether it's by charging a fee directly to the customers or by somehow getting a rebate from AT&T. AT&T doesn't seem to be entirely thrilled by this development, since it gets them involved in situations with resellers who are often marginal, low-overhead, and somewhat slimy, but it is a way they can offer competitive prices to businesses too small for the bulk plans but too big to be happy with something like Reach Out. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Subject: Re: NYTel LATAs Organization: I.E.C.C. Date: 23 Aug 92 15:26:13 EDT (Sun) From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) > New York Regional Calling Area: > New York City (212/718/917 area codes); Long Island (516) except > Fisher's Island; ... Aha. I'd long been wondering where Fisher's Island gets its phone service. It's physically close to New London CT, has a New London zip code (the only place in the country out of state zip sequence) and the only way to get there is by ferry from New London. So I guess SNET provides their phone service, too. > Albany Regional Calling Area: > Capital District and Adirondack Region - all of Area Code 518 and Hancock, > Massachussetts in Area Code 413); That's odd, the New England Tel phone books claim that all of 413 is in the Western Mass. LATA. The exchange is 413-738. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 10:51:13 -0500 From: David S. Wise Subject: Re: What Does This "Western Electric" Box Do? Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman) writes: > I moved into a new apartment this weekend, and found a mysterious box > plugged into an electric outlet, with wires running into a telephone > junction box. Various writing on the box reads: > Western Electric > 2012C Trnsf. > [Moderator's Note: It is indeed a transformer to light the dial on a > Princess phone ... a style long since replaced by the Trimline models. > The reason you do not need it on the Trimline is because instead of an > actual little light bulb under the case of a Princess phone, the newer > Trimline model uses LED's under each push button and they light up Amendment: Sometime before 1984, ITT sold a Trimline clone -- "Trendline" I believe was the cloned name. The original Trendline (with heavier "Indestructible 500"-style components) uses the transformer/bulb arrangement Pat ascribes to the Princess. BUT, the bulb was not delivered with the instrument although the phone was already wired for it (yellow/black). The Trendline 2 uses a modified LED arrangement, similar to what Pat describes for the Trimline. Both these are fully modular phones, and so the original is likely to be plugged in where it doesn't belong. Thus, the following is not for novices: for $1 you can buy a bulb and plug it in to a Trendline. If you still have such a transformer, you now have a WELL lighted phone. Not all the transformers started fires, but a specific subset was URGENTLY recalled. LOC (which installed it) should still be able to identify a nasty, but would probably just beg you to unplug it. WARNINGS: If you have such a transformer and don't need it, please UNPLUG IT. If you want to keep it, check its recall status before using it. DO NOT ATTACH ANY 2-LINE phones. Competent rewiring might save you, but I would not have both in the same building. And if you put a bulb into an original Trendline, BEWARE OF 2-LINE wiring. David S. Wise +1(812)855-4866; fax: +1(812)855-4829 dswise@cs.indiana.edu Computer Science Dept., Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405-4101, USA ------------------------------ From: grnwood@gagme.chi.il.us (Jerry Greenwood) Subject: Re: Ameritech Complete MasterCard Date: 23 Aug 92 07:21:21 GMT Organization: Gagme Public Access UNIX, Chicago, Illinois. Also ... the May 1990 issue of {Consumer Reports} has the four major ways in which the interest is computed. They list them according to their desirability. Armed with these one can make a good choice. There is even a 7.9 percent card out there ... the catch is that it has a $39.00 fee. That would be great for me as I carry a large balance. I'll probably get that card and when the balance is paid off ... switch to a no fee card. Jerry Greenwood N9NRG grnwood@gagme.chi.il.us 312-545-2219 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 22:34 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Switching Systems On Aug 22 at 22:26, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: So with panel and SXS being incompatible, how were > calls handled between those offices? PAT] There were several hacks that were used. Early on, there were mechanical translators to convert revertive to rotary and visa versa. While it was not much trouble sending a call from SXS to Panel the other direction was problematic. In the former, a switch level was connected to special trunks from the Panel office equipped with the same type of rotary receivers that the subscribers used. However, the only output language spoken by Panel is revertive and this had to be converted to rotary pulses. Due to the handshaking in revertive signalling, conversion to rotary was not a trivial task. And the native tongue of SXS IS rotary. Later on, calls between SXS and Panel were routed through the local tandem switch. The first of these were crossbar, and as you will recall crossbar speaks all traditional signalling languages fluently. This was how calls between San Mateo and San Francisco were handled decades ago, when San Mateo had a major amount of SXS and San Francisco still had some Panel offices. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #657 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02302; 24 Aug 92 0:56 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06092 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:03:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA17755 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:02:57 -0500 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:02:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208240402.AA17755@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #658 TELECOM Digest Sun, 23 Aug 92 23:03:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 658 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Conversation Attack: Software Blue Box in Germany (Wolf Paul) Odd Calling Card Rates at NYTel (Douglas Scott Reuben) Interesting Stuff in a Box (Roy Smith) Question About PBX Phone (Dave Grabowski) Weird Intercept (Randy Gellens) Sprint and Network 2000 Sued by Sellers of Long Distance (Joe Konstan) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul) Subject: Conversation Attack: Software Blue Box in Germany Reply-To: Wolf.Paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf N. Paul) Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 14:14:04 GMT The following is from the Austrian newsweekly "profil", No. 34, Aug. 17, 1992. "Conversation Attack" -- German computer hackers permit cheap telephoning around the globe. The demonstration setup was extremely simple. A PC, a monitor with an earphone socket, a modem, and -- most importantly -- a disk with special software. The man in front of the keyboard dialled the digits 0130, the prefix for Germany's "freephone" numbers. A few digits later the connection to Canada was established, the diskette began to spin and sent some fake signals across the Atlantic. A few moments later another dial tone could be heard, and the computer freak at the keyboard leisurly keyed in the number of a girl friend in Tokyo with whom he'd wanted to talk for some time. The faces of the men who are looking over the computer freak's shoulders show increasing dismay. Experts, particularly telco experts, don't like to be confronted with the ease with which they can be defeated. And that's exactly what this writer for the German magazine "Capital" did in July. The man took his time with his call to Tokyo. The call didn't cost him more than a call to his mother at the other end of town. The bill would be paid by someone else. The diabolically genial program developed by German hackers caused the meters to rotate at the Canadian firm whose "freephone" number was dialed at the beginning of the demonstration. Experts from "Telekom", the German telco, had assured the public that security precautions against this kind of unwelcome "conversation attack" had been been perfected. But this demonstration by "Capital" -- which had been previously announced -- mercilessly revealed the weaknesses of the telco's defenses against hackers. Here' how it works: In addition to the deluge of conversations which pours through the ether, there are signals which are sent on certain frequencies. These signals indicate to the phone systems who is connected to whom, and most importantly, who pays for what. As soon as the hackers have found out which frequencies are used for these signals, it becomes child's play to fool the receiving system with counterfeit signals and make it pay for the call. The telco has started the counter-attack. Telekom spokesman Juergen Kindervater: "We are in the process of installing technical blockers in the network which will make access more difficult". The hackers are not discouraged by this. The have started to offer their software package "Blue Box" (cost inclusive one year's warranty: DM 25,000 or $12,000) to a wider public -- as yet under the counter. If the telco should change its system, that wouldn't be a problem, the hackers assure potential customers. The program could always be adjusted to allow for new measures. "Kimble", the alias of the hacker who wrote most of the program, is convinced that this system is "perfectly legal in Germany" and plans to start a company to publicly market his program. Telekom spokesman Kindervater compares the situation to a tortoise-and-hare race. As soon as telco technicians close one loophole, the hackers have found a new one. Kindervater: "We won't have a chance until we can separate the voice and signal channels." This is supposed to happen by next spring when Telekom introduces the new digital "Signaling System Seven". A Hamburg hacker comments gleefully: "A digital network will increase our possibilities even more. We'll be able to get into anything, even the main telco computers." The damages caused by these "telecom-parasites" are still comparatively small (according to Kindervater), maybe in the tens of millions of Marks. But the future perspectives are disquieting. German and Austrian telco officials are afraid of the specter of Eastern European companies who might want to increase their communications budget by purchasing this software from the German hackers. That could raise damages into the billions. The software functions equally well in Austria. One simply uses the Austrian "freephone" prefix, 0660. While Austrian telco spokesman Stadbauer claims that this has not yet happened in Austria, and that measures are in place to prevent it, "Kimble" claims that several of his customers are using Blue Box in Austria. Telco technician Adalbert Dirnboeck admits that the Austrian security network is not yet perfectly tight: "The analogue portion of the network still has some loopholes, but the digital portion is safe." Very reassuring, especially since two-thirds of Austria's 0660 numbers are still handled by the analogue portion of the network. In any case, "Kimble" is not fazed by the prospects of a digital network. "Blue Box will still work -- we are demonstrating that even now in Hamburg, which is already digital." 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) ELIN RESEARCH A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe +43-1-2246913 (h) ------------------------------ Date: 23-AUG-1992 19:07:28.56 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: Odd Calling Card Rates at NYTel I recently got a bill for Calling Card calls from NYTel, reflecting charges for calls made from Shoreham, NY, to NYC, NY. The calls were made at 1AM, and lasted for one minute each. Each call cost $1.10. I thought that was a bit expensive, so I called my business office to check these charges. Here's what happened: 1. I was told "We charge a 40 cent surcharge, plus the coin rate, plus toll". I asked what that came out to be, and the rep said "We don't have that information here, but we will get back to you." They never did. 2. Called back the next day from Mass (collect, of course!). I asked why my call was not returned. Rep. said she tried to call me back, but no one was there. I told her I had an answering machine or voice mail at EVERY number I gave her, but received no message. No answer from her. She then tells me the same thing she did the day before, and I repeat my request for an exact breakdown of the charges, with actual dollar amounts. She says she will get back to me. Again, never did. 3. Repeated calls go on all week, no answer. I call the NYTel "President's Helpline". Rep. there sounds VERY concered (they always do! :) ). Next day I get a call on voicemail from the NYTel supervisor for my office, she says that they have looked into the problem, and the rate is "a 40 cent surcharge plus the coin rate for the call." According to her, a call from a PAYPHONE in Shoreham, NY, to NYC, NY, is 70 cents for the first minute, and $.15 for each additional minute. Thus, a minute call is $.40 (surcharge) + $.70, which comes out to the $1.10 which I had been billed. I didn't think this was correct -- in the past, NY Tel (and presently all LECs that I deal with) charge a surcharge, plus whatever the direct dial rate is -- there is no special rate from payphones. Thus, a payphone call has a certain "coin surcharge" plus the direct dial rate if one pays by coin, a calling card call has a "calling card surcharge" plus the direct dial rate, and operator assist calls have a given number of surcharges (depending on what she does) plus the direct dial rate. 4. I called the NYTel Pres. Helpline again, noted the above, and told the rep. that the NYTel phone book says "Calling card calls cost a 40 cent surcharge plus the direct dialed rate, if handled by NYTel". She said yes, but there is a DIFFERENT direct dial rate for payphones than what one pays from non-coin phones. Nice, ambiguous use of the term "direct dial", eh? Giving up on NYTel to resolve this, I called the NY Public Service Commission. I spoke to someone on the Rates and Tariffs staff, who after looking up the concerned tariffs, said yes, indeed, NYTel is correct, but ONLY for calls in the NY Metro LATA, and only for calls from payphones. Thus, she said, there is a separate "direct dial" rate from payphones, and if I had made the Calling Card call from a business or residence phone I would pay a different (cheaper) rate. (This STILL doesn't sound right to me, but it seems the PSC allows and agrees with this.) Thus, a NYTel handled call from downtown Albany to one of the Albany suburbs is $.40 + toll direct dial (or local direct dial) rate. So, if it cost me $.10 for a one minute call from Albany to another Albany number, it would cost $.50 for a one minute calling card, ie $.40 plus $.10, regardless of if the call was made from a payphone or a business/residence phone. However, a call of EXACTLY the same mileage from NYC to another number in NYC (let's say from one payphone to another right next to it) will be $.65, that is, $.40 surcharge, plus the cost of a placing the call with coins, which is $.25 cents. And indeed, upon inspection of my bill, I note that calls from payphones are billed as such. As I noted earlier, this is the only case where I have EVER seen this rate. Having TWO direct dial rates (e.g., one from coin and another for non-coin phones) seems to go against the industry "standard" of having a set toll rate and then attaching surcharges to that rate for special telco-offered services, like Calling Card calls, etc. In the case of the 1AM call from Shoreham to NYC, I think it would have been a bit cheaper to dial 10288 first (this is allowed in NY for INTRA-LATA calls), as AT&T would charge something like $.80 surcharge + $.15 (or less) toll. From now on, I'm not using NYTel for calls in the New York Metro calling area (NYC - 212, 718, 917; Southern Westchester - 914; Greenwich/Byram, CT - 203; Rockland - 914, and Long Island - 516 except for Fisher's Island). One of the reasons I obtained a Calling Card was to avoid the high coin-deposit surcharge; apparently NYTel has managed to convince the PSC to allow them to charge it again via Calling Card calls in the NY Metro calling area. If I can place a no-surcharge call with Metro Media for $.20, or a surcharge call with AT&T which for non-local calls is cheaper than what NYTel will charge me from a payphone, why bother with them? This seems self-defeating -- Calling Card calls save the Telco time in collecting coins and having to tie up a payphone while a customer deposits them. By encouraging me to use coins, or to give my money to someone else (although NYTel gets a cut in any event), they will gain less revenue. I assume they expect no one to notice and/or care about this new rate structure , and thus the minimal revenue loss from customers such as myself who do migrate to other services is of little interest to them. Oh well ... :( Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Subject: Interesting Stuff in a Box Organization: Public Health Research Institute, New York Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 17:46:49 GMT I was just walking down the street in midtown Manhattan and came to a Con Ed (New York's gas and electric utility) truck parked by an open equipment box. It was obviously some sort of gas pipeline monitoring station. In one side of the box was what looked like a large gas pressure regulator and random sorts of valves and sensors. Underneath was a large circular chart recorder. Another part had a digital thermometer for outside air temperature, etc. The interesting part was the section which contained some neat looking telecom gear. There was a Radio Shack alarm dialer, a plain-jane wall-mount telephone (presumably for the convenience of service people installing or testing the equipment), what I could swear was a Telebit Trailblazer modem (couldn't see the front panel but the box and rear panel look exactly like a Trailblazer), and a neat pair of boxes which I assume were the guts of a cellular phone. One box was a slim metal case with a piece of fat (RG-8?) coax coming out one end, the other was a fatter box connected to it with a nameplate that said "CelJack", and had an RJ-11 jack on it, into which were plugged the Telebit, alarm dialer, and telephone via a random assortment of T-connectors). One piece of gear I couldn't identify was a slim, approximately 10 x 16 inch box which was a Hewlett/Packard model 48060 (anybody know what a HP-48060 is?) It had two sets of barrier-strip type terminals, one on each end. I'm assuming it was some sort of industrial process control computer. OK, my question is, why the cellular phone? Obviously, this is some sort of setup where they monitor gas pressure/whatnot and download data periodically to some central point. The alarm dialer presumably can send in some sort of emergency message. But why the cellular phone? Why not just run a regular copper phone line into the box? It's not like it's out in the boonies or someplace. I can think of only two reasons for the Telebit. One is that there is so much data to be sent that hey really want the speed you get from those to cut down on cell air time. But, if that's the case, wouldn't a land line be cheaper? The other possibility i that this is such a critical station that they need the reliability you get from a Telebit. But if that's the case, why go with an alarm dialer from Radio Shack? roy@wombat.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016, USA ------------------------------ From: dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) Subject: Question About PBX Phone Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 21:16:59 GMT I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works fine. Dave ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 23 AUG 92 21:56 Subject: Weird Intercept I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this number before). When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are using. Please read the instruction card and dial again." (There are the standard SIT tones at the beginning.) This is odd since I'm calling from my office phone, not a pay phone. (I also tried it as 310-663, but got a "Your call cannot be completed as dialed" intercept.) Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com >>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to rgellens@mcimail.com <<<<<<<< Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 20:15:40 -0700 From: konstan@postgres.Berkeley.EDU (Joe Konstan) Subject: Sprint and Network 2000 Sued by Sellers of Long Distance The {San Francisco Chronicle} August 18 Business Briefs Section has a short under the title: Sprint is Accused of Pyramid Scheme To summarize, 52 resellers in 18 states have sued Sprint and Network 2000 (a marketing company whose only client is Sprint) charging that they were recruited into an illegal pyramid scheme and were denied commissions. The suit demands $25,000 per plaintiff. Joe Konstan ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #658 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa04571; 24 Aug 92 2:04 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18971 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:12:48 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14038 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:12:38 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 00:12:38 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208240512.AA14038@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #659 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Aug 92 00:12:43 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 659 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Internet PRIVACY Forum (Lauren Weinstein) Announcing "The Electronic Dimension" (Lambda Computer Associates) SS7 and Call Forwarding Variable (James VanHouten) Three-Wire Phone Hookups? (Gabe M. Wiener) Information Wanted: Toryo (Ray Normandeau) Baby Bells and States (Dave Niebuhr) FAXes Over Internet (David Link) ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? (Irving Wolfe) GTE California Changes (Matt Holdrege) Please Help Absolute Beginner (Timothy Murphy) Cellular Phone Usage From Airplanes (Jordan Hayes) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 14:26:59 PDT From: lauren@vortex.COM (Lauren Weinstein) Subject: Internet PRIVACY Forum Greetings. This is a reminder regarding the availability of the Internet PRIVACY Forum digest and related archive materials. The PRIVACY Forum is a moderated digest for the discussion and analysis of issues relating to the general topic of privacy (both personal and collective) in the "information age" of the 1990's and beyond. Topics include a wide range of telecommunications, information/database collection and sharing, and related issues, as pertains to the privacy concerns of individuals, groups, businesses, government, and society at large. The manners in which both the legitimate and the controversial concerns of business and government interact with privacy considerations are also topics for the digest. The PRIVACY Forum digest is supported in part by the ACM (Association for Computing Machinery) Committee on Computers and Public Policy. Except when unusual events warrant exceptions, digest publication is limited to no more than one or two reasonably-sized digests per week. Other mailing lists/digests relating to some of these topic areas, with somewhat different submission and editorial policies, may be more appropriate for readers who prefer a higher volume of messages regarding these issues. The goal of PRIVACY Forum is to present a high quality electronic publication which can act as a significant resource to both individuals and organizations who are interested in these issues. The digest is best viewed as similar in focus to a journal or specialized technical publication. The moderator will choose submissions for inclusion based on their relevance and content. The PRIVACY Forum is moderated by Lauren Weinstein of Vortex Technology. He has been active regarding a wide range of issues involving technology and society in the ARPANET/Internet community since the early 1970's. The Forum also has an "advisory committee" consisting of three distinguished individuals who have offered to act as a "sounding board" to help with any questions of policy which might arise in the course of the Forum's operations. For more details regarding the PRIVACY Forum, including FTP and listserv archive access information, please send a message to: privacy-request@cv.vortex.com with the command: information privacy in the BODY of the message. Or to subscribe, send a message to the same address but with the command: subscribe privacy in the body of the message. Thanks much. --Lauren-- [Moderator's Note: This is NOT a duplicate. Lauren's publication is entirely separate and distinct from the one published by Dennis Rears which was discussed here earlier today. Both digests deal with privacy issues: The one Dennis started a couple years ago had its beginning here in telecom. The one Lauren started a few months ago is similar, but with a different set of guidlines as Lauren noted. PAT] ------------------------------ From: ddsw1!akcs@ddsw1.mcs.com Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 15:57 CDT Subject: Announcing "The Electronic Dimension" T H E E L E C T R O N I C D I M E N S I O N BBS Newsletter Premier Issue to be released - OCTOBER, 1992 Dedicated to all members of the on-line community Six bi-monthly issues per year, in printed format. One year subscription: $15.00 Featuring articles of interest on: * BBS Software * Telecommunications Software * Feature stories on different BBS's * Modems & PC Hardware information * Shareware and Freeware * and much, much more! Sign up now for your complimentary issue! To receive the premier issue free of charge, complete the coupon below, and mail it to: Lambda Computer Consultants P.O. Box 264 Park Ridge, IL 60068-0264 (708) 827-3615 OR Netmail your name, address and phone number to: Toby Schneiter or Gloria LaHay FidoNet > 1:115/769 Attention SysOps & Industry Vendors: Advertise your product or multi-line BBS for FREE !!! Supply us with camera ready art, or just typed copy, and we will run a 1"x2" add in the premier issue of THE ELECTRONIC DIMENSION NEWSLETTER. (This offer is limited, so please submit your ads early!) Quarter, half or full page ads are available on a limited basis for a nominal fee. .............................................................. . . . Name ___________________________________________________ . . . . Address ________________________________________________ . . . . City,St,Zip ____________________________________________ . . . . Phone #: (_____)________________________________ . . . . . . Yes! Please send me the free Premier issue of . . THE ELECTRONIC DIMENSION NEWSLETTER, and sign me up for . . a yearly subscription at $15.00. . . Enclosed is my __check __money-order __Visa . . __MasterCard . . . . Credit Card #: _______________________________________ . . . . Expiration Date: ______________________ . . . . Signature: __________________________________________ . . . . . .............................................................. ------------------------------ From: James.VanHouten@f544.n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 04:52:11 -0500 Subject: SS7 and Call Forwarding Variable > [Moderator's Note: I did this for awhile with my recorded message > service back in 1973-74. Someone living in Joliet, IL had a metro area > unlimited line which included all of northern Illinois and Chicago. I > paid the cost for a real cheap incoming only (no outgoing calls > without extra expense) line for him to receive calls on. He made his > outgoing calls on the unlimited line which he also left forwarded at > all times to my number in downtown Chicago. People in Aurora, Joliet > and Will County called that number locally. Eventually IBT got sore > about it and we turned it off rather than argue with them. PAT] From what I understand SS7 is putting an end to this. If Party A is calling Party C thru Party B and it is normally a toll call for Party A to call Party C then it will not complete the call or will complete with a charge. On a different topic: Is there a tariff that prevents subscribers from dedicating modems together on POTS lines. One of my customers has 20 auto parts stores that call into their parts computer every morning at 7 AM and they stay up until about 6 PM. How are they getting away with this?? James Van Houten, Vice President | Voice: +1.301.248.3300 CIS 72067,316 Metropolitan Security Services, Inc | Fax: +1.301.967.7220 WN 55:4004/0 P.O. Box 502 | Data: +1.301.967.7220 FIDO 1:109/544 Temple Hills, MD 20757-0502 | Internet: James.VanHouten@f544.n109.z1. USA | fidonet.org ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Three-Wire Phone Hookups? Organization: Columbia University Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 05:13:56 GMT For years I have always known that telephone service is carried on tip/ring pairs. Yet for some reason I have memories of being told that phone service was carried on three wires when I was growing up in the 70's. I recently came across some old "How it works" book from the same era, replete with B&W photos of WECO 500 sets and non-modular wiring blocks, and there was some description of how the "telephone ring is carried on the red and yellow wires" and "when you pick up, the yellow wire is disconnected and the voice is carried on the red and green" or some such. Has there ever been a time when the CO loop to the customer was carried on three wires? I have many antique phones and even *they* work on two-wire systems (albeit they called it L1 and L2 then). And please, don't anyone chide me because the first Strowger systems worked on five-wire (yes, five-wire) systems :-) Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ [Moderator's Note: It was thought in the past that a phone should be grounded for best service, user protection, etc ... and frequently the yellow wire served this purpose. Often times it provided the ground for the bell which is higher voltage than the rest of the connection. Now the yellow and black wires are most commonly used for the second line in a two (or more) line installation. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Information Wanted: Toryo From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: 24 Aug 92 03:02:00 GMT Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) I have a two line residential phone with brand of Toryo. Last I heard the company was out of business. DAK I think had bought the last of the stock of the two line models. So ... if you have trouble tracking down company, now you know why. The phones also have the A B C D buttons. ray.normandeau@factory.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 06:55:39 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Baby Bells and States I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course). It seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover many. Would this be based on the population at the time? Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: David Link Reply-To: david@mike.lrc.edu Subject: FAXes Over Internet Date: 23 Aug 92 10:38:37 EDT Organization: Lenoir-Rhyne College, Hickory, NC Does anyone know if it is possible to send FAXes over the Internet using TCP/IP? If it can be done what hardware/software would be needed, how much would it cost, and who sells it? Thanks for any information. David J. Link david@alice.lrc.edu Lenoir-Rhyne College Hickory, NC 28603 (USA) ------------------------------ From: irving@happy-man.com (Irving_Wolfe) Subject: ANI Long Distance Service: Okay or Beware? Reply-To: Irving_Wolfe@happy-man.com Organization: Happy Man Corp., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399 Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 14:31:05 GMT I've been approached by a company called ANI (through a man in Chicago who apparently is a personal salesman for them, operating out of his own space) to change my business long distance service to ANI. He claims that AT&T would still be carrying the calls but that I'd save 20% or so (on a $250 or so long distance bill) by using them instead. Does anyone know these guys? Are they okay? Does what they said make sense? Why would AT&T carry my calls for 20% below its own ProWatts rates through them? What's the catch? Irving_Wolfe@Happy-Man.com Happy Man Corp. 206/463-9399 x101 4410 SW Pt. Robinson Rd., Vashon Island, WA 98070-7399 fax x108 We publish SOLID VALUE for the intelligent investor. NextMail OK Info free; sample $20. Send POSTAL addrs: Solid-Value@Happy-Man.com [Moderator's Note: There is no catch. Assuming they are otherwise legitimate, they do what they say. AT&T carries the traffic and handles the billing for them at the quoted rates under what is known as Tariff 12. A message earlier today discusses Tariff 12 in some detail. Look through earlier messages in the past several hours for details on this. ANI makes its money through a fee they charge you. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 16:47 GMT From: HOLDREGE_MP Subject: GTE California Changes John Higdon can no longer complain about the incompetant GTE reps in Thousand Oaks, CA. He soon will be able to complain about the incompetant GTE reps in North Carolina, Florida, and Texas. Excerpts from 8/19 {Los Angeles Times}: GTE California, the state's second-largest telephone company, plans to close the LA area facilities and transfer as many as 400 jobs out of state, union officials said Tuesday. GTE officials confirmed plans to close the company's Norwalk and Thousand Oaks long-distance access centers, which employ 255 people. A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans. The company is also considering closing its Long Beach network operations monitoring center, which could imperil another 160 jobs. While I can't blame any business from wanting to leave California, what with the crazy laws, high insurance and benefits corruption, I am upset that our phone company is pulling out. Is is especially upsetting that the Network Operations Monitoring center is leaving. The center, which opened only six months ago, was responsible for alerting technicians to problems. Who is going to do this now? Computers in Texas? Matt Holdrege 5156065@mcimail.com holdrege@eisner.decus.org 714-229-2518 [Moderator's Note: I'd like you to know a great deal of Illinois Bell's monitoring of its Chicago area facilities during off hours is done from Springfield, IL a couple hundred miles away. There are very definite disadvantages: after all, how do you think that terrible fire we had in 1988 got so far out of control? A technician in Springfield got the alarm but decided to insert his own judgment from afar over that of someone locally who might have made a difference in the time it took for the Fire Department to arrive. Good luck, Californians! PAT] ------------------------------ From: tim@maths.tcd.ie (Timothy Murphy) Subject: Please Help Absolute Beginner Organization: Dept. of Maths, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 17:32:47 GMT My apologies for intruding on esoteric discussions of ISDN, X400, etc -- but I have a very elementary question, and I should be most grateful for an answer to it. I have two phones, one brand new (Northern Telecom) and one possibly antique. (My wife thinks it beautiful, and wants to use it.) The new phone has six wires attached to it, variously coloured. The old phone has eight such wires. My question is -- is there any sort of standard meaning to these colours? eg; does red always mean the same thing, and if so what? I've managed to get the new phone working on our public system, after some experimentation. The system here only uses two wires - so there were only 30 = 6 x 5 possible combinations. But I'm still interested to know what the other four wires are for. Are they vestigial relics, like the appendix? I've made no progress with the eight-wire antique. I am wondering if some of the wires have to be connected together -- in which case it is hard enough to calculate the number of possibilities, let alone go through them. Is there an FAQ for people like me? If so, please accept my apologies for creating noise on your line. If not, is there any simple book on the subject? The problem here is that until recently one was not allowed -- or I should say supposed -- to connect one's own apparatus to the public network. So little or no public information was made available. Any help gratefully received. Timothy Murphy e-mail: tim@maths.tcd.ie tel: +353-1-2842366 s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland [Moderator's Note: In the USA at least, the colors go like this: red/green for line one; yellow/black for line two if the phone is so equipped; blue/white for some supplementary feature such as an intercom signal, etc. Usually only two-line phones have the blue/ white pair. Was your Northern Telecom phone built for use here in the USA or specifically constructed for use in Ireland? It matters. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 13:22:31 EDT From: jordan@imsi.com (Jordan Hayes) Subject: Cellular Phone Usage From Airplanes Organization: Investment Management Services Inc., NYC Someone here wants to use a Cellblazer while commuting by aircraft, but I remember hearing something about an FCC rule prohibiting the use of cellular phones while airborne. My guess is that it would make the cells that are now equidistant from the phone go crazy trying to figure out who has the best signal. What about tall buildings? What about hilltops? Does anyone have the real scoop on this, and (more importantly), have any good ideas about how to "stay connected" using SL/IP or PPP while in the air? jordan [Moderator's Note: We go 'round and 'round on this from time to time here and perhaps some readers will send the appropriate past messages direct to Jordan or correspond with him in email. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #659 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa28385; 25 Aug 92 1:46 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA19104 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 23:35:57 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26836 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 24 Aug 1992 23:35:43 -0500 Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 23:35:43 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208250435.AA26836@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #660 TELECOM Digest Mon, 24 Aug 92 23:35:30 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 660 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Dialback Management (Bob Ackley) Panel Nostalgia(?) and Trivia (Jack Winslade) Call Forwarding/CLASS Version (cinpmx!cdid!ralphw%proty@attmail.com) A Wierd Thing Happened on a Call to CA (Aninda V. Dasgupta) AT&T and Sandia (Jim Haynes) PacBell Message Center Woes (Jeff Stieglitz) NEED: Data/Protocol Analyzer (Richard B. August) Celluar Payphone (David Brightbill) 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Jeff Garber) Interfacing Modem to Telephone System (Eric Jacksch) Looking For DID Call Transfer Device (Paul Robinson) Help With ROLM REDWOOD Flashing LOCK on WYSE (Robert Patrick MacKin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 03:05:03 CST From: Bob.Ackley@ivgate.omahug.org (Bob Ackley) Subject: Dialback Management Reply-To: bob.ackley@ivgate.omahug.org In a message of <29 Jul 92 07:49:39>, Richard Nash (11:30102/2) writes: > pete@cssc-syd.tansu.com.au (Peter Alexander Merel) writes: >> The reason that dialback modems are sometimes not secure is that a >> cracker can call into the modem and wait for the modem to hang up, >> and then remain on the line, playing dialtone back to the modem. The >> modem "thinks" it is dialing on the network, but instead it reaches >> the bad guy's modem. >> This is possible because many central offices will keep the circuit >> up for up to about 22 seconds if the calling party remains off-hook >> after the called party goes on-hook. This is a long enough window >> for the dialback modem to re-seize the line and start dialing. > To eliminate that type of hacking possibility, it is mandatory that > the dialback portion of the modem call is originated from a different > line. Therefore, if you have 'n' number of phone lines to be used for > dialback, you require n+1 lines. It is required that the host system > performs the dialback procedure in order to determine the correct line > to use. It also has the added benefit in that system administration > of the modem pool can be centrally administered by the system > adminstration folks. > [Moderator's Note: A much easier solution is to simply have three way > calling on the modem lines and on all outgoing calls have the dialing > string begin with a switchhook flash. That'll leave the phreaks out in > left field every time. PAT] Our mainframe at work has a very large (bigger than a refrigerator) box containing eight or nine modems (and a LOT of air); one is the dial-in line, the remaining modems are outbound only. The user dials in and identifies him/herself to Gandalf (they make the box and contents, so that's what I call it), which then hangs up and dials the user back on one of the outbound lines. There are at least thirty empty modem card slots, so I suspect that we will be adding more lines. If anyone is looking for something that big, I think Gandalf is located in or near St. Louis. Pat's solution is undoubtedly MUCH less expensive. msged 1.99S ZTC Bob's Soapbox, Plattsmouth Ne (1:285/1.7) ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 22:02:38 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Panel Nostalgia(?) and Trivia Reply-To: jack.winslade%drbbs@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha In a message dated 19-AUG-92, John Higdon writes: > sbrack@jupiter.cse.UTOLEDO.edu (Steven S. Brack) writes: >> I have, over the year I've read the Digest, become fairly telecom >> literate. Recently, people have talked about a type of swiotch called >> a "panel" switch. Could someone tell me what panel is, and how it >> differs from crossbar or SxS switches? > The panel switch was (for its day) an amazing monstrosity. It was also > the first major attempt at "common control", where a pool of > components would complete calls on a non-dedicated basis. Unlike the > SXS switch which operated in lock-step with the pulses from the > subscriber's dial ... As I've mentioned before, I've been fascinated by the panel switches ever since being served by a quirky one and eventually seeing one in action. The first full-scale deployment of the panel switch was on the ATLantic office here in Omaha in 1921. A while ago I posted a 1921 newspaper article about it. It may be in the archives (Pat ??) but if not, if anyone wants a copy, mail me and I'll send it. The original installation lived until the mid 1960's when it was replaced with a 5-Xbar. (Note that it lived 40+ years -- I'm now seeing mid 1970's 1A ESS machines being trashed in favor of later models.) The last panel switch in Omaha was replaced in 1973, but I know there were a few left in Manhattan in the late 70's. The action of a panel switch can best be described as monkeys sliding up and down on flagpoles. The one I saw was a real Rube Goldberg contraption of sliding rods and cork-covered rollers. Pat's 'cannonball' comment brought back a memory I had far back, and that was the distinctive 'rattle' during call setup (and sometimes during the call itself) which was plainly audible. Add to this a very scratchy sound of ringback and busy tone (which John explained a while back) and you will see it was not the clean, quiet switch that we're spoiled with now. (And BTW, that was a very loud and obnoxious BAAAAA BAAAAAA BAAAAAA busy tone, not the pleasant tweet-tweet-tweet we hear now. It really rubbed your nose into the fact that you had reached a busy number.) The quirk I remember most was that when dialing a busy number, one, maybe two cycles of ringback tone would frequently be heard, followed by scratches and clicks, and then the raucous BAAAAA BAAAAA busy tone. Good day. JSW Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.14 r.1 402-896-3537 (1:285/666.0) ------------------------------ From: cinpmx!cdid!ralphw%proty@attmail.com Date: 24 Aug 92 22:08:55 GMT Subject: Call Forwarding/CLASS Version (was Call Return vs. Call Forward) [description of feature interaction between call forwarding/call return] > Unfortunatly, the telephone that you have forwarded your calls to will > get no indication that you were an intermediary. In effect, the line > that you made the nuisance call to will appear to be calling directly > to the line you have your phone forwarded to. It would seem to me that, in a CLASS environment, the call forwarding implementation described above is 'buggy', since the 'dialed number' is not signaled to the users of the forwarded-to 'terminating' phone. Since distinctive ringing is available in CLASS environments, one could reserver a special cadence for 'call forwarding' calls. I'd also expect that the 'mother-in-law' bits in the CLID format could be used to indicate the actual dialed number. (my Motorola CLID chip spec sheet labels an unused sequence of bits in the message as 'mother-in-law' bits, presmuably for the situation where someone is calling your mother in law, who has a distinctive ringing number terminating at your instrument.) What would YOU suggest? disclaimer: I don't design telephone features for a living. It's more of a hobby, I suppose. ------------------------------ From: add@philabs.philips.com (Aninda V. Dasgupta) Subject: A Wierd Thing Happened on a Call to CA Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff, New York Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 19:37:40 GMT A wierd thing happened today when I was talking on the phone (from Westchester County, NY) to San Diego County, CA. As my friend and I were speaking, suddenly I heard another conversation break into our line, and my friend's voice disappeared. I could clearly hear every word being said in this other conversation. It appeared the participants of this other conversation were recently connected 'coz they were exchanging "hellos". I hung up, waited two minutes and dialed my friend's number again. The phone rang and I was reconnected to this ongoing conversation. I finally asked the AT&T operator to dial the number and at the first attempt she got a busy tone and on trying again got through to my friend. My friend reported that everytime she tried to get an outside line she too got connected to this other conversation. Neither my friend, nor I were on a cordless phone. (She did mention later that her cordless phone has run out of batteries.) Any clues as to what was going on? Was this a switch malfunction (crosstalk?) and if so, which switch might have been the culprit, the CO on my end, or the one in CA or something in between? What are the likely causes of such a malfunction? Bad programming, system overload? Again, how did the AT&T operator manage to get through to my friend's number? Just curious ... Aninda DasGupta (add@philabs.philips.com) Ph : (914) 945-6071 Fax : (914) 945-6552 Philips (No, we don't produce Gas, we make lightbulbs) Labs. 345 Scarborough Road\n Briarcliff Manor\n NY 10510 ------------------------------ From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) Subject: AT&T and Sandia Date: 23 Aug 1992 21:58:51 GMT Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy Sandia National Laboratories. Does anybody know what's happening? Is this AT&Ts decision, or DOE's decision, or is the lab being closed, or what? haynes@cats.ucsc.edu haynes@cats.bitnet ------------------------------ From: stieglit@orion.oac.uci.edu (Jeff Stieglitz) Subject: PacBell Message Center Woes Organization: University of California, Irvine Date: 23 Aug 92 00:17:55 GMT Just what is the problem with Pacific Bell's Message Center? Today I called my home phone number after six rings I heard: "We are having technical difficulties, please call again later" I hung up and called right back. This time I heard a tinny, machine-synthesized voice: "I'm sorry, due to technical difficulties, Pacific Bell and the Message Center are unable to take your call. Please . I'm interested in knowing the details of what is going wrong with the Message Center. This marks the fifth time I was unable to leave and retrieve messages, not to mention the numerous pre-announced outages. Someone asked this before in the Digest, but there was no reply, so someone please tell me: What are the technical reasons for the recent outages? Jeff Stieglitz stieglit@orion.oac.uci.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 13:02:38 PDT From: AUGUST@JPLLSI.JPL.NASA.GOV (Richard B. August) Subject: Need: Data/Protocol Analyzer We are currently looking for a good-better-best Data/Protocol analyzer. It must be portable (preferably PORTABLE vs. LUGGABLE). If there is one available that fits in your briefcase, and leaves room for other stuff, that would be the one. Want all the "bells and whistles" we can get due to the fact that we don't know just what type of problems we will encounter in the 'field'. Price is not of extreme importance, but we don't want to "break the bank" ( we need about ten of these things). Please mail your responses to me directly at: august@jpllsi.jpl.nasa.gov and I will post results of the responses to the group. Thenks in advance. Richard B. August august@jpllsi.jpl.nasa.gov ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 21:44:43 -0400 From: David Brightbill Subject: Celluar Payphone I received an advertisement today that I thought the readers of the Digest might be interested in. TCP - Telular Cellular Payphone Available in a variety of enclosure types, the TCP is equipped with a microprocessor based call control network that provides the latest in intelligent payphone features and functionality. The TCP can be configuted to handle coins, tokens, credit cards and/or debit cards. For more information ... call Telular at +1.708.256.8000 Disclaimer: I have no connection with Telular other than being a, thus far, satisfied customer. David Brightbill ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 05:01 GMT From: Jeff Garber <0005075968@mcimail.com> Subject: 911 on Jerry Springer Show On The Jerry Springer Show (Aug 19, 11 A.M., KCAL Channel 9, Los Angeles) the topic was 911. Apparently, someone in the Cincinnati area called 911 from a cellular phone because he believed a man was having a heart attack on the side of the road. The 911 operator told him that they cannot accept calls from cellular phones! They actually played the recording from the call on the show, so I heard it with my own ears. The man died, although he was not suffering from a heart attack, and it was determined that he would have died even without the delay in reaching help. I never heard what he actually died of. What good is it to have a phone with you if you can't use it in an emergency? I've used L.A. Cellular to call 911 many times and have had no problems like this. The call goes first to the California Highway Patrol, and if it's not a CHP type problem, they transfer you immediately to the emergency agency that handles the area and type of problem you are reporting. The show also had a woman who dialed 0 (instead of 911) when her daughter was being assaulted. Evidently it took awhile to get the information to the right place. When the police got there, they found the victim dead. They had a 911 operator on the show complaining about people calling 911 for non-emergency calls. No one mentioned that callers to police stations, etc. are often told to report their non-emergency problem to 911. Jeff Garber My opinions are just that. ------------------------------ Subject: Interfacing Modem to Telephone System From: jacksch@insom.eastern.com (Eric Jacksch) Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 20:36:26 -0400 Organization: Insomniacs' Guild, Toronto, Ontario, Canada At work I have a Harris Lanier electronic key set on my desk (the ones with a number of lines, intercom, etc ... don't know why as I will only talk on one line at a time, but that's besides the point ...) The wall jack is a standard four conductor modular jack. I would like to connect a modem so that I can make outbound calls. Are these phones digital, or are two of the four wires a "normal" ring and tip phone circuit? Any suggestions? Also, is it possible to build an interface to allow connection via the handset cord? Thanks, Eric Jacksch, jacksch@insom.eastern.com ------------------------------ Reply-To: tdarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 18:37:45 EDT Subject: Looking for DID Call Transfer Device I would like to find out if there is an inexpensive method to process a DID trunk line for small volumes, either using a small device or a device plugged into a Personal Computer. What I'm looking for is something to handle, say, five DID lines and as many phone numbers as I want to put in. I'm thinking of something which would sell for about $250 which would transfer a call depending on the number passed to the device. This may not currently be capable but I'd like to find out if something is possible and what it would cost. I hope I can find something not too expensive, as I know there is a demand for this type of device if it was available. The reason I'm thinking about it is to allow me to assign different phone numbers. I know there are some devices available but I don't know what they cost. In the alternative, what does this require to do this, i.e. to generate a ring signal and generate a ring voltage to a telephone, and stop both when it is answered, as well as reversing the polarity when it is (so the caller is charged). Sounds like it's more complicated than I think it is. I'm not so interested in making outgoing calls, it's more like what is used for a Voice Mail system or something similar. ------------------------------ From: rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Subject: Help With ROLM REDWOOD Flashing LOCK on WYSE Organization: University of Western Ontario Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 23:39:27 GMT I can get in from a 400 set on the admin port. But if I try to use the WYSE-50 plugged into the back, I get the title greeting, asked for the password, and it even echoes the *****, but it then clears the screen, flashes LOCK on the top line, and you are left with a hung terminal. I know the password is correct because I can get in from the 400 set. It is a single cabinet ROLM Redwood running release 3.0 PBX lib card. H E L P !!!!! ( please... ) rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Western Business School -- London, Ontario [Moderator's Note: It is apparently sending a Control-O or an ESC # which are the two things which are used to lock the Wyse keyboard from the remote site. If you use the ADDS-VP mode then a Control-D or ESC 5 would cause the lockup. Just hit the unshifted Set Up key to release the lock and remove the message. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #660 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21853; 26 Aug 92 1:26 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30538 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:10:18 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA30351 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:10:06 -0500 Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:10:06 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208260410.AA30351@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #661 TELECOM Digest Tue, 25 Aug 92 23:10:10 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 661 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Foreign Calling Cards (David R. Zinkin) Where Can I Get TL1 Software Package? (Qian Li) Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Brett G. Person) Pulse Dialing Still Useful (Bennett E. Todd) GSM Adaptative Time Alignment (Jean-Louis Fuccellaro) 800 Portability (Bill Huttig) Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Phill St. Louis) San Francisco Area Exchange Names (Daniel M. Rosenberg) Standardized Exchange Names (Leonard Erickson) Who Offers National Alphanumeric Paging Service? (Brent Chapman) GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) (Jim Gottlieb) Monitoring of Broadcasts (Adrienne Voorhis) Archive Access (Paul Lutt) Polite Thief (Jerry Leichter) Asking Something About SLC-120 From AT&T (Yee-Lee Shyong) Spread Spectrum (Lesley S. Saitowitz) "Congestion in My Area" (Gabe M. Wiener) PicturePhone Power Pinout? (Bill Romanowski) Anti-Digital Dialing (was Deterioration of POTS) (Mark Brader) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: drz@po.CWRU.Edu (David R. Zinkin) Subject: Foreign Calling Cards Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:41:01 GMT Does anyone know how to get a calling card from a telephone company in another country? A friend of mine would like to get a calling card from Japan in the hope that using it would be cheaper than dialing directly. I know that AT&T offers "Country Direct" for non-US citizens who have calling cards from home; can US citizens get these cards and use them in the same way? Please respond by mail as my time for reading this group is decreasing rapidly. Thanks, David R. Zinkin (drz@po.cwru.edu) Rochester General Hospital Radiology Dept. SUNY Buffalo School of Medicine Class of '96 (The sesquicentennial graduating class!) ------------------------------ From: QIAN Li Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 15:27:33 -0400 Subject: Where Can I Get TL1 Software Package? Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility I am going to buy a TL1 software package which can be stored in PC. If you have any information about this package, please send a E-mail to me: qianli@ecf.toronto.edu. Thank you for your information. ------------------------------ From: plains!person@uunet.UU.NET (Brett G Person) Subject: Automated hate Calls in Minnesota Date: 25 Aug 92 01:41:24 GMT Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network I was watching the lcoal news last night and saw a strange news report from Minneapolis. Apparently, people there I getting alls from a new kind of telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc. It sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attourney General's office says that this doesn't violate any laws. Any comments? Have any of you gotten phome calls like this? Brett Person Guest Account North Dakota State University person@plains.nodak.edu || person@plains.bitnet ------------------------------ From: bet@cyclone.sbi.com (Bennett E. Todd) Subject: Pulse Dialing Still Useful Date: 26 Aug 92 02:36:49 GMT Organization: Integration - Salomon Inc., NY I decided not to pay extra for DTMF dialing, so the phone company has it blocked on my line. I've found a use for this setup: I've got a regular trimline phone, and a cordless, both switchable. I use the regular phone for placing calls; I only want the cordless for receiving them. Living in an apartment in NYC it seems quite possible that someone within range would have a compatible phone -- but by switching the base unit of the cordless to tone dialing, I can make the cordless phone effectively incoming-only, so nobody else can use their cordless handset to place calls on my phone line. Bennett bet@sbi.com ------------------------------ From: Jean-Louis Fuccellaro Subject: GSM Adaptative Time Alignment Reply-To: Jean-Louis Fuccellaro Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 12:30:05 GMT According to what I understood : GSM uses adaptative time alignent to determine the transmit timing advance required at the MS to receive bursts in their correct timeslots.Timing advance can have 64 levels. If two users (MS) have the same carrier (they have one timeslot from the same frame) are in the same place, the timeslots will arrive at the same time in the BS. Does the BS change the carrier of one of them or do I miss something? Thanks for answer. Jean-Louis Fuccellaro Post : HP Labs E-mail: jlf@hplb.hpl.hp.com Filton Road phone : (44) / (0) 272 228 122 Stoke Gifford Bristol BS12 6QZ U.K. ------------------------------ From: wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) Subject: 800 Portability Date: 25 Aug 92 14:48:34 GMT Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne USA I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be phased in? Will every possible exchange become avaiable? Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as a large company? Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing problems? I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I would hate to have to write that database). Bill ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 10:59:20 PDT From: stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill St. Louis) Subject: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada The Subject says it all. I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? Thanks, Phill ------------------------------ From: dmr@rugrat.Corp.Sun.COM (Daniel M. Rosenberg) Subject: San Francisco Area Exchange Names Date: 25 Aug 1992 18:42:22 GMT Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Reply-To: dmr@rugrat.Corp.Sun.COM Does anyone happen to have a phone book sufficiently old enough to list the old-style exchange names in the South Bay? The one I know in Palo Alto was for the main 32x exchange, known as "DAvenport," from an old sign. Davenport? What's that have to do with Palo Alto? Did the phone company just make that up? And did the 424's, 85x's, 497's and so forth come from anywhere? Where could I find out? Any hints appreciated. Daniel M. Rosenberg Dan.Rosenberg@Corp.Sun.COM +1 415 688 9580 Opinions expressed above aren't Sun's. ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Standardized Exchange Names Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:49:35 GMT > [Moderator's Note: Another Hyde Park exchange is FAIrfax (324), > which it is said was named in honor of a University of Chicago > trustee, Fairfax Cone. I think "FAirfax may be a "standard" name of some sort, as the 32x exchanges in Spokane used that in the 60's. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: brent@greatcircle.com (Brent Chapman) Subject: Who Offers National Alphanumeric Paging Service? Organization: Great Circle Associates; Mountain View, CA Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:47:52 GMT What companies offer national alphanumeric paging service? I'm aware of MobileComm, but I don't know how to contact them for more info. I know SkyPage offers national numeric service, but what about alphanumeric service? Can anybody provide me with contact info for MobileComm or SkyPage, or other companies that offer national alphanumeric paging? Thanks! Brent Chapman Great Circle Associates Brent@GreatCircle.COM 1057 West Dana Street +1 415 962 0841 Mountain View, CA 94041 ------------------------------ From: jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) Subject: GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) Organization: Info Connections, West Los Angeles Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 06:19:16 GMT I am pleased to announce that GTE has finally fixed my DISA, over one year after it stopped working. My Direct Inward System Access lets me access my home centrex system when I'm out of the house. Over one year ago it stopped accepting my security code. Since then, calls to repair service have resulted in nothing but the problem being "cleared", or worse, being told that my DISA number does not belong to me so there is no way they can take a report. As recently as last week, GTE dispatched technicians to my home (twice) to try to fix the problem (good diagnosis, GTE!). After enlisting help from the business office, I was finally able to convince someone at repair that I actually do subscribe to this service, it used to work, it doesn't any more, and it's a software problem so stop sending people to my house. The message finally got through and they fixed it on Friday. While I had their attention, I asked if they could please change my security code from 1234 to something a bit more secure. "Sorry, it's hardcoded" was the reply. I don't believe it. And I am surely not going to pay for any calls when someone discovers this. GTE ... I'm still not impressed. Jim Gottlieb E-Mail: or V-Mail: +1 310 551 7702 Fax: 478-3060 Voice: 824-5454 ------------------------------ From: Adrienne Voorhis Subject: Monitoring of Broadcasts Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 8:18:08 EDT jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell)> writes: > It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any > mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it. > This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even > covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time > to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one > else. Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from disclosing what was heard? I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information, that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have legitimately obtained. What if a reporter, for instance, was listening to a police band radio and heard a newsworthy event? Could he or she legitimately be punished for reporting this information? Adrienne Voorhis Albert Einstein College of Medicine Bronx, New York Just MY opinion... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 13:51:49 PDT From: pwl@tc.fluke.COM (Paul Lutt) Subject: Archive Access I seem to have misplaced my notes on how to access the Telecom Archive. I am interested in getting a copy of the stuff dealing with the IXO/TAP protocol. I do not have direct Internet access, so an email interface would be required. Could you please send me a copy of the directions on how to use the archive? Thanks. Paul Lutt Domain: pwl@tc.fluke.COM Voice: +1 206 356 5059 UUCP: uunet!fluke!pwl Snail: John Fluke Mfg. Co. / P.O. Box 9090 / Everett, WA 98206-9090 [Moderator's Note: This question comes up frequently. The Telecom Archives can be accessed using anonymous ftp from lcs.mit.edu. When on line, then cd telecom-archives. Various email > ftp services are available and instructions can be obtained from the operators. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 08:49:52 EDT From: Jerry Leichter Subject: Polite Thief Yesterday, I tried to place a long-distance credit card call using a pay phone in Piscataway, New Jersey. LD service was from some company like "American Network Services". Needless to say, I dialed 10288 first. The response was interesting: A ring, then a polite recorded female voice, sounding just every official telco message you ever heard (but without any SIT) told me that "it is not necessary to dial a long-distance access code" with the number I was dialing. Well, of course, it wasn't NECESSARY - I just had to be willing to pay whatever exorbitant rates the AOS would charge. No combination I tried would let me select AT&T; either the sequence was (legitimately) declared invalid, or I got the "not necessary" message. Most people, having learned about 10288 from AT&T's ads, would surely have responded to the "not necessary" message by trying again, WITHOUT the "optional" carrier selection. And this is right in the heart of AT&T land: Fire a gun in any direction and you'll probably hit an AT&T facility! I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense like this reported, but I can't remember it. Anyone? Jerry ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 08:50:37 CST From: apollo@n2sun1.ccl.itri.org.tw (Yee-Lee Shyong) Subject: Asking Something About SLC-120 From AT&T Does anybody out there know the architectures or specifications anout SLC-120 Network Access System from AT&T? How the Automatic Protection Switching Unit work? (E1 Trunk). Thanks in advance ! Apollo ------------------------------ From: saitowit@underdog.ee.wits.ac.za (SAITOWITZ L S) Subject: Spread Spectrum Organization: Wits Electrical Engineering (Undergrads). Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:56:54 GMT Hi my name's Lesley. I'm looking for information on spread spectrum techniques. Specifically what are the bandwidth versus capacity trade offs? What are the power/distance versus error rates say on open wire or in fibre optics (preferably both)? Is anybody familiar with this area? I'm doing a pie in the sky design, but would just like to gauge how way off or near the mark I am. Please give references if available. Thanks, Lesley :) ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: "Congestion in My Area" Organization: Columbia University Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:49:20 GMT I'm in the process of installing two more NY Tel lines into my place, and am running into a little technical hitch that I'm not quite grasping. The lineman came out and punched the new lines into the RJ-21X that feeds my system. he then went down to the (antiquated wooden) breakout box in the basement to get it onto a pair back to the CO. No dice. He couldn't find one. So they apparently had to move somee stuff around, bring it over from another building, etc. Anyway, today at 5:00 I plugged into the RJ21X with a test set, and ... ah ha! No dialtone, but there was talk power. My DTMF pad worked, I had sidetone, but still no dialtone. Progress, I thought. Four days late, but at least some progress. Anyway, I called the "president's help line" (misnomer, since they've never been too helpful), and after waiting on hold for several minutes while the "executive representative" apparently called the CO or whatever, I was told that there is "congestion" in my area and they don't have enough pairs and I'd have to wait until their engineering dept. figures out a way to bring the service in. Now wait a sec, I thought. What am I missing here? I've got power on the line. If it isn't coming from the switch, then where the heck is it coming from? But more to the point, is there any means of, shall we say, getting them to take to the matter a little more aggressively? Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ From: billabs@nic.cerf.net (Bill Romanowski) Subject: PicturePhone Power Pinout? Date: 25 Aug 92 17:33:04 GMT Organization: CERFnet I have a pair of PicturePhones and want to provide them with correct power. I know they can't be used as phones ... the have what appears to be two video in/out bnc's and I want to connect them as a "video mirror" ... The units have no serial or product id's. Power looks like it comes in on a pin header (with seven pins). They are heavy aluminum boxes,camera on the top, landscape oriented monitor on the bottom. A small WE (bell in a circle) logo on the front on a greenish gray plastic bezel. They'll be cool if I can get 'em up. Any ideas out there? bill romanowski vp of antiuquities prairie research ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 09:25:00 -0400 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Anti-Digital Dialing (was: Deterioration of POTS) Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, Canada > Two billion, one hundred fifty-six million, six hundred forty five > thousand, four hundred thirty two" (last n digits changed to protect > my mother who still lives in (now) twelve billion, one hundred fifty Oh, come now. Since the "ten billion" digit isn't really part of the phone number, this must be international format. But in that case it should be: POSITIVE twelve billion, one hundred fifty... Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #661 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa24199; 26 Aug 92 2:24 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23636 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:20:53 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA04178 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:20:38 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:20:38 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208260520.AA04178@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #662 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:20:40 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 662 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T Tackles Hurricane Disaster! (William Degnan) Help Needed: Programming Info on an EXTROM HMS-612EE (Robert P. MacKin) Staying Up All Night - Or All Day (Lars Poulsen) How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? (Shailesh M. Potnis) Need Fiber Optic System (Wayne Jones) How Are Intercept Codes Interpreted? (John Gardiner Myers) Hearing Radio on the Phone (Robert Aaron Book) Decoding Touchtones With a PC (Robert Aaron Book) CWA Members Ratify AT&T Contracts (Phillip Dampier) CLID Format Compatibilty Question (Mike Riddle) Gating the Pound (was Pounding on an Octothorp) (Nigel Roberts) Request for Line/Trunk Emulation Boxes (Allen Barrett Ethridge) Newest MCI F&F Offer - Free Calls! (Bill Rubin) Good For a Laugh ... (Scott Fybush) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: William.Degnan@mdf.FidoNet.Org (William Degnan) Date: 25 Aug 92 14:21:46 Subject: AT&T Tackles Hurricane Disaster! AT&T PREPARES FOR HURRICANE ANDREW'S SECOND LANDFALL NEW YORK -- As Hurricane Andrew headed west this morning, so too did a convoy of about a dozen AT&T trucks carrying an emergency crew, portable generators and enough transmission equipment to provide emergency long distance service to a small city. The trucks hold enough AT&T people and equipment to quickly restore thousands of phone circuits anywhere along the Gulf Coast, if needed. Initially stationed in Windermere, Fla., in case AT&T service was affected by hurricane damage in southern Florida, the trucks and crew have now moved on to Bonifay, Fla. They stand ready to respond to any damage that Andrew might do to AT&T's network along the Gulf Coast. Bonifay is located about 105 miles east of Pensacola. AT&T long-distance calling on Monday totaled 172.1 million calls, making it the second busiest day ever on AT&T's long distance network. Overall calling on the network today is up 13 percent from the same day a week ago. AT&T, reporting that its network has so far weathered the storm with minimum damage to facilities, said calling into and out of Florida was still running 300-500 percent above normal today. Because of local network congestion, some people may encounter delays in completing their calls, AT&T said. The company said that calling to and from New Orleans was beginning to build this morning. "Our network has performed superbly," said Jim Carroll, vice president, network operations. "And our emergency telecommunications restoration team is ready and prepared to respond if the hurricane hits the Gulf Coast." Meanwhile, to help with restoration efforts now underway in southern Florida, AT&T is: -- Carrying calls between the United States and Cuba via third countries -- Spain, Italy, Canada and the United Kingdom -- due to the loss of an AT&T microwave radio tower in Goulds, Fla., that was part of a radio link handling calls between the two countries. If the Cuban government agrees, AT&T is prepared to activate a 140-circuit undersea cable that was installed in 1989 between West Palm Beach and a point near Havana. -- In partnership with Cellular One, providing free long distance cellular service to relief agencies in the Miami area. McCaw Cellular, which operates as Cellular One in Florida, has provided the agencies with 500 phones. -- Moving portable generators and phone banks to areas in southern Florida affected by hurricane damage for the use of local residents there anxious to make long distance calls. -- Working with local telephone companies to help restore local service. # # # Disclaimer: I'm just passing this along. William Degnan, Communications Network Solutions -Independent Consultants in Telecommunications and Technology- P.O. Drawer 9530 | wdegnan@mdf.fidonet.org | mfwic@mdf.fidonet.org Austin, TX 78766-9530 | !wdegnan@attmail.com | Voice +1 512 323 9383 [Moderator's Note: My sympathies go out to the people in Homestead, FL and surrounding communities. Homestead is 95 percent wiped out; the town is totally demolished. All phone service is dead there. As usual in these situations, AT&T the company which can't be trusted to stay in one piece lest they treat the come-latelys unfairly is leading the way to restoration of the telephone network. Maybe someone from MCI and/or Sprint can write and tell us what those companies are doing to assist the relief effort in southern Florida today, and perhaps in New Orleans on Wednesday. :( PAT] ------------------------------ From: rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Subject: Help Needed: Programming Info on an EXTROM HMS-612EE Organization: University of Western Ontario Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 16:00:42 GMT I got the phone system at a flea market. It works just fine, but I want to change the programming (line ringing, toll restrict, SMDR, etc.) A copy of a programming manual would be appreciated. Could anyone help with info? Thanks a million ... rpmackin@student.business.uwo.ca (Robert Patrick MacKin) Western Business School -- London, Ontario ------------------------------ From: lars@spectrum.CMC.COM (Lars Poulsen) Subject: Staying Up All Night - Or All Day Organization: CMC Network Systems (Rockwell DCD), Santa Barbara, CA, USA Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:24:03 GMT In article James.VanHouten@f544. n109.z1.fidonet.org (James VanHouten) writes: > Is there a tariff that prevents subscribers from dedicating modems > together on POTS lines. One of my customers has 20 auto parts stores > that call into their parts computer every morning at 7 AM and they > stay up until about 6 PM. How are they getting away with this?? Until a few months ago, this GTE service area had flat rate local calling, but now all business calls are metered. The rate is about $0.02 / minute daytime, $0.01 / minute nighttime. Residential subscribers have a choice between flat rate and measured local calls. I would not be surprised to see flat rate phased out in a couple of years. The net result is that for a wide area of rate bands, from local to transcontinental, it is cheaper to lease a line than to keep a call up for more than about seven hours per day. How common is flat rate or per call local calls anymore ? If you will mail me your data, I will summarize for the Digest. Sample: Line, daytime night City or suburb, ST Co NPA-PFX Plan Monthly Percall Per min Per min Santa Barbara, CA GTE 805-682 Bus $35.00 $0.02 $0.02 $0.01 Santa Barbara, CA GTE 805-682 Resflat $12.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Lars Poulsen, SMTS Software Engineer Internet E-mail: lars@CMC.COM CMC Network Products / Rockwell Int'l Telephone: +1-805-968-4262 Santa Barbara, CA 93117-3083 TeleFAX: +1-805-968-8256 ------------------------------ From: smp@cathedral.cerc.wvu.wvnet.edu (Shailesh M. Potnis) Subject: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? Date: 25 Aug 92 20:01:24 GMT I am in the process of installing a modem and a few extra telephone outlets. I have a few pieces of indoor telephone cable which I used to use at my previous address. If I have to splice them together to run a longer distance, I have to add two male connectors at each splicing ends and thn use an inline female connector to connect the male connectors. I see this grossly redundant. Is there a terminal or connector which splices two ends of a telephone cable to make a longer one? Essentially what I would emagine would be similar to the two male connectors fused together. All comments and suggestions are highly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Shailesh Potnis, Associate |Concurrent Engineering Research Member of Technical Staff |Center, West Virginia University ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 15:01:43 MDT From: jones@sunspot.sunspot.noao.edu (Wayne Jones) Subject: Need Fiber Optic System Here I am again with another request for help. I previously asked for information on the Mitel SX-200 digital pbx. Now I am wondering if this is our best option. Perhaps someone out there could help steer. We have a small campus environment (8 buildings, 120 phones) situated on top of a mountain (9200 ft. elev.) and lightning is our major concern. We've lost our AT&T pbx several times to the tune of $10k in repairs. I have already installed a fiber backbone for the computer network, video distribution, etc., and now I am looking for a way to put telephone distribution on the fiber as well. I have heard that 24 voice channels can be multiplexed onto a T1 line, then the T1 can be put on fiber. T or F? Is there maybe a better way to do this? Can this be done with the Mitel SX-200 digital? I guess what I need is to speak with a consultant with this sort of expertise but I don't know one (hint, hint ;-). At this point I will be glad to hear from anyone. Thanks in advance. Wayne Jones email: jones@sunspot.noao.edu National Solar Observatory voice: 505-434-7043 P.O. Box 62 Sunspot, NM 88349 ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 13:52:03 -0400 (EDT) From: John Gardiner Myers Subject: How Are Intercept Codes Interpreted? How does one interpret the codes a the end of an intercept. For example, I get something like "[SIT] We're sorry, your call cannot be completed as dialed. Please check your number and try again. 412 1T." I assume "412" is the area code generating the intercept. What is the interpretation of the "1T"? [Moderator's Note: The letter and number following the area code identify the switch within the area code. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book) Subject: Hearing Radio on the Phone Organization: Rice University Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:46:13 GMT Recently I was talking on the phone to a friend of mine in Long Beach, California, and she told me a a repetitve problem she had been having on her phone -- whenever she used the phone, she heard a *radio* *station* on her phone line. I listened carefully, found that, on the other end of the line, I heard the same thing (only when I was talking to her), only not as loud. We identified the radio station as KFI (640 AM, Los Angeles). A few weeks later, I found another friend had the same problem, also in Los Angeles, but with a different radio station. The latter person had just installed a new phone, so perhaps it has something to do with a circuit in the phone instrument responding to the radio signal. I've heard of RF intereference before, but this is ridiculous. It reminds me of a fictional story I once read about someone who got a tooth filling that picked up radio stations. Does anyone know why this happens, or what can be done to fix the problem (or reproduce it)? Robert Book rbook@rice.edu [Moderator's Note: There are line filters available which will cure this problem. The telco has no special responsibility to handle the problem as long as the lines are 'clean' when they had them over at your premises. Typically newer electronic phones seem to have this problem more than older style instruments. If someone is located within a mile or so of a radio station transmitter/antenna the problem can be more difficult to clear. You might want to check out an article which appeared in TELECOM Digest a few years ago: "Praise the Lord and Pass the RF Filters" told the story of the fight residents of the north side of Hammond, IN had for a long time (maybe still?) with FM radio station WYCA whose transmitter facilities are located about four blocks away in Burnham, IL. Maybe I will reprint that article if there is sufficient interest. PAT] ------------------------------ From: rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book) Subject: Decoding touchtones with a PC Organization: Rice University Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:53:51 GMT Is there any device which can connect to a phone line on one end and a PC (through a serial port?) on the other, and translate touch-tones into numbers understandable to the computer? Any modem (almost) can *produce* the touch-tones; I am looking for a device that can understand them. A way to use a modem to do this would be even better; a device that could also produce touch-tones and flash would be great. I have many applications in mind, but the one that first triggered the question is that with such a device, and three-way calling on my phone, I could call my home phone from my office (a local call), type in a password, then a long-ditance number, then have the computer flash and dial the long-distance number, thus setting up a three-way long distance call and saving me the calling card surcharge when I am local to my home phone. This is essentially a reproduction of the discontinued MCI "around town" feature, which allowed you to make long-distance calls with no surcharge when local to you home phone (or within 11 miles, or something to that effect). Any ideas? Robert Book rbook@rice.edu ------------------------------ From: Phillip.Dampier@f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier) Reply-To: phil@rochgte.fidonet.org Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 18:37:01 -0500 Subject: CWA Members Ratify AT&T Contracts CWA MEMBERS OVERWHELMINGLY RATIFY AT&T CONTRACTS WASHINGTON -- Members of the Communications Workers of America have overwhelmingly ratified new three-year contracts with AT&T, CWA Vice President Jim Irvine announced today. "Our members voted favorably by better than 88 percent to accept the national operation and the national units contracts," said Irvine, the union's chief negotiator in prolonged negotiations with AT&T. The ratification votes protect retroactively on wages and other provisions back to May 30, although the talks continued another six weeks past that date before agreements were reached. The unit-by-unit breakdown on local agreements follows: Bell Labs 89.3 percent Installation and CARAs 85.03 percent MMS 73.2 percent Manufacturing 89.7 percent Operations 88.04 percent The settlement, valued at $1.5 billion over three years, covers 100,000 workers represented by CWA and another 27,000 workers represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. IBEW members also ratified these agreements. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:29:16 CST From: Mike.Riddle@ivgate.omahug.org (Mike Riddle) Subject: CLID Format Compatibilty Question Reply-To: mike.riddle%inns@ivgate.omahug.org Organization: Inns of Court, Papillion, NE An interesting question came up today, one which I couldn't answer but am sure that someone in this group can. The Phone Company is currently marketing two versions of CLID in the Omaha area: 1. Number- only. 2. Number and name. Someone who wants to purchase the service is served by a DMS-100. According to TPC, the DMS-100 currently can only support the number-only CLID format. The potential purchaser wants to know, and no one local seems able to answer definitively: 1. How long before the generics for DMS-100 will support number and name? 2. How interoperable are the number-only and name-and-number display boxes? The intent is to buy a name-and-number box, use it for number only service, and upgrade when the software is available for the DMS-100. The other side of this question, will a number-only box work at all on the name-and-number service, appears to be "no," but no one other than a TPC Marketing Droid seems to be quite certain about this. Can anyone help? Thanks. <<<< insert standard disclaimer here >>>> mike.riddle@inns.omahug.org | Nebraska Inns of Court bc335@cleveland.freenet.edu | +1 402 593 1192 (Data/Fax) Sysop of 1:285/27@Fidonet | V.32/V.42bis / G3 Fax Ybbat (DRBBS) 8.9 v. 3.13 r.3 inns.omahug.org +1 402 593 1192 (1:285/27.0) ------------------------------ From: roberts@frais.enet.dec.com (Nigel Roberts) Subject: Gating the Pound (was Pounding on an Octothorp) Organization: IC Software AG (on contract at DEC) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 14:08:30 GMT In article , Richard Cox writes ... > The common name for it here, is "hash": but BT, when they introduced > facility codes for PABXs and Network Services, decided they would give > it their own name. They sold phones with the "thorps" missing from > the octothorp symbol: and then told us all to call that key the > "square". > Even today, when you set up any diversion or call barring, an > automated voice tells you what the network is about to do, adding "If > incorrect, dial square." I recently had occasion to order Call Waiting (it's on free trial at the moment) and Call Barring for my parents house in Liverpool. I wanted to know what the commands were, so I phoned 150 (local BT Business Office) to ask. In referring to the # key, the sales rep. called it the "gate key". Because it looks like one, I suppose. (Sort of a Five-Barred Gate, huh?) Nigel Roberts | roberts@frais.enet.dec.com | Tel. +44 206 396610 European Engineer | P O Box 49,Manningtree,CO11 2SZ | & +49 6103 383 489 G4IJF | "Life is but a tale . . . " | FAX +44 206 393148 ------------------------------ From: allen@well.sf.ca.us (Allen Barrett Ethridge) Subject: Request for Line/Trunk Emulation Boxes Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 01:49:34 GMT I'm looking for hardware that would connect into a PC or workstation and allow several analog lines and/or analog or digital trunks to terminate into and be controlled from the workstation. A VME based solution (as I believe someone else has already requested) would be excellent. An HP-UX compatible solution would also be excellent, but I'm open to any suggestions. I can be reached at work as 'ethridge@bnr.ca' or at play as 'allen@well.sf.ca.us'. I prefer the work address (it's free and I have a real editor there). Thanks, Allen Ethridge ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:25:06 EDT From: Bill Rubin Subject: Newest MCI F&F Offer - Free Calls! I saw a new (to me) MCI Friends and Family ad last night between Murphy Brown and Designing Women. Here's the offer: specify any one person in your calling circle and receive a free ten minute call to that person every month for the next year. While aimed at new customers, they invited existing F&F customers to call in to select their choice as well. Well, I called right away, after first getting no ringing at all, and then dialing again and having it ring for a few minutes, someone finally picked up and said that everyone was busy, they'd have to call me back. About 30 minutes later, they did. They did try to get me to add other people to my calling circle (including local numbers, for when I travel and call them w/a calling card -- interesting approach). I declined and just left it at the one number for free calls. Anyway, the number is 1-800-756-4FRE(E). Bill Rubin ------------------------------ From: fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us (Scott Fybush) Subject: Good For a Laugh ... Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 20:01:17 EDT Heard on Paul Harvey Monday ... A reader noticed an item in a Kentucky newspaper: Apparently an elderly woman called up the complaints department of telco, saying that her phone cord was too long and she was afraid she'd trip over it, fall, and hurt herself. Her request to the operator went like this: "Now, dear, if you could just start pulling in on it from your end, I'll let you know when you've taken in enough!" :-) Good day ... Scott Fybush -- fybush@unixland.natick.ma.us -- Waltham, MA USA ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #662 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa25990; 26 Aug 92 3:12 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07739 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:05:06 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA06745 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:04:56 -0500 Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:04:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208260604.AA06745@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #663 TELECOM Digest Wed, 26 Aug 92 01:05:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 663 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson City of Omaha to Tax Telephone Books! (Jack Winslade) GTE Feature Dialing (Randy Gellens) Busy Call Forwarding Options in CA? (Kevin Wang) More Phone Line Woes (Dan Lanciani) Information on X.38 X.39 and X.5 Standards (Thomas K. Hinders) New Sony 696HF VCR's for $329! (Aaron M. Barnes) Looking For Modem to Computer Network Service (Josh N. Pritikin) 911 From CMT (was 911 on Jerry Sringer Show) (Mark W. Earle) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 22:15:45 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: City of Omaha to Tax telephone books! From: jsw@drbbs.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha Imagine this conversation ... Officer: I'm afraid I'm gonna have ta take ya downtown, Mac. Citizen: But wha'd I do, officer ?? Officer: I don't see a tax stamp on that phone book you're carrying. But seriously, the Omaha City Council has passed a $.25 tax on telephone directories with the stated purpose to encourage recycling . The Omaha city budget is facing a shortfall in the megabuck range, and this is one solution, along with such items as raising the 'temporary' wheel tax. According to television station WOWT ... 'Another revenue-raiser passed by the City Council today would put a $.25 tax on telephone directories. We've got a dollar's worth of tax right here. (announcer holds up four directories) It is promoted as a tax to encourage recycling -- US West questions that.' (cut to tape of Dick Johnson, US West representative) Johnson: 'If the council truly believes that this tax is necessary to resolve landfill problems, they must apply the tax to these other entities also, particularly to newspapers.' Omaha is blessed with having two full-service phone directories, now both available in full-size and yuppie-cellular size. ;-) One is, of course, the 'real' US West book, and the other is that black-covered 'phony' one put out by some other company. I've heard merchants gripe about having to shell out twice since the second company came to town. I will say one thing about the competition. Before they came to town, it was like pulling teeth to get a book from Ma Bell. Since the competition came, both books are available everywhere. In my opinion, the Omaha book should have been split into white and yellow books long ago. Now I doubt it will happen, since I doubt if either company would want to be the only one without a 'handy' white-pages section. I wonder how they will enforce this tax. Because it's a city tax, it cannot extend past the city limits. (We live about two blocks outside.) If it's on books distributed within the city, I can see PILES of new books sitting at supermarkets just outside the limits, with them being few and far between within the city. Good day. JSW ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 25 AUG 92 04:21 Subject: GTE Feature Dialing I happened to be reading the recent post discussing feature access (xx# vs *xx, etc) while going through my paper mail, and came across the new feature instruction pamplets I has requested from GTE. (I had asked for three sets, so I could tear off the quick-reference guide from the last page and keep by the phones I usually use. I always forget the codes for last number redial and busy number redial.) They've updated the pamplets since I got the features (a couple of years ago). For instance, busy number redial used to have a vague phrase about being limited to "calling certain numbers within your local calling area." Now it clearly says "The use of the Busy Number Redial feature is currently limited to other numbers within your switching office." Not sure I like this change -- to me it implies a long-term restriction, otherwise why bother? Also, the old pamplet had instructions for both speed calling 8 and 30. The new one only lists 8, and underlines the word "eight." (Oh, busy number redial is now called "Busy Number Redial/Camp On.") One really funny change is that now, each feature has at least two pages, with the first (left-hand) page showing pictures of how to activate the service! For BNR, for example, there are three pictures on top of each other on the left-hand page, showing a rather old-fashioned looking phone keypad (with the letters for each digit arranged in a half-circle above the digit), and a forefinger (with painted and polished nail) on a digit (the pictures show the finger pressing the "6", "6", and "#" keys.) This is done for all features! For call waiting, there is one big picture (instead of the three small ones) showing the hand pressing the switch-hook on a 2500 set (side view). All features are activated with an xx# sequence. The instructions note that for rotary phones, "disregard the '#' symbol." The pamplets now come with a line-tag card (a card with a slotted hole for the phone line cord) with "CALL FORWARDING" in huge red letters and "This telephone is equipped with a special {\bf Custom Calling Service}" in smaller blue letters. I guess so you can tag your phones if you forward them. There is also a peel-and-stick quick reference card (new) that says at the bottom "If you are using a SmartCall telephone, press the button that corresponds to the features you want to use instead of depressing the hookswitch or dialing a code." What is this? Does GTE sell phones with buttons that are preprogrammed to dial feature access codes? Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com >>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to rgellens@mcimail.com <<<<<<<< Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ From: kwang@zeus.calpoly.edu (Kevin Wang) Subject: Busy Call Forwarding options in CA? Organization: The Outland Riders Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 09:14:17 GMT I was looking for busy call forwarding, relatively cheap. I would install a hunt group, but unfortunately, our house line and my line are on two separate billing names, so I cannot use that option. I would like to use Busy Call Forwardning (CommStar ][ ) except that the cost quickly climbs up beyond what I would like to pay. Anyone have any alternatives? I'm in San Luis Obispo (Central Coast) and we don't have the latest and greatest in CO equipment. (However, Cal Poly, SLO is setting up ISDN to end-users' homes, so soon we'll have 64kb access to the internet! 8> ) Email me if possible, I don't read this newsgroup often enough. Kevin Wang kwang@hermes.calpoly.edu or kwang@gauss.elee.calpoly.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:51:35 EDT From: ddl@das.harvard.edu (Dan Lanciani) Subject: More Phone Line Woes [Some time ago, I described here a problem with my phone service. Since then I've been running the twisty little maze of the repair service. As I don't seem to be getting anywhere, I am almost ready to write to the PUC. I would expect the bulk of such a letter to be a description of what has happened so far and a first pass appears below. Any comments are welcome.] For at least the past eight months, New England Telephone has been unable to resolve a problem with their service in spite of my repeated requests. The details of the problem are as follows: Every night, starting at approximately midnight (but occasionally as early as 10pm) persons to whom I speak experience dropouts (gaps) in the audio from my line. These gaps are of varying lengths (some are long enough to delete entire phrases) and at varying intervals from seconds to many minutes. These gaps are not accompanied by clicks or static -- they are simply a complete loss of audio. I hear nothing unusual from my end of the connection. The problem occurs regardless of whether I place or receive the call. In addition, the problem occurs on my mother's phone (different number, same address) so it is not line-specific. The problem never occurs during the day. I have tried a different phone connected at the demarkation point with identical results. In order to best illustrate the problem, a friend and I each taped the same phone conversation from our respective sides. The tapes clearly show that speech which was present at my line is completely muted at the other end. I have experienced the problem on calls from my home in Gloucester to Somerville, Cambridge, Reading, and Chicago. As these are the only exchanges that I typically call at night, I do not know how widespread the problem is. Below I chronicle my most recent of several attempts to have this problem resolved. I omit conversations with first-level repair persons who made the expected suggestions that the problem was with my home phone and/or wiring. During the week of July 20 I reported the problem to the repair service and spoke with a supervisor (Mrs. Grant). She said that my line would be "moved to a different switch" as a precautionary measure although they could find nothing wrong. My line was disabled from afternoon until mid morning the next day (presumably to make the change) but the problem remained. At the end of the week I spoke to a different supervisor (Judy) about the problem. I played the tapes for her and she suggested that it was probably a problem with the trunks that could be quite difficult to track down. She assured me that they were working on it. Two weeks later, on August 7, I called repair and spoke to Judy again. She expressed surprise that the problem had not been resolved and said they would work on it. As of August 14 the problem remained and I spoke to Judy again. She suggested that it would be useful to have the problem reported by a party with whom I was speaking when the problem occurred. I had my friend report the problem the next time it occurred (which was, of course, the next time we spoke at night). Unfortunately, the repair service told him that the problem must be with my end and they would send someone to check my home wiring. However, no one arrived. On August 21 I attempted to reach Judy again but she was away from her desk. A different supervisor was able to have Catherine from the central office call me back. Catherine indicated that they had not looked at the problem at all yet because they did not have an adequate description. I described the problem and played the tape for Catherine and then her supervisor came on the line. He suggested that I check the wiring in my home. When I explained that I had connected a different phone at the demarkation point with identical results, he said that they would "go into the line group" that night and get back to me first thing Monday morning. By Monday (August 24) afternoon, neither Catherine nor her supervisor had called back and I again contacted Judy. Judy said that others were experiencing problems and Catherine would call me back. Catherine called back and said that they had not checked anything on Friday but that they could set up to monitor my line this night. However, I would have to be on the phone in order for them to test. I asked why they could not simply establish a test call of their own and monitor the line. Catherine said that I was the only person having trouble and therefore they had to use my line. Moreover, they could not put up a call on my line: I had to be present and talking for them to test. I pointed out that this seemed wrong as my mother's line showed identical symptoms to mine. I asked whether they couldn't just put on a test tone and monitor that. But she said she had been told to tell me this and could do nothing about it. Monday night I arranged to be on the line with a friend from approximately 11:45 PM until 4:30 AM in order to give ample opportunity to locate the problem. The problem occurred and there were several splendid examples of entire phrases being dropped. On August 25 I contacted Judy to find out how the test went. She had Catherine call me back. Catherine said that the monitor listened for as long as she could but it is "very difficult on a 5ESS switch because they must start over each time you hang up and call." I pointed out that this was why I maintained the same call from 11:45 PM until 4:30 AM. She suggested that perhaps I had had the other party call me back; I said no. She could not explain further. She did say that the monitor detected some static but no dropouts. I asked if the monitor was simply listening to my line and, if so, how she could hope to detect the dropouts since they showed up only on the other end. She said that there was no way for them to monitor the other end because it was in a different office. I asked what was the purpose of the test if it couldn't detect the problem. She did not explain. She did say that they had both moved my line to another switch and changed some software. I mentioned that they had moved my line before but she said that this time they "really" moved it. (Curiously, this move did not produce the long service interruption of the previous one.) I asked what software they had changed. She said that it was far too intricate to explain. I suggested that she try anyway because, if this did solve the problem, I would want to be able to request something similar the next time the problem appeared. She said she could not go into it. I contacted Judy again to complain that I was not satisfied with the way things were progressing. [End of what would go to the PUC ...] Several questions come to mind: Is it really impossible for NET to test a routing path without involving my line? Even if they have to involve my line, is it true that I must be on the phone talking? Can't NET make a connection at the office and put up a call themselves? What is the purpose of listening only to my line? I suspect they wanted to show that the dropouts were coming from my phone/wiring. Dan Lanciani ddl@harvard.* ------------------------------ Date: 25 Aug 92 21:05:11-0900 From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com Subject: Information on X.38 X.39 and X.5 Standards I am seeking information on several "new" (maybe ?) CCITT standards: X.38, X.39 and X.5 Can anyone provide a brief description of these standards. Thanks in advance. Thomas K Hinders Martin Marietta Computing Standards 4795 Meadow Wood Lane Chantilly, VA 22021 703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5027 (f) ------------------------------ From: aj008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Aaron M. Barnes) Subject: New Sony 696HF VCR's For $329! Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA) Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 19:20:42 GMT Thats right -- New 696HF VCR's for $329. All you have to do is send your request for information to this gentleman: interpol@casbah.acns.nwu.edu He let me know about this, but did not specify the dealer. I am sure he would appreciate any and all responses. Thanks. Aaron Barnes aj008@cleveland.freenet.edu [Moderatpr's Note: Two questions: Do you think that is really such a good deal, and who is 'interpol' here in the Chicago area. Casbah is a work station here at Northwestern University in the Academic Computing Center. Oh, never mind, I will finger interpol myself: [casbah.acns.nwu.edu] Login name: interpol In real life: Drew Cheng Directory: /home/u2/interpol Shell: /bin/csh Last login Wed Aug 26 00:04 on ttyp1 from elvex.nwu.edu No unread mail Plan: To search out and destroy every computer geek that FINGERs people to try to find out their real names! Do you HEAR me, you nerdy little hackers? I'M AFTER YOU! Finger THIS, you putzes! PREPARE TO DIE!!! HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA..... AHAHAHHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!! hahhahahahahahahaha!!!!!! hahahah ha I kill me (sorry, I've been on Prozac lately...) [Moderator's Note: I guess so. I think I'd rather buy a used car from this guy than a VCR. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 17:51:15 -0400 (EDT) From: Josh N. Pritikin Subject: Looking For Modem to Computer Network Service I am looking for companies that provide a service such that customers with personal computers can using their modem to locally connect to a network from which they can connect to our unix box. Currently, I am aware that PSI provides such a service and Tymnet may also. Are these the only two? Josh Pritikin joshp+@cmu.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 15:58:04 CDT From: mearle@pro-party.cts.com Subject: 911 From CMT (was 911 on Jerry Springer Show) Here in South Texas, Southwestern Bell Mobile systems operators handle the initial part of a 911 call. This is because the area a cmt works in covers a large number of Law Enforcement juristictions. For instance, my service, based out of Corpus Christi, TX, works in: CorpusChristi, Alice, Rockport, Beeville, Kingsville, Refugio, Raymondville, and other places. That's an area represented by a rectangle 100 x 80 miles! So when I dial 911, a SWBMS operator answers, asks where I am (approximately) and transfers the call to the proper agency, announcing "mobile call from xxx-yyyy". She/he stays on the line during the call, in case of some trouble on the mobile side. They NEVER (in my experience) hassle one, or question the nature of the call -- they just connect one to the law enforcement agency as quickly as possible. Cellular One has a similiar procedure. Mark W. Earle mearle@pro-party.cts.com (Mark Earle) [WA2MCT/5] FidoNet at Opus 1:160/50.0 Bitnet adblu001@ccsu.vm1 Internet 73117.351@compuserve.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #663 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21416; 27 Aug 92 3:57 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02778 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:10:09 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA01685 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:09:59 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:09:59 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208270709.AA01685@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #665 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Aug 92 02:10:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 665 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Baby Bells and States (Bill Sohl) Re: Baby Bells and States (Nigel Allen) Re: Baby Bells and States (Darwei Kung) Re: Baby Bells and States (J. Butz) Re: Polite Thief (Eugene R. Schroeder) Re: Polite Thief (Bob Halloran) Re: Polite Thief (Robert L. McMillin) Re: Polite Thief (Andy Behrens) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (John Karabaic) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Robert S. Helfman) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Bill Mayhew) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Marshal Perlman) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Ronald Oakes) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Andy Sherman) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Dave Niebuhr) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: dancer!whs70@uunet.UU.NET (22501-sohl) Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 12:41:57 GMT In article dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be > assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course). It > seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover > many. Would this be based on the population at the time? As memory serves me, the decision involved AT&T, the 23 telcos (NY TEL, Pacific Bell, etc) and the court. The goal was to have seven regional companies of approximately equal financial size. Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.) Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!dancer!whs70 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 2:06:20 EDT dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes in Volume 12, Issue 659: > I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be > assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course). It > seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover > many. Would this be based on the population at the time? I think the intention was to create seven regional companies of roughly the same size. I don't have any numbers handy, but I think all the RBOCs have a similar number of access lines. My guess is that the decision to have seven (rather than three or 22) regional companies was made by AT&T to maximize shareholder benefit. If AT&T had chosen to split its local operations into fewer than seven companies, they might have been harder to manage. ------------------------------ From: kung@actin.ee.washington.edu (Darwei Kung) Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States Organization: University of Washington Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:27:22 GMT Judge Harold Greene decided the fate of the Bell System. His rulings still stands today, and he is still the man who has the final say on the fate of RBOCs. Darwei Kung [Moderator's Note: Actually, I believe one thing Greene did NOT say was how many holding companies there had to be or how many telcos would be assigned to each. I think AT&T was allowed to decide. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jbutz@homxa.att.com Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 15:03 EDT Subject: Re: Baby Bells and States dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > I'm curious about who made the decision as to which Baby-Bell would be > assigned to serve what states (excluding the non-RBOCs of course). It > seems that some cover only a few states while others like USWest cover > many. Would this be based on the population at the time? Well according to my "Engineering and Operations in the Bell System" text (a book still handed out to new AT&T employees), the current RBOC territory boundaries seem to follow the same boundaries that formed the old Western Electric Regions. Also, I think the same boundaries constituted the various regions of the old AT&T Long Lines. LATA determination went by "area/regions of interest" or some other buzz term. I suppose this was by population, though I cannot say for sure. J Butz jbutz@homxa.att.com AT&T - BL ER700 Systems Engineering ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:51:01 EDT From: ers@cblpe.att.com (Eugene R Schroeder) Subject: Re: Polite Thief Organization: AT&T In article Jerry Leichter writes: > Yesterday, I tried to place a long-distance credit card call using a > pay phone in Piscataway, New Jersey. LD service was from some company > like "American Network Services". Needless to say, I dialed 10288 > first. > No combination I tried would let me select AT&T; either the sequence > was (legitimately) declared invalid, or I got the "not necessary" > message. > I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense > like this reported, but I can't remember it. Anyone? The number to report having 10288+0 blocked from a public phone is 1-800-742-6260 (we got stickers some time ago to put on our calling/universal cards). Presumably this results in AT&T taking action to get the phone unblocked. Hopefully you can make the 800 for free. Non-disclaimer: I work for AT&T Gene ------------------------------ From: rkh@ucs.att.com (Bob Halloran) Subject: Re: Polite Thief Organization: AT&T Universal Card Services, Jacksonville FL Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:53:06 GMT In article Jerry Leichter writes: [Moderator's Note: See earlier message this issue for the text. PAT] Off the sticker they sent to stick on my card, it's 1-800-742-6260. I recall they'll want to know where the phone was, when you tried to make the call, and the AOS. Bob Halloran AT&T Universal Card Jacksonville FL rkh@ucs.att.com Any similarity between opinions stated here and AT&T's corporate opinion are purely coincidental. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 06:30:03 -0700 From: rlm@ms_aspen.hac.com (Robert L. McMillin) Subject: Re: Polite Thief Jerry Leichter writes: [stuff about the phone rejecting the 10288 prefix deleted] > I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense > like this reported, but I can't remember it. Anyone? The number you're looking for is 816-654-8000. They accept collect long-distance calls for the purpose of making long-distance calls over AT&T's network. Presumably, they then go after offending operator for blocking 10288 calls. 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 ------------------------------ From: andyb@europa.coat.com (Andy Behrens) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 15:00:36 -0400 Organization: Burlington Coat Factory Reply-To: Andy.Behrens@coat.com Subject: Re: Polite Thief This has been illegal since January 11 of this year. To get AT&T's help, dial 1-800-CALL-ATT, then select options 2+1+0 from the menu. Tell the operator that you want to report a phone that won't let you dial 10ATT. You should also file a complaint with the FCC: Informal Complaints and Public Inquiries Branch Enforcement Division Federal Communications Commission 2025 M Street, N.W., Room 6202 Washington, D.C. 20554 Andy Behrens P.O. Box 116, South Strafford, Vt. (802) 765-4138 Burlington Coat, HC 61 Box 1B, Lebanon, N.H. 03766 (603) 448-5000 [Moderator's Note: I'd like you to know that a couple weeks ago I was in the Executive House Hotel in downtown Chicago to meet someone and every payphone in the place was operated by some AOS outfit. They all had 10288 blocked and they all had a notice next to the phone actually claiming 'it is not illegal to block 10288; to reach AT&T simply dial the operator and asked to be 'splashed back' to AT&T ...'. I tried it and the operator had no idea what I was talking about. I asked her if I was speaking English or some other language, and if English was she having difficulty in hearing me; if so I could begin screaming in the phone at her to help her hear and understand me better. It was like talking to a turtle or a goldfish. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jkarab@NeXT.COM (John Karabaic) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Date: 26 Aug 92 13:40:06 GMT Reply-To: jkarab@NeXT.COM Jeff Garber writes: > On The Jerry Springer Show (Aug 19, 11 A.M., KCAL Channel 9, Los > Angeles) the topic was 911. Apparently, someone in the Cincinnati > area called 911 from a cellular phone because he believed a man was > having a heart attack on the side of the road. The 911 operator told > him that they cannot accept calls from cellular phones! They actually > played the recording from the call on the show, so I heard it with my > own ears. Rest easy, that dispatcher was disciplined. She (I think it was a she) misinterpreted the policy. Since 911's Caller-ID doesn't work with cellular phones, despatchers had been instructed to ask specific questions of cellular callers. This despatcher either misinterpreted the training, was under stress and made a mistake, or was a bozo. I use my cellular phone with 911 all the time to report motorists in need of assistance, accidents, and the like. I state where I am, where the person who needs assistance is, and am usually cheerfully thanked. If asked, I provide my name and my cellular number. For non-emergencies, some despatchers will hook you up with the state police or county sheriff. Since I have the (dubious) privilege of having a phone, I figure it's my duty to use it this way. John S. Karabaic, Systems Engineer, jkarab@NeXT.com, 513 792 5904 NeXT Computer, Inc.; 4434 Carver Woods Dr.; Cincinnati, OH 45242 cellular: 513 532 0224; fax: 513 792 5913; territory: OH, IN & KY [Moderator's Note: I try to use my handheld in the same way. I pass by accident scenes and situations where police intervention is required almost every day ... and I call it in. PAT] ------------------------------ From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 16:43:35 GMT In article Jeff Garber <0005075968@ mcimail.com> writes: > What good is it to have a phone with you if you can't use it in an > emergency? I've used L.A. Cellular to call 911 many times and have had > no problems like this ... I have PacTel Cellular and have also had no problem using 911. I saw a man down being beaten by someone in the right lane of Santa Monica Blvd (the victim was holding his head and screaming while the other guy was kicking him). I grabbed the phone about 200 feet past the scene, called 911, told them (they had real difficulty getting the correct intersection -- it was obvious they weren't anywhere in the area), and drove on. About another 200 feet down the street, I passed the fire station, where several sheriffs were starting out on their bicycles. I rolled down my window and told them what I'd seen and they said they had just been dispatched. Net time: about 45 seconds. ------------------------------ From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:28:59 GMT Here in Ohio, the Highway Patrol will accept calls from cellular telephones at 800-525-5555. Luckily I have not had to call the OHP, but the instruction book I received from Cellular One recommends this number for reporting emergencies. The same book also mentions that 911 may be called to report emergencies. Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (140.220.1.1) ------------------------------ From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:30:12 GMT I don't know where you are, but in California the 911 people LOVE cellular phones. I've never called 911 from a regular phone but I understand you get right in touch with a police or fire person. When you call 911 from a cellular you get a 911 operator and you tell them who you want to talk to, I.E. "Please get me the Huntington Beach PD", then you tell the PD what is wrong. I use it all the time to report accidents, and they are glad to hear from me. I'll also call in when I see broken down [like with smoke comin' out of the hood or a broken axel] car with people near it, or even little things like traffic lights being out or large chunks of metal in the road it is a free call and they are always glad to hear from me. Marshal Perlman - Huntington Beach - California - USA - Earth - Milky Way [Moderator's Note: We don't have cellular 911, but we can call 787-0000 or the operator and get connected to Chicago Emergency. I only use that for *emergencies*, but I call the city all the time for things like stop-and-go lights out of order, open hydrants, dead animals on the street or parkway, street/sewer cave-ins, etc. I do not call through the main City Hall centrex number; I call direct to the appropriate dispatcher and am always thanked for my report. PAT] ------------------------------ From: oakes@maize.rtsg.mot.com (Ronald Oakes) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 9:42:32 CDT haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) writes: > I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve > as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy > Sandia National Laboratories. Does anybody know what's happening? Is > this AT&Ts decision, or DOE's decision, or is the lab being closed, or > what? I do not think that any decisions have been made yet. However, Sandia will remain open -- or at least it is supposed to. I have heard rumors that the University of New Mexico is thinking of taking over the management, and I suspect there may be other interested parties. I have to say that I hope that Sandia does not close. My father has worked there for 30+ years as an engineer. Additionally, directly and indirectly most of the population of Albuquerque, NM -- my home town -- would be effected by its closing. I suspect that AT&T's decision to not renew the contract to operate Sandia is related to the large number of lay off's that have been occuring at the AT&T division around here, the automation of operator services, and the other steps that they seem to be taking to streamline operations. Ronald B. Oakes ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 12:56:53 EDT From: andys@internet.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia Reply-To: andys@flatline.sbi.com (Andy Sherman) In article , haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) writes: > I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve > as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy > Sandia National Laboratories. Does anybody know what's happening? Is > this AT&Ts decision, or DOE's decision, or is the lab being closed, or > what? This was AT&T's decision. As far as I know the lab will remain open, but with peace breaking out all over you can never tell. As I recall The official word was on the order of "we'd like to concentrate on making money now". The Sandia contract was cost + $1.00. Andy Sherman Salomon Inc - Unix Systems Support - Rutherford, NJ (201) 896-7018 - andys@flatline.sbi.com or asherman@mhnj.sbi.com "These opinions are mine, all *MINE*. My employer can't have them." ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:38:30 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia What is happening is that the contracts between the DOE sites and AT&T are up for renewal and apparently Sandia is going with another company for their long distance carrier. My employer, Brookhaven National Laboratory, is negotiating a contract right now and I don't know who the players are at the present time. It should be noted that these contracts are of approximate ten-year duration which would put the beginning of the AT&T-Sandia one in 1982, the same as BNLs. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #665 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa22967; 27 Aug 92 4:50 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA31452 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:44:11 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07752 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:43:56 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 02:43:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208270743.AA07752@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #666 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Aug 92 02:44:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 666 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Michael A. Covington) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Steve Forrette) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Laurence Chiu) Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone (Angie Clarke) Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone (Kenneth A. Becker) Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone (Ang Peng Hwa) Re: GTE California Changes (John Higdon) Re: GTE California Changes (Jeff Sicherman) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (R. Kevin Oberman) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Jim Rees) Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? (Richard Nash) Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? (Dan Odom) Last Laugh! Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Brad Hicks) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 05:54:39 GMT In article voorhis@aecom.yu.edu (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: > jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell)> writes: >> It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any >> mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it. >> This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even >> covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time >> to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one >> else. > Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow > you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from > disclosing what was heard? I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it > would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information, > that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have > legitimately obtained. Hmmm? Never heard of confidentiality? Jon was describing the Communications Act of 1934, which forbids disclosing or "using" information obtained by listening to non-public radio services. (Broadcasts, hams, CBs, and a few other things are freely disclosable.) That law simply imposes a kind of confidentiality on people who, through technological pursuits, come into possession of other people's private messages. Just like telephone repair personnel, mail carriers, etc. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 goes further: it forbids _listening_ to private radio communications (cellular phones, ship-to-shore phones, etc.). But it also makes it clear that non-encrypted police and other public service communications, as well as ships and aircraft (other than phone calls intended to be private), are not subject to the prohibition. Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 07:43:25 GMT In article voorhis@aecom.yu.edu (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: > Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow > you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from > disclosing what was heard? I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it > would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information, > that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have > legitimately obtained. I'm not a First Amendment lawyer either (or any other kind of lawyer for that matter), but I do know that there is a common misconception that the various amendments prevent any restrictions whatsoever on certain activities. There are many cases where "lawfully obtained" information cannot be legally discussed: - The tried and true "fire in a theater" example. - Trade secrets that you legally obtain in the course of employment. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:36:04 GMT In article voorhis@aecom.yu.edu (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: > What if a reporter, for instance, was listening to a police band > radio and heard a newsworthy event? Could he or she legitimately be > punished for reporting this information? Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up the cell-phone frequencies. The last news report I saw indicated that the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him. Laurence Chiu ------------------------------ From: aclarke@stsci.edu (Angie Clarke) Subject: Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone Reply-To: aclarke@stsci.edu Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore MD Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:18:42 GMT I certainly am interested in the article that appeared in TELECOM Digest a few years ago: "Praise the Lord and Pass the RF Filters". Please post. Thanks. Angie [Moderator's Note: Okay, I will hunt it up and use it soon, maybe over the weekend. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:16:38 EDT From: kab@hotstone.att.com (Kenneth A Becker) Subject: Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone Organization: AT&T In article , rbook@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert Aaron Book) writes: > Recently I was talking on the phone to a friend of mine in Long Beach, > California, and she told me a a repetitve problem she had been having > on her phone -- whenever she used the phone, she heard a *radio* > *station* on her phone line. I listened carefully, found that, on the > other end of the line, I heard the same thing (only when I was talking > to her), only not as loud. We identified the radio station as KFI > (640 AM, Los Angeles). > [Moderator's Note: There are line filters available which will cure > this problem. The telco has no special responsibility to handle the As it happens, I have one of these line filters in my desk, a Z100A radio interference filter sold in AT&T phone stores. Quote: PURPOSE: The Radio Interference Filter is designed to eliminate extraneous noises from local AM band radio stations that you might hear through the receive of your phone. It will also minimize interference from other sources such as FM band radio stations, citizen band, and ham radios. Hope you all find this useful. Ken Becker kab@hotstone.att.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:39:16 SST From: Ang Peng Hwa Subject: Re: Hearing Radio on the Phone I had the same problem of radio on the phone when I lived in LA. It was a rap station that got louder the longer I stayed on the line. The PacBell technician came over and after some checks concluded that it was my cheap $4 phone bought literally off the street (guy unpacked a box on the street) in Greenwich Village, NY. He plugged in one of those heavy-enough-to-use-as-a-weapon phone and there was no rap music. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:26 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: GTE California Changes HOLDREGE_MP writes: > GTE California, the state's second-largest telephone company, plans to > close the LA area facilities and transfer as many as 400 jobs out of > state, union officials said Tuesday. It does not stop does it? I have to admit that this even surprised me. Actually I am very delighted: now the SoCal people can experience the joy of dealing with someone who confuses Santa Monica with Santa Barbara (hell, they're all 'Santas' aren't they???). Now everyone in CA with GTE "service" can try talking with people with southern accents. Oh well, people who cannot help you, cannot help you. > GTE officials confirmed plans to close the company's Norwalk and > Thousand Oaks long-distance access centers, which employ 255 people. Really dedicated to the communities that it "serves", no? > A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing > effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North > Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans. Is it not funny that Pacific Telesis can be located fully within California, use local reps and business offices, maintain local walk-in facilities, fully integrate with the served community, and even contribute to local, regional, and state funds for the arts and philanthopic causes, and STILL provide real telephone service at much less cost than GTE? > The company is also considering closing its Long Beach network > operations monitoring center, which could imperil another 160 jobs. Well, I do not blame them for doing that. The phone service in Long Beach stinks. I would move, too. In fact, a client is moving! > While I can't blame any business from wanting to leave California, > what with the crazy laws, high insurance and benefits corruption, I am > upset that our phone company is pulling out. Pac*Bell seems to be able to make it in California. My phone company is not leaving. And I pay less for my phone service than you do; Pac*Bell's tariffed rates have always been lower than GTE's. > Is is especially upsetting that the Network Operations Monitoring > center is leaving. The center, which opened only six months ago, was > responsible for alerting technicians to problems. Who is going to do > this now? Computers in Texas? Probably no one. But then I doubt that you will notice any service level reduction. It could not get much worse. I have reported trouble in the Los Gatos CO on a Friday night, but of course it is Monday or Tuesday before GTE can fly someone up from southern California to fix it. There is an amusing story here. After calling GTE repair repeatedly (necessary to get ANYTHING fixed), someone from the "network control center" called me on Saturday to tell me that they were on top of the problem. The problem, he said, was that someone had removed some of the wiring improperly from the frames. He could see the problem from his terminal right there (in Long Beach?). Well, I guess I was impressed! "So how long to fix it?", I asked. "Should take no time at all once we get someone up there -- no later than Tuesday." John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:30:11 -0700 From: Jeff Sicherman Subject: Re: GTE California Changes Organization: Cal State Long Beach In article HOLDREGE_MP writes: > John Higdon can no longer complain about the incompetant GTE reps in > Thousand Oaks, CA. He soon will be able to complain about the > incompetant GTE reps in North Carolina, Florida, and Texas. > A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing > effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North > Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans. Does this mean they will be programming the computers to ignore and throw away trouble tickets ? Jeff Sicherman ------------------------------ From: oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Date: 26 Aug 92 18:23:09 GMT In article , stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill St. Louis) writes: > The Subject says it all. > I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will > work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) > RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will > these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? Actually, they both have notches, but the DEC connector (called an MMJ) has the notch offset while the standard RJ-45 has it centered. If you have MMJ hacks installed in offices you will need MMJ plugs for them. The RJ45 will not work. The idea of the MMJ was to have a different connector for data to avoid blowing up data equipment by putting the telco battery (and ring) on it. While might have been a good idea, it never caught on and I don't know of anyone other than DEC using it. Other vendors have either ignored the problem or have designed their equipment to be uneffected by telco voltages. MMJ jacks are available at about the same cost as RJ-45s, so it's not too expensive to use them. It's just a pain in the neck! R. Kevin Oberman Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Internet: koberman@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: rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Reply-To: Jim.Rees@umich.edu Organization: University of Michigan IFS Project Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:05:14 GMT In article , stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill St. Louis) writes: > I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will > work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) > RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will > these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? The jacks are the same, except for the notch. The difference is in the cable. A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end. A notched cable is wired straight. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 22:38:18 -0600 From: rickie@trickie.uucp (Richard Nash) Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? David G Lewis writes: > In article hgschulz@gaia.cs.umass.edu > (Henning Schulzrinne) writes: >> Just curious: how much does a CO switch cost? I realize that this >> question is about as precise as asking "how much does a car cost"... > Actually, I think it's more along the lines of asking "how much does > an airplane cost?" Depends -- are you talking a Cessna 172 or a B2 > Stealth Bomber? The above comparison is a wee bit misleading. Even though the machine looks identical (minor internal equipment provisioning differences), the price can be radically different if a toll machine, versus a local switch, or also, who you are! Software prices are very expensive. After all, it is those expensive tastes of the contracting software developer and 1000 percent markup of the equipment vendor that has to be satisfied. At least that is how it appears to be done in Canada. :) :) Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: trickie!rickie@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ From: danodom@cutlass.ksu.ksu.edu (Dan Odom) Subject: Re: What Does a CO Switch Cost? Date: 26 Aug 1992 09:43:13 -0500 Organization: Kansas State University A switch can cost a LOT. Like another poster said, nobody will give out exact information, including my school. But I did some asking around and heard a "rumor" that our switch ran about $10,000,000. I don't know if I believe this (they are barely willing to spring for $130,000 in computer equipment), but it's a start. Dan Odom danodom@matt.ksu.ksu.edu Send email for PGP key. ------------------------------ From: mc/G=Brad/S=Hicks/OU=0205925@mhs.attmail.com Date: 26 Aug 92 16:04:23 GMT Subject: Last Laugh! Re: Pounding on an Octothorp > The very plaintive (and frustrated question was) "I can't find the > ANY key." Back when I worked at a major defense contractor, I was sitting next to a guy who took one of these calls. He just barely stifled his smirk, explained to the user that meant that if he hit any of the keys on the keyboard, the computer would continue. Which one? ANY of them! After a brief pause, the user replied: "Well, I just hit a key and nothing happened." What key did you hit? "The Shift key." Now, YOU smirk. I think this is a a "fair cop." Once he understood the directions on the screen, the user followed them ... and because the instructions were wrong, it didn't do him any good. I guess it COULD have said "Press any non-modifier key to continue." But my ex-wife, who writes specifications and user documentation for another company, designs the screens now so that they say "Press Enter to continue." In fact, the programmers write it so that it works if you hit any non-modifier key, but the user is much, much better off with simple, unambiguous directions. J. Brad Hicks Internet: mhs!mc!Brad_Hicks@attmail.com X.400: c=US admd=ATTmail prmd=MasterCard sn=Hicks gn=Brad I am not an official MasterCard spokesperson, and the message above does not contain official MasterCard statements or policies. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #666 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa23809; 27 Aug 92 5:11 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00898 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:18:59 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20589 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:18:49 -0500 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 01:18:49 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208270618.AA20589@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #664 TELECOM Digest Thu, 27 Aug 92 01:18:54 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 664 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson AT&T and Hurricane Andrew (Ed Hopper) Disaster Reporting (Dave Niebuhr) Another AOS Experience (J. Butz) New England Telephone Brings Back "Granite State Calling" (Mark Eklof) Recommendations Wanted For Pager/Beeper (Ray Normandeau) Do-It-Yourself Car Phone Installation? (Andrew C. Green) Another Valuable Service From Pac*Bell (John Higdon) Cell Phones in the Air (Tom Gillman) Modem Noise on Line (Steve Shapiro) How Do I Locate Graybar? (Michael Schuster) Slamming Prevention (David Caldwell) Anyone Hear of PROVOX? (Larry Rachman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ehopper@attmail.com Date: 26 Aug 92 20:25:03 GMT Subject: AT&T and Hurricane Andrew Pat: Here is an item of interest from AT&T Today, the internal electronic newsletter. HURRICANE AID *** As of 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, 80 AT&T employees in southern Florida were unaccounted for, and the homes of an estimated 100-150 employees were devastated in the wake of Hurricane Andrew. No figure on total AT&T employees in the affected area was immediately available. Company efforts are underway to locate unaccounted-for employees and to help others move belongings from their homes and find temporary shelter. The AT&T Foundation donated $100,000 today to the American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund for Florida. There is an URGENT need for supplies for our friends and co-workers in Dade County, Fla. The following items are needed: portable radios, batteries (size C and D), flashlights, Coleman stoves, matches, ice chests, paper products (towels, utensils, trash bags, toilet paper), bottled water and juices, manual can openers, canned food, linens, cots, blankets, towels and washcloths. Adult items needed are clothing and toiletries. Children's items needed are shoes, clothing and toys. Baby items needed are diapers, formula, baby food, clothing, bedding, powder and ointment. Other items needed are aspirin, Bandaids, bug spray, sunscreen, pet food, litter and litter boxes, collars and leashes. Donations should be sent to Pioneer Office, 6451 N. Federal, Room 101B, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. 33308. Ed Hopper AT&T - IMS Atlanta, GA [Moderator's Note: Ed, I am more than happy to help spread this call for assistance through the telecom industry among the readers of this Digest. How about let's all take a few minutes Thursday and prepare boxes of stuff to be sent, preferably via Federal Express so that it will arrive by the weekend or Monday at the latest. The need is very great *right now*. Grab stuff that you do not need from the list above, toss it in a large cardboard box and send it to the Telephone Pioneers in Ft. Lauderdale. These donations will be distributed throughout Dade County with telco employees in the area given priority. Perhaps readers can post this on company bulletin boards and have other employees bring in stuff Friday morning. If you prefer (or can spare yet a second box full of stuff) your packages can be sent to the City Clerk, City of Homestead, Homestead, FL marked 'disaster relief supplies'. Telco employees with a few days vacation coming might want to volunteer their service by going down there and helping residents and businesses get their telephone instruments connected and back on line pending restoral of service. Even if all you do is send a few cans of food and some toilet paper, **please do it Thursday if at all possible, and use an overnight courier to get it there Friday**. The folks are in very bad shape. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:48:07 EDT From: dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) Subject: Disaster Reporting What with the two disasters on our hands -- the fire in California and the damage caused by Hurricane Andrew, I was wondering if people located in those areas who have power and telephone service and receive the Digest could keep us posted on the efforts to recover from these calamaties. My sympathies go to those living in those areas and hope that their losses are minimal which unfortunately aren't. Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 [Moderator's Notes: Very little word is coming in or out of Dade County, and the news that is reaching us is horrible. The town of Homestead, with 30,000 residents was wiped out of existence. Utility poles and wires are laying on the ground in a jumble, ripped and torn from their poles, etc. Utility service will not be fully restored for many weeks. I forward articles to comp.dcom.telecom using nntpxmit through several sites including cs.miami.edu, and they have not responded to telnet since Monday. I sincerely hope that telecom people everywhere will rally to the support of Dade County. The California disaster is of equal concern right now but to some extent was over- shadowed by the enormity of Andrew's fury this week. And now we have Louisiana to deal with ... so much to do. Please take a few minutes on Thursday and help out however you can: Florida, Louisiana, California. Thanks, and if you hear from folks in these areas, pass along news. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jbutz@homxa.att.com Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:11 EDT Subject: Another AOS Experience leichter@lrw.com writes: > And this is right in the heart of AT&T land: Fire a gun in any > direction and you'll probably hit an AT&T facility! At a recent reunion of my college buddies at Puglia's family style Italian restaurant (home of Jorge the keyboard player, dancing permitted, but don't drink the house red) in Little Italy in Manhattan, I had the unpleasant occasion of running into one of these AOS monsters. A 0+ call gave me a bong tone followed by a mechanical, female voice announcing "ITI Telecommunications." 10288 was blocked as well. A call to 1-800-CALL-ATT put me in touch with an AT&T customer rep who picked up the ANI that was intentionally not posted on the phone, recorded the street address and cheerfully connected me to bong tone which allowed me to complete my call on the carrier of MY choice. AT&T and NY Tel must have an intra-lata call completion agreement, since my intra-lata call to "da Bronx" terminated with no problems. > I seem to recall that AT&T has a number at which they want nonsense > like this reported, but I can't remember it. Anyone? The number is 1-800-CALL-ATT. + To report an AOS that blocks carrier selection, select option 2, then option 0 for a customer rep. + To bill to card, select option 2, then option 1. Enter the number you are dialing, followed by your card number. Later, J Butz jbutz@homxa.att.com AT&T-BL ER700 System Engineering ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 23:09:02 EDT From: me@stile.stonemarche.org (Mark Eklof) Subject: New England Telephone Brings Back "Granite State Calling" This spring, there was mention in the Digest of New England Telephone's switch to flat rate in-state (New Hampshire) long distance calling. With the new system, I could call the adjacent town to the west of here for the same rate that I could a town on the other end of the state (about 3.5 hours of highway driving away). When they did this, they also changed the discount calling plan (formerly called "Granite State Service", and now called "CallAround 603 Plan"), with different time periods, and rates. The old plan allowed plan calls in the afternoon, while the new one gave no discounts during the day. I called NETel at the time, to complain of the loss of the daytime discount. Suprisingly, the person I talked to said that many people had voiced the same complaint (It wasn't suprising that others had complained, it was suprising that they told me that), and that they were "looking into" ways to address this. I figured that was a brush off, and there wasn't much I could do anyway. Apparently, I was wrong. I received the following letter today. ---------------------------------- New England Telephone August 24, 1992 Dear Mr. Eklof: Effective March 20, New England Telephone simplified and restructured in-state long distance rates, eliminated Granite State(SM) Service, and introduced the new CallAround(R) 603 discount calling paln. As a result, some customers expressed concern about the elimination of the daytime calling period associated with their Granite State Service. To alleviate these concerns, Granite State Service will be offerred to qualified residence subscribers who so request between now and October 9. As a Granite State Service customer of record during March, please take a minute to read the descriptions below. Then decide which plan best fits your calling patterns and life style. If you are unsure if you qualify, you may call your local Business Office for more information. ... [Details of the two plans ommitted. I can send them if there's interest, but the plan details and rates are the same as they were before. Also details of normal rates that would be in effect without the plans, or during the (different) periods the plans aren't active.] ... If you wish to re-subscribe to Granite State Service or request assistance in choosing a calling plan, call your Service Representative at the telephone number listed on the New England Telephone Itemization of Account page of your bill. Remember, orders for Granite State Service must be received by October 9, 1992. This will be your only opportunity to re-subscribe to Granite State Service. Orders for the service will not be accepted after Octover 9. If you re-subscribe to Granite State Service, we will reinstate your service without applying any installation charges. If you are happy with your current service arrangement, you do not need to contact us. We hope this offer expresses our appreciation of your business. Thank you for using New England Telephone. Sincerely, Allen F. Pattee Vice President - New Hampshire --------------------------------------- So, it looks like I'll be able to get the old service back, though if I were just moving in, I'd be SOL. I do plan to call them in the morning and tell them to switch me back to Granite State Service. Mark D. Eklof Brookline, New Hampshire, USA me@stile.stonemarche.org ------------------------------ Subject: Recommendations Wanted For Pager/Beeper From: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) Date: 26 Aug 92 18:53:00 GMT Organization: Invention Factory's BBS - New York City, NY - 212-274-1243v.32bis Reply-To: ray.normandeau@factory.com (Ray Normandeau) I am thinking of getting a pager (beeper). I would like to be paged when my answering machine gets a message. What are the recommendations to accomplish this? I now use two Panasonic KX-T1470 Answering Machines and would prefer not to get another machine as I am very pleased with the ones I have. They have all the features that I want, except that they will not dial a beeper number. As I already have telephones that handle multiple lines, I especially would like to avoid having to get another answering machine that would include its own phone that would only be usable on one line. Incidentally, the reason that I use two answering machines instead of a dual line answering machine is because a dual line answering machine can not answer both lines simultaneously. Ray Normandeau INTERNET:ray.normandeau@factory.com P O Box 854, Times Square Station, New York, NY 10108-0854 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:16:54 CDT From: Andrew C. Green Reply-To: acg@hermes.dlogics.com Subject: Do-It-Yourself Car Phone Installation? I've been toying with the idea of picking up a used cellular phone for my wife's car, primarily for some peace of mind (both hers and mine) in case of breakdown. At this time, neither of us have one and I'm (obviously) not an expert on the subject. For various reasons, I want a permanently-installed model. Now the question: how difficult is it to install? I have extensive experience with car electrical systems, sound systems and the like, but the few articles I've seen on the subject make it sound like brain surgery; they blather on about how to choose a good installation outfit, but don't clarify what's so darned difficult about it. Two more questions: Does the antenna require any kind of adjustment (i.e. tuning) after installation? Finally, what sort of bureaucracy is involved in obtaining service? This sort of paperwork is usually done by the installation outfits, but as I said, I'm hoping to do this myself. Thanks in advance for the net.wisdom ... Andrew C. Green Datalogics, Inc. Internet: acg@dlogics.com 441 W. Huron UUCP: ..!uunet!dlogics!acg Chicago, IL 60610 FAX: (312) 266-4473 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:00 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Another Valuable Service From Pac*Bell Here, right from the horse's mouth, is a new subsidized service to attempt to put the competition out of business (and exploit the network which Pac*Bell controls): "Pacific Bell plans to upgrade a small number of Pacific Bell Public payphones in its franchise territory to trial Public Coin voice Messaging Service (CVM). Our intent is to trial this service from a limited base beginning the first quarter of 1993 pending regulatory approval. CVM will allow a caller, encountering a busy or no answer condition, to send up to a one minute message to their called party for an additional fee above the cost of the call. The caller, after hearing a busy or set number of ring-no-answers, is presented with a voice prompt offering the service. The caller accepts the service by following the instructional voice prompts that are provided when the aforementioned conditions are encountered. Once the service is accepted, the caller is forwarded to a messaging system where the message is recorded and the call delivery is attempted at pre-determined intervals for a set period of time depending on the condition encountered by the caller (i.e. every 30 minutes for the next four hours for no answer, every 15 minutes for the next two hours on a busy). "During the trial, customers using Pacific Bell public payphones can leave a message for the party they are trying to reach whenever they encounter a busy or no answer condition. Customers can now exchange important information even without reaching the called party live. Messaging is an important tool for people on the go." Remember the discussion about whether a telco should charge for busy or no-answer condition? Looks like Pac*Bell has discovered a way to do just that (and make the customer think he got something for his money in the process). John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: ddssuprs!tom@uunet.UU.NET (Tom Gillman) Organization: Dickens Data Systems, Inc. Subject: Cell Phones in the Air Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 15:54:38 EDT I, too, would like to know why cellular phones are prohibited by law on aircraft. Please post or email any relevant info. Thanks, Tom Gillman | Internet: tom@dickens.com Systems Integration - Dickens Data Systems | uucp: ...uunet!ddssuprs!tom [Moderator's Note: Perhaps whoever sent the old thread on this topic to the other inquirer recently will send it to Tom also. Thanks. PAT] ------------------------------ From: shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) Subject: Modem Noise on Line Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Marlboro, MA Date: 26 AUG 92 09:30:37 EST Howdy All! I have a problem that I hope one of you wizards can help me with. I have a residence in which I have two phone lines. The wire coming to the house is a 'standard' four wire line (red, black, yellow, green). For one line I use red/green and for the other I use black/yellow. On one line I have my BBS attached and so the modem attached to that line is quite busy. The other line is for voice. The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of hissing and noise heard on the voice line. What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can use inside the house? Is there something I can do on my end or do I have to have the phone company come out and string a second physical wire in support of the second line? Please advise. Regards, Steve.Shapiro@f440.n101.z1.fidonet.org FidoNet 1:101/440 (508) 664-6354 The Contract Professional BBS, North Reading, MA ------------------------------ From: schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) Subject: How Do I Locate Graybar? Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 00:09:42 GMT Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar". Is this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store? Do they have a catalog? Mike Schuster NY Pub. Access UNIX/Internet: schuster@panix.com | 70346.1745@CompuServe.COM The Portal (R) System: schuster@cup.portal.com | MCI Mail,GEnie: MSCHUSTER ------------------------------ From: davecal@microsoft.com (David Caldwell) Subject: Slamming Prevention Date: 26 Aug 92 15:56:35 GMT Organization: Microsoft Corp. Well, I have just set up phone service for myself and requested my long distance carrier. So far, so good. When I called Southern Bell to make some changes to my service (they default you with their $2.50/month Maintenance Plan ... thanks, but no thanks!) I inquired about the status of my long distance carrier. They informed me that it could be changed by any LD carrier with my verbal consent to said carrier. Well after hearing all of the horror stories on this group about slamming I inquired about "locking" (their word, not mine) my account so that changes could only be made when authorized by me. They told me that I could pay 10.75 to have my account locked! I told them they could take their charge and shove it. I know that Southern Bell has switched people I know here to other LD companies based on "verbal confirmation" through the LD carrier. I am thinking that switching LD companies is a great source of revenue for my friends at Southern Bell. Any advice or ideas on how to deal with the phone company from hell? Thanks, David Caldwell davecal@microsoft.com ------------------------------ Date: 26 Aug 92 21:19:07 EDT From: Larry Rachman <74066.2004@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Anyone Hear of PROVOX? I will be setting up an auto-attendant/voicemail system, and am looking at a software package from a company called Provox, in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii. The product runs on a PC with Dialogic cards. Does anyone out there have any experience with this product? Can anyone recommend something similar from another vendor? Thanks, Larry Rachman, WA2BUX - 74066,2004@compuserve.com - Fax: 516-427-0656 ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #664 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa08082; 28 Aug 92 3:13 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA13242 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:08:05 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA27149 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:07:57 -0500 Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:07:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208280607.AA27149@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #667 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 Aug 92 01:07:52 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 667 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson More on AT&T and Hurricane Andrew (Ed Hopper) CWA Union Hall Aids Hurricane Relief Efforts (Nigel Allen) NYC Plans Attack on Pay-Phone Abuses (capek@watson.ibm.com) Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Gabe M. Wiener) 110 vs. 66M Blocks (Jonathan Edwards) A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Laura Fermi, 1965 Interview via P. Townson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: ehopper@attmail.com Date: 27 Aug 92 17:46:23 GMT Subject: More on AT&T and Hurricane Andrew HURRICANE RELIEF *** Although 60,000 storm victims spent Wednesday night in shelters after Hurricane Andrew struck Louisiana, damage was considerably less there than in Florida. All AT&T employees in Louisiana are accounted for. Also, according to information received early today, none of the estimated 400 to 500 AT&T people in the area struck by Andrew, which was downgraded to a tropical storm today, lost their homes. There was no damage done to the network as the storm ripped through the oil towns and Cajun country of South Louisiana Wednesday. Calling volumes doubled Wednesday and are still up today at 15% above normal. Meanwhile, in Florida today, AT&T people from NCR, American Transtech and AT&T Universal Card Services mobilized to bring emergency supplies to AT&T people who have been provided temporary shelter at the company's Ojus facility outside Coral Gables, Fla. Ojus has been established as a central emergency relief office for employees. The storm, which has been called the most expensive natural disaster in this country's history, wreaked between $15 and $20 billion damage in Florida. Some of the 80 AT&T employees unaccounted for Wednesday have been located through efforts by the business units, although no exact figures were available this morning. While there were no network outages in Florida, Andrew destroyed the homes of an estimated 250,000 people, and AT&T moved quickly Wednesday to supply emergency phone service for victims. The company sent 200 coinless public phones to the Fort Lauderdale area and set up approximately 12 public phones at the Homestead Air Force Base in hard-hit South Florida. AT&T also shipped phones and equipment used for the Republican National Convention in Houston to the Louisiana disaster site. Various efforts are under way to raise cash and provide supplies for storm victims. The AT&T Foundation donated $100,000 Wednesday to the American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund. Employees who wish to make tax-deductible cash donations or equipment donations can do so through the following organizations: o The Pioneers in Florida are collecting bottled water, portable radios, batteries, flashlights, portable stoves and fuel, canned food, paper products, umbrellas, clothing, baby items, toiletries, pet supplies, etc. Supplies and tax- deductible cash donations (checks only, please), which will be used to assist AT&T and South Central Bell employees, should be sent to the address below. Checks should be made out to Telephone Pioneers of America/Andrew. Telephone Pioneers of America Florida Goldcoast Chapter No. 83 6451 N. Federal Highway Fort Lauderdale, Fla. 33308 o Donations to Florida storm victims can also be made to: The American Red Cross Disaster Relief Fund c/o Michael Carroll P.O. Box 025230 Miami, Fla. 33102-5230 o Dade County Emergency Relief 800-682-3362 o Emergency-relief collections at various local AT&T building sites. Check with local management for details. After the storm struck, AT&T's Human Resource Division quickly provided guidance to managers to help affected employees in the following areas: o Reasonable additional time off with or without pay, subject to local management discretion, but not to exceed 30 calendar days in a 12-month period. o Flex time/flex place, subject to local management discretion, to give employees some work-schedule flexibility to handle personal matters or work closer to home to oversee home repairs. o Wage advances of up to four weeks. o Expedited processing of mortgage applications through Prudential Home Mortgage. o Assistance in forming car/van pools to help employees whose vehicles were lost or damaged. o Discounts on rental cars through Avis, Hertz and National. o Local employee-sponsored fund-raising activities to aid employees in need. ------- Ed Hopper AT&T - IMS Atlanta, Ga [Moderator's Note: As pointed out yesterday in these columns, the big need in south Florida right now is NOT for money -- they have no where to spend it! What they do need are all sorts of common household items and emergency supplies as per the list provided by the Telephone Pioneers above: baby powder, baby and pet food, flashlights, batteries, can-openers, toilet tissue, etc. I was gratified to get a dozen notes today from readers who took to heart what I requested yesterday: they found some cardboard boxes, loaded them with all sorts of household supplies and other odds and ends, then shipped it out by overnight delivery on Federal Express today to the Pioneer's office at the address shown above. How about the rest of you doing the same? If you need to work on it over the weekend, then send it Monday so the folks will have it Tuesday or Wednesday. If you prefer, you can send the same type of shipment to the attention of the City Clerk, City of Homestead, Homestead, Florida. Federal Express will know where to deliver it along with the truckloads of stuff arriving from big hearted people all over the world ... two of the notes I got today were from Digest readers in Europe. Thank you very much. :) PAT] ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: CWA Union Hall Aids Hurricane Relief Efforts Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 19:23:26 EDT Here is a press release from the AFL-CIO which mentions that the union hall of Communications Workers Local 10511 in Jackson, Mississippi, is being used for hurricane relief efforts. Labor Assists Victims Of Hurricane Andrew Contact: Sharolyn Rosier of the AFL-CIO, 202-637-5010 WASHINGTON, Aug. 27/U.S. Newswire/ -- The AFL-CIO/American Red Cross Disaster Response Network has been activated to aid relief efforts for victims of Hurricane Andrew in Louisiana and Florida. The Network of 144 local unions allows the Red Cross to use their halls in the event of disaster. The following union halls have been mobilized: Carpenters Local 1765 and Plumbers Local 803 in Orlando, Fla.; Electrical Workers Local 349 in Miami; Carpenters District Council in Hialeah, Fla.; Electrical Workers Local 985 in Baton Rouge, La.; and Communications Workers Local 10511 in Jackson, Miss. The halls are equipped with staff to assist with such services as housing, food, and damage assessment. AFL-CIO Community Services liasons who have more information on labor's outreach efforts are: -- South Florida -- Billy Tindle or Frank Culver at 305-324-2523 or 324-2525 or Marilyn Jacobs at 305-579-2267. -- Baton Rouge/Jackson -- Walt Norris (phone lines are down, please call Chris Marston at 202-637-5010.) "The union halls are the backbone of the hurricane response plan for the gulf coast and much of the eastern United States," said Armond Marscelli, manager of disaster operations at the American Red Cross. "Services are provided much quicker because the halls can be readily used as staging areas, watch districts and headquarters." ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 00:47:14 EDT From: capek@watson.ibm.com Subject: NYC Plans Attack on Pay-Phone Abuses An article in the {New York Times} on August 23 says that New York City is moving ahead with a plan which would require the operators of COCOTs on public property to obtain a franchise from the city's Department of Telecommunications and Energy, and which would be granted only to those who comply with the (Federal, state and city) laws which regulate them. A survey conducted by the department shows that "as many as two thirds" of the pay phones violate the law in a number of ways -- by overcharging, blocking long distance carrier access, offering misleading or no information about rates, failing to indicate the owner of the phone, and so on. Apparently, none of the private pay phone presently on public sidewalks have permission from the city, although such permission is required. (NY Telephone routinely obtains such permission.) The present effort is apparently an escalation by the city in the level of enforcment: Now the companies must obtain the franchise, whereas in the past individual phones had to be granted permission. The article gives a number of examples of abuses which I won't repeat here; we're all familiar with the kinds of things which go on. The proposal is expected to be approved by the City Council in the fall and go into effect next year. [Moderator's Note: Chicago is doing the same thing. All pay phones including those of Illinois Bell will have to be registered starting next year if they are on public property. PAT] ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Proper use of 66-block punchdown tool Organization: Columbia University Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 00:52:35 GMT How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the end gets trimmed? My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to. I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one to get it it down and one to cut? Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other. Does any one color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side on mine seems to trim the cable.) Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ From: edwards@world.std.com (Jonathan Edwards) Subject: 110 vs. 66M Blocks Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:30:18 GMT What is the difference between 110 and 66M blocks? I am wiring my house for a mix of voice and possible future 10-BASET. All the wires will end-run to the blocks in the basement. Should I use 110 or 66M blocks? Jonathan Edwards edwards@intranet.com IntraNet, Inc 617-527-7020 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 23:24:00 -0400 From: TELECOM Moderator (telecom@eecs.nwu.edu) Subject: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep The article below is reprinted from the TELECOM Digest, Volume 10, Issue 12, Thursday, January 4, 1990. With the passing of two and a half years, there are many readers who did not see it. My thanks to Mark Brader (msb@sq.com) for suggesting this be reprinted. PAT Date: Thu, 4 Jan 90 0:31:10 CST From: TELECOM Moderator Subject: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep There were simpler times in the history of telephony, and simpler problems to deal with. During the several years I lived in the Hyde Park neighorhood on the south side of Chicago during the 1960's, my favorite neighbor was Lauri Fermi, widow of Enrico Fermi, known for his work on the Atomic Bomb. Mrs. Fermi and I lived in the same apartment building on East 56th Street, directly across the street from the Museum of Science and Industry, and we chatted and dined together frequently. In the fall of 1965, on the occassion of the twentieth anniversary of the completion and first testing of the bomb, Mrs. Fermi told a fascinating story of that summer day, twenty years earlier. Her comments were tape-recorded, and are transcribed below: "The testing was of course kept closely under wraps, you know, the government was awfully sensitive about it. All the papers were giving reports that a monster-like weapon was in the final testing stages, but some of the newspaper accounts were ridiculous. Enrico was given his orders only two days earlier as to exactly where we were to be stationed in the test zone area. Even the local people in New Mexico were told as little as possible; I think the governor and some state officials were told, and sworn to secrecy. "In Alamogordo, we checked into the hotel then drove out to where Enrico had been assigned. It was set up that the scientists were deployed over about a two hundred square mile area; we were about fifteen miles from the target. "The test was set for 4:30 AM the next morning, so we returned to the hotel and went to bed early. We got up at 3 the next morning and drove out to the location, since it took about an hour to set up the test gear Enrico would use ... I suppose it was about 4:15, when a fierce rain storm developed. It lasted only five or ten minutes, but was quite a downpour, and Enrico remarked he hoped nothing would go wrong with the test because of it. "Well, the time came and went, everything was quiet, no bomb, nothing. About 4:45, Enrico decided we had better return to town and see what was what, and we drove back. He wanted to make a phone call and see if the test had been cancelled or not, and the only place open in town at that time of night was the hotel where we had stayed. There was a payphone in the lobby, and Enrico went in the booth, but he didn't get anywhere. I heard him flashing the hook and swearing softly, then he came out and said he could not get the operator. (Alamogordo had manual service at that time, just a small switchboard.) "We got in the car, and Enrico had me drive while he leaned out the window and kept looking overhead at the phone wires. He'd have me turn down one street, then turn back up another street, and finally he said pull the car over and stop. "Where we stopped was in front of a house on one of the residential streets there, but what looked odd to me was on the side of the house, there were hundreds of wires converging, coming in from a dozen telephone poles which all seemed to meet in the back yard or on the side of the house. And all these wires came down out of the sky you might say, and went in the side of the house in a big bundle. "The front porch light was burning, and when we went up on the front porch, the front door was open, but the screen door was latched from the inside. A radio was playing music very softly, and the room was rather dim with just a single light burning. A switchboard sat on one side of the room, and the signal lights on it were flashing off and on like Christmas tree lights. Over by the other corner was a sofa, and a woman was laying on the sofa, obviously sound asleep. This was right about five o'clock, I guess, or a few minutes after. "Enrico banged on the screen door a few times, then kicked it once or twice with his foot. All of a sudden, the lady woke up; she looked over at us very startled, standing at the door; she looked over at the switchboard; looked back at us; jumped up and rushed over to the board and sat down, pausing long enough to light a cigarette and she started frantically answering all the flashing signals. "We got back in the car, and drove out to where we had been before. We were there about five minutes, and the test was conducted. Everything the poets have said about the brilliance and beauty of that first explosion was true.... later, we got together with the others who had been assigned there and found out that it wasn't the rain that delayed things; it was that woman asleep; you see, the main people responsible were linked by phones through Alamogordo; they had to coordinate what they were doing and sychronize their work. All of them got the same thing on the phone we got: no answer from the operator for 45 minutes! "Really, I can't blame the lady much. The whole summer of 1945 was just horrid. When we arrived the day before, the temperature was over a hundred; the poor lady probably couldn't sleep at all that day from the heat, and still had to go to work that night exhausted. Then the rain cooled things off twenty degrees in fifteen minutes; that sofa was just too tempting for her; and probably every other night she only got two or three calls in the whole eight hour shift.... "No one ever said anything to her or the woman who owned the phone exchange there, so I suspect to this day, twenty years later, she doesn't realize she was responsible for causing the first atomic bomb explosion in the world to be delayed for a little over an hour ... but as I think back now, probably someone should have told her ahead of time about that very special morning, and sworn her to secrecy until the test was completed. "When I was there in town two weeks ago for the (twentieth anniversary) reunion, just from curiosity I went past that house; it took me awhile to remember where it was. No wires anywhere like before; and I asked someone there if the phone exchange was there. He told me the 'telephone lady' had been gone for years; Bell or someone had bought it and moved it to a building in the downtown area." ===================== End of Transcription ======================= And that was Laura Fermi talking about the summer of '45 in the desert of New Mexico, in the fall of '65 at a dinner. Patrick Townson ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #667 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa09469; 28 Aug 92 4:07 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA20200 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:00:59 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15822 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:00:51 -0500 Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 02:00:51 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208280700.AA15822@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #668 TELECOM Digest Fri, 28 Aug 92 02:00:53 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 668 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (John Higdon) Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (Nigel Allen) Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names (Carl Moore) Re: Weird Intercept (Arthur Rubin) Re: Weird Intercept (Carl Moore) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Carol Springs) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Scott Dorsey) Re: 800 Portability (Alan L. Varney) Re: 800 Portability (David G. Lewis) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Mike Proicou) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Mark Boolootian) Re: AT&T and Sandia (Bud Couch) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 23:44 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names dmr@rugrat.Corp.Sun.COM (Daniel M. Rosenberg) writes: > Does anyone happen to have a phone book sufficiently old enough to > list the old-style exchange names in the South Bay? I don't have a phone book that old, but memory still serves somewhat. > The one I know in Palo Alto was for the main 32x exchange, known as > "DAvenport," from an old sign. Davenport? What's that have to do with > Palo Alto? Did the phone company just make that up? Funny you mention that. As you head north on Hwy 1 from Santa Cruz you come to a little town called "Davenport". It consists of a general store and gas station. I would guess that it is just over the mountain from Palo Alto (south and west). Of course, I have no idea what if any connection there would be. > And did the 424's, 85x's, 497's and so forth come from anywhere? Possibly the 85x exchange has a name because it dates back into that era, but the other exchanges are new and have no names. But for your amusement here are some in your area: 76x = REgent (Sunnyvale) 96x = YOrkshire (Mountain View) 94x = WHitecliff (Los Altos) 36x = EMpire (Redwood City) 34x = DIamond (San Mateo) In the San Jose area, for some unknown reason, different names were given to prefixes that had the first two digits, even though they were in the same town. Years ago Campbell had three prefixes: 377, 378, and 379. They were named ESsex, FRanklin, and DRexel. Two were in one CO and the third in another. Los Gatos had two: 354 and 356. Both were ELgato and were in separate offices and were served by the "Western California Telephone Company" which was later acquired and hosed by GTE. San Jose had 29x which were all CYpress except 296 which was AXminster and was served out of a Santa Clara office. 24x was CHerry except for 245 which was CHestnut and was actually a Sunnyvale prefix. 25x was split down the middle with about half being ALpine and half being CLayburn. ALpine was westside and Cupertino; CLayburn was eastside. My prefix was named ANdrews, but 262 and 263 were AMhearst and were used in Milpitas. > Where could I find out? I believe the San Jose public library has back issues of the telephone directory. You will need to find a 1961 or earlier edition. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 5:00:34 EDT In Volume 12, Issue 661, dmr@rugrat.Corp.Sun.COM (Daniel M. Rosenberg) asks: > Does anyone happen to have a phone book sufficiently old enough > to list the old-style exchange names in the South Bay? Pacific Bell probably has a historical department that could answer your question. If you are interested in looking at old telephone directories, your local library may have them on microfilm. (In Canada, the Metro Toronto Reference Library has a complete set of all Bell Canada telephone directories ever issued on microfilm.) It's interesting to look at a 1953 directory in which today's office-park suburbs show up as farming communities with manual telephone service. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 12:27:53 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: San Francisco Area Exchange Names You could go to a library and look up newspapers on microfilm. Some libraries might even have old telephone directories on microfilm, as was the case in Wilmington, Delaware (where I located a 1960 directory on microfilm and figured from it that the 1965 area code split in Florida was 305/904). [Moderator's Note: The Chicago Public Library has directories from Illinois Bell and Chicago Telephone Company (IBT's 1920's predecessor) going back to 1879. They are all on microfilm, as is a complete set of the {Chicago Tribune} back to October, 1871. They have a few pre-fire copies of the {Tribune) between 1842 and 1871 also. I use the old issues of the papers a lot for reference. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Weird Intercept From: a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) Date: 27 Aug 92 15:29:41 GMT Reply-To: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) In MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev. unisys.com writes: > I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this > number before). When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're > sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are > using. Please read the instruction card and dial again." (There are > the standard SIT tones at the beginning.) This is odd since I'm > calling from my office phone, not a pay phone. Sounds like a PBX intercept to me. Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea 216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal) My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer. [Moderator's Note: IBT has a few numbers where they 'store' various funky intercept recordings for whatever reason: 312-856-1520 ==> 1525 always return messages like " ... can't be completed as dialed, please ask your attendant for assistance", " all circuits are busy now", and a particularly odd one used to be in that range of numbers which simply said "the voting has been concluded"(?), plus one that makes sense if you think about it, "the number you have dialed cannot be reached from outside the customer's premises". PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 28 Aug 92 16:52:34 EDT From: Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) Subject: Re: Weird Intercept All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would still be in 213, not in 310. ------------------------------ From: drilex!carols Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 17:56:13 EDT In Volume 12, Issue 661, person@plains.nodak.edu (Brett G Person) writes: > Apparently, people [in Minneapolis are getting calls] from a new kind > of telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc. It > sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer > that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attourney General's > office says that this doesn't violate any laws. > Any comments? Have any of you gotten phome calls like this? Thankfully, not any quite of this nature. But I did get a call the other day that started out, "Hello, there. This is Thomas Something-or-other, your neighbor, and I was wondering: Has anyone ever told you to ... go to hell?" "Well, I just wanted to tell you to ... go to heaven." It was, of course, a recorded pitch for some church; which one, I'm not sure, since I quickly hung up. The message served its purpose as an attention-getter. The recording had low enough background noise that it was hard to identify the call immediately as automated. Especially annoying was that I do have an upstairs neighbor named Tom, with whom I have had conflicts about noise in the past, so there was a considerable adrenalin rush for a second there. I wish now I'd stayed on the line long enough to see if they were taking information, and if so, to respond, um, appropriately. Carol Springs carols@world.std.com [Moderator's Note: Well what would you rather have, a phone call like that or the Jehovah Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday morning like they do mine? PAT] ------------------------------ From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey) Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:59:07 GMT In article plains!person@uunet.UU.NET (Brett G Person) writes: > Apparently, people there I getting alls from a new kind of > telemarketer slime encourageing them to hate minorites, Jews,etc. It > sounded like the phone calls were comming from an automated dialer > that plays a tape encouraging violence. The State Attourney General's > office says that this doesn't violate any laws. I have got calls from a local church, which uses an automated dialer to call in the afternoons and exhort people to attend church. I have also got a call from an automated dialer which is reminding me to vote for the Republican party in the next presidential election. I did not find either of these offensive, although I found them both rather silly wastes of telephone switching capability. scott [Moderator's Note: We have one working hard here at present exhorting whoever answers to be sure and vote Democratic. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 07:18:55 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) writes: > I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean > that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be > phased in? > Will every possible exchange become avaiable? NOTE: The following is opinion -- the details are still being "worked out" in various industry committees. Every exchange (NXX) can be made "portable", in theory. Since some of them are already "portable" in the sense of using the LEC 800 databases (that is, the LEC "NXX" codes), I don't believe you'll see an "at once" scenario. A local CO might cut all remaining NXX codes at once (maintaining the same routing after the database query as before), but it will take some time to get all the COs to use the new database for all 800 calls. Once that total change-over is complete, it will be possible to change the routing of a given number. > Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as > a large company? > Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing > problems? See above NOTE. Correction of problems is a major concern of the industry. Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing against each other??? The only one that comes to mind is the default carrier assigned to equal access lines. > I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different > times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I > would hate to have to write that database). The database is already "written" for the capabilities you've mentioned, and others. But maintaining them ALL accurately is going to be much harder than building them ever was ... and, of course, you're likely to be billed based somewhat on the complexity of what you're asking the system to do. Al Varney -- remember, it's just MY opinion ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: AT&T Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 13:32:00 GMT In article wah@zach.fit.edu ( Bill Huttig) writes: > I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean > that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be > phased in? It's phased, but not the way you're thinking. At some point in time, LECs will begin doing SCP (database) queries of 800 numbers in parallel with six-digit translations in switches; these queries will do six-digit translations in the SCP. At first, these queries will not be used for call processing, just to test the system. After some soak period, the query responses will begin to be used for call processing and the six-digit translations in the switches will be deactivated. After some additional soak period, the SCPs will begin doing ten-digit translations (instead of six-digit translations). At this point, "800 number portability" is available for all 800-NXXs. > Will every possible exchange become avaiable? I believe so, save for some which may be reserved for testing or for network use. > Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as > a large company? > Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing > problems? I believe the bid for 800 DBA (Database Administrator) is still open, but I'm not sure. The 800 DBA will effectively control the 800 number space, because the 800 DBA is the organization which updates the database. I don't know if the upstream information flows (customer -> 800 DBA) have been well-defined yet. (For that matter, I don't know how well-defined the downstream information flows -- 800 DBA -> 800 SMSs -> 800 SCPs -- are ... but given the organizations involved, I have a little more confidence in that area than in the upstream area ...) As to responsibility for routing problems, that's an interesting question. Issues of incorrect routing will have to be resolved by the originating LEC, the 800 DBA, the customer, and any and all involved 800 service providers. This is one of the operational issues that is critical to the success of 800 number portability, and probably one of the ones that some companies (among which my employer is one) have been insisting must be well-defined before 800 NP is implemented. > I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different > times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I > would hate to have to write that database). Bellcore calls these "vertical services"; I believe the plan is that they are a "phase 2" implementation of the 800 database service. Disclaimer 1: This information is drawn from memory of another AT&T person's presentation on the 800 number portability implementation plan. I accept full responsibility for any errors ... is there anyone out there, say, from Bellcore SS7 Project Management who might be able to correct any of them? Disclaimer 2: My views, not AT&T's, etc., etc. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 09:08:45 MDT From: proicou@merlin.plk.af.mil (Mike Proicou) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia Organization: Parallel Processing Group, Phillips Lab In article dwn@dwn.ccd.bnl.gov (Dave Niebuhr) writes: > What is happening is that the contracts between the DOE sites and AT&T > are up for renewal and apparently Sandia is going with another company > for their long distance carrier. > My employer, Brookhaven National Laboratory, is negotiating a contract > right now and I don't know who the players are at the present time. Nahh, that's not it. AT&T through Bell Labs through Sandia Corp. is the operating contractor for SNL. All of the DOE labs and plants are GOCO (government owned-contractor operated) facilities. BNL is operated by something like Associated Universities, Inc. isn't it? Los Alamos is operated by the University of California. Oak Ridge by Martin Marietta Energy Systems. The word in town is that DOE is pushing for the contractors to operate the labs for profit (instead of the cost + $1). In exchange, DOE wants the contractor to accept liability for cleaning up any environmental problems. Doesn't sound like a bargain to me. I'm across base at the Air Force's Phillips Lab, so this is all just stuff in the papers and rumors. Mike Proicou (505) 846-2227 Phillips Laboratory/WSP Kirtland AFB, NM 87117-6008 ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 08:50:21 PDT From: booloo@framsparc.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Boolootian) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia oakes@maize.rtsg.mot.com (Ronald Oakes) writes: > I have to say that I hope that Sandia does not close. My father has > worked there for 30+ years as an engineer. Additionally, directly and > indirectly most of the population of Albuquerque, NM -- my home town -- > would be effected by its closing. It should be noted that there is more than one Sandia lab: Sandia, Livermore is right across the street from LLNL. I have not heard rumours of a shutdown (and I'd be very surprised if it actually came to that). LLNL is in the process of renegotiating its contract with the University of California. This occurs every five years (at least for LLNL). If the UC were to opt to no longer manage LLNL (which was a real possibility for awhile), we would begin the search for another organization to manage us. I seriously doubt we would shut down. Mark Boolootian booloo@llnl.gov +1 510 423 1948 ------------------------------ From: kentrox!bud@uunet.UU.NET (Bud Couch) Subject: Re: AT&T and Sandia Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:05:06 GMT In article oakes@maize.rtsg.mot.com (Ronald Oakes) writes: > haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes) writes: >> I see by the news that after September, 1993 AT&T will no longer serve >> as the management and operating contractor for the Dept. of Energy >> Sandia National Laboratories. Does anybody know what's happening? Is > I have to say that I hope that Sandia does not close. My father has > worked there for 30+ years as an engineer. Additionally, directly and > I suspect that AT&T's decision to not renew the contract to operate > Sandia is related to the large number of lay off's that have been > occuring at the AT&T division around here, the automation of operator > services, and the other steps that they seem to be taking to > streamline operations. I really doubt that AT&T's decision to drop the management of Sandia is in any way related to the "automation of operator services". Since your father worked there, I assume you know what they did, but maybe a lot of netters aren't aware: the Department of Energy label is a bit of a smokescreen. Sandia Labs was operated by (originally Western Electric Government Operations) AT&T to do weapons work, i.e. "The Bomb". No, I think that AT&T simply saw that, with end of the Cold War, the government teat labeled "defense" was drying up, and big bucks were no longer guarenteed. I thought that Lawrence-Livermore and Sandia had been combined under some sort of common management awhile back, but I could be wrong on that. Does anyone if this management change affects Lawrence-Livermore? Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew ... standard BS applies ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #668 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13851; 30 Aug 92 18:02 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07156 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:09:22 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16892 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:09:12 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:09:12 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302109.AA16892@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #669 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 16:09:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 669 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Harold Hallikainen) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (Mark W. Schumann) Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota (John Higdon) Re: 800 Portability (Alan L. Varney) Re: 800 Portability (David G. Lewis) Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Walter R. Trachim) Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (John Higdon) Re: Proper use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool (Julian Macassey) Re: 66 and 110 Punchdown Blocks (Pat Turner) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 18:58:23 GMT Here in California, recorded message calls must be preceeded by a live person who: 1. Identifies him or herself. 2. States the nature and duration of the message. 3. Asks wheter you are willing to listen to the message. 4. Disconnects if you refuse. These rules do not apply to calls from outside the state of California or to calls placed by businesses to preexisting customers. If you receive a recorded message call which fails to do all of the above and wish to make a complaint, your local Business Office will need to know the name of the individual or business making the call. I've received several calls that do not comply with these requirements, and have, where the caller is identified, turned them over to the local business office. Have never gotten a call that complies with the requirements. Harold ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 13:31 EDT From: catfood@wariat.org (Mark W. Schumann) Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota Organization: Akademia Pana Kleksa, Publi Access UNI* Site I would think that anyone calling you could be cited for harrassment if you asked him/her to stop calling and were ignored. IMHO, if the caller chooses not to listen to you (by automating the call), that is the caller's problem. The first time you get one of those calls, ask the computer to refrain from calling ever again. The second time, you can prosecute. :-) Mark W. Schumann/3111 Mapledale Avenue/Cleveland, Ohio 44109-2447 USA Preferred: mark@whizbang.wariat.org | Alternative: catfood@wariat.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:53 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Automated Hate Calls in Minnesota On Aug 28 at 2:00, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: Well what would you rather have, a phone call like > that or the Jehovah Witnesses coming to your door at 9 AM on Saturday > morning like they do mine? PAT] As a matter of fact, a Saturday morning phone call OR a Saturday morning visit from the Jehovah's Witnesses would be handled about the same way. My front door is equipped with the doorphone option on my Panasonic hybrid. Someone comes to the door, I reach over and "answer the phone", and tell whoever it is to "shove it under the door" and go away. Then I hang up and go back to sleep. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 07:18:55 CDT From: varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: AT&T Network Systems, Lisle, IL In article wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean > that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be > phased in? > Will every possible exchange become avaiable? NOTE: The following is opinion -- the details are still being "worked out" in various industry committees. Every exchange (NXX) can be made "portable", in theory. Since some of them are already "portable" in the sense of using the LEC 800 databases (that is, the LEC "NXX" codes), I don't believe you'll see an "at once" scenario. A local CO might cut all remaining NXX codes at once (maintaining the same routing after the database query as before), but it will take some time to get all the COs to use the new database for all 800 calls. Once that total change-over is complete, it will be possible to change the routing of a given number. > Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as > a large company? > Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing > problems? See above NOTE. Correction of problems is a major concern of the industry. Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing against each other??? The only one that comes to mind is the default carrier assigned to equal access lines. > I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different > times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I > would hate to have to write that database). The database is already "written" for the capabilities you've mentioned, and others. But maintaining them ALL accurately is going to be much harder than building them ever was. And, of course, you're likely to be billed based somewhat on the complexity of what you're asking the system to do. Al Varney -- remember, it's just MY opinion ------------------------------ From: deej@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (david.g.lewis) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: AT&T Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 13:32:00 GMT In article wah@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) writes: > I was just wondering about the 800 portability area ... will this mean > that all 800 exchanges will be come portable at once? or will they be > phased in? It's phased, but not the way you're thinking. At some point in time, LECs will begin doing SCP (database) queries of 800 numbers in parallel with six-digit translations in switches; these queries will do six-digit translations in the SCP. At first, these queries will not be used for call processing, just to test the system. After some soak period, the query responses will begin to be used for call processing and the six-digit translations in the switches will be deactivated. After some additional soak period, the SCPs will begin doing ten-digit translations (instead of six-digit translations). At this point, "800 number portability" is available for all 800-NXXs. > Will every possible exchange become avaiable? I believe so, save for some which may be reserved for testing or for network use. > Will the residential user be able to switch carriers just as easily as > a large company? > Who will control the number space and be reponsiable for routing > problems? I believe the bid for 800 DBA (Database Administrator) is still open, but I'm not sure. The 800 DBA will effectively control the 800 number space, because the 800 DBA is the organization which updates the database. I don't know if the upstream information flows (customer -> 800 DBA) have been well-defined yet. (For that matter, I don't know how well-defined the downstream information flows -- 800 DBA -> 800 SMSs -> 800 SCPs -- are ... but given the organizations involved, I have a little more confidence in that area than in the upstream area...) As to responsibility for routing problems, that's an interesting question. Issues of incorrect routing will have to be resolved by the originating LEC, the 800 DBA, the customer, and any and all involved 800 service providers. This is one of the operational issues that is critical to the success of 800 number portability, and probably one of the ones that some companies (among which my employer is one) have been insisting must be well-defined before 800 NP is implemented. > I assume that the customer could have different carriers at different > times of day and location along with multi termination points ... (I > would hate to have to write that database). Bellcore calls these "vertical services"; I believe the plan is that they are a "phase 2" implementation of the 800 database service. Disclaimer 1: This information is drawn from memory of another AT&T person's presentation on the 800 number portability implementation plan. I accept full responsibility for any errors... is there anyone out there, say, from Bellcore SS7 Project Management who might be able to correct any of them? Disclaimer 2: My views, not AT&T's, etc., etc. David G Lewis AT&T Bell Laboratories david.g.lewis@att.com or !att!houxa!deej Switching & ISDN Implementation ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 09:52:55 -0400 From: walt@unhsst.unh.edu (Walter R. Trachim) Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool Organization: UNH Network Services, Durham, NH > How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the > end gets trimmed? > My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and > then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never > seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to. > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? In my experience, it depends on a number of things: 1.) the quality of the cross-connect you're using, 2.) whether or not the block is new, e.g., how many times connections have been made on the positions you're working with on the 66 block and whether or not there are indents under the pins, and 3.) the sharpness of the blade. As far as punching more than once on a wire, that depends on how well the wire was punched after the first hit. Sometimes it will go down on one try. But more often than not having to whack on it more than once is the rule rather than the exception. > Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is > black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has > one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other. Does any one > color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side on mine seems > to trim the cable.) If you look on the yellow side of your tool, you should see the word "CUT" in bold letters at the blade end. If you install you 66 blade with the uneven side out, the lip of the blade should be on the yellow side for cutting. Same goes if you're using a 110/88 blade; it has a hook on one side, and that's used for cutting the end off of the x-connect. Walter R. Trachim University of New Hampshire - Office of Telecom and Network Services Telecommunications Center, Durham, NH 03824 walt_trachim@unh.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 11:00 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes: > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? That is sometimes necessary, but ... > Does any one color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side > on mine seems to trim the cable.) The tool is shipped with the CUTTING end inside the handle. You are apparently using the NON-CUTTING end. Loosen the big screw near the blade, pull the blade out, swing it around, push it back in, and tighten the screw. You will see that one side of the blade now has a sharp ridge that will trim the copper wire. It will be obvious which way to hold the tool (you do not want to cut the business end of the wire, but rather the excess). John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Proper Use of 66-Block Punchdown Tool Date: 30 Aug 92 16:22:05 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 4 of 6 > How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the > end gets trimmed? > My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and > then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never > seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to. > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? > Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is > black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has > one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other. Does any one > color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side on mine seems > to trim the cable.) Your description is not clear. So lets make some assumptions. You are using a springloaded punchdown tool. The tool has a bit on the end of it that is reversable. You usually reverse these by loosening a screw or a collet. One end of the bit is for punching and cutting, the other end is for punching only -- used when looping wire across several blocks. The cutting end has a knife blade on one side. If that blade is blunt or you are using the end without the blade. The wire will not get cut. Get a new bit, they cost about $10.00, worth it every time. > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? A good tool with a sharp bit will punch and cut with one simple stroke. If it takes two, sharpen the blade or replace it. > Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is > black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has > one that's blue on one side and yellow on the other. Does any one > color indicate which side has the blade? (Neither side on mine seems > to trim the cable.) The colours are an indication of the manufacturer. If you can't see the blade, you don't have one. Take out the bit and reverse it, or buy a new bit. Some punchdown tools have a legend "Blade" on the handle to help orient the user. If this is not clear, stop a telco installer - the guys and girls with the macho tool belts. Ask how to use and adjust a puncdown tool. Easier to use than a revolver -- much more fun. Both look good on your hip. 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: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:13 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: 66 and 110 Punchdown Blocks Gabe M Wiener writes: > How does one properly punch a wire down into a 66-block so that the > end gets trimmed? I can think of three likely reasons you aren't getting good results: 1) Dull blade (You may be able to inprove this a little with a whetstone but usually blades used by non-pros get nicked from being dropped and such.) 2) Wrong wire, 22-26 AWG PIC or PVC wire works best. Broadcasters will often use them for stranded wire and 20 ga wire. 3) You are aware that the blade has two ends, one of which cuts and terminates, and the other which just terminates. The inpact is supposed to be adjustable, though I've never noticed a difference from adjusting this control. > My usual practice is to stick the end into the front of the tines and > then just click it down with the punchdown tool, however, this never > seems to trim the end as (I was told) it is supposed to. One impact should be enough > I've seen some installers click *twice* on each terminal. Is that one > to get it it down and one to cut? Not that I know of. > Also, is there a significance to the colors on the tool? Mine is > black on one side and yellow on the other, though a friend of mine has > one that's blue on one s the cutting side if the cutting end of a > blade is used. Jonathan Edwards writes: > What is the difference between 110 and 66M blocks? I am wiring my > house for a mix of voice and possible future 10-BASET. All the wires > will end-run to the blocks in the basement. Should I use 110 or 66M > blocks? If you are going to use ethernet, I would opt for the 110 if you can borrow the tools to install them. I am assuming you are familar with the 66 blocks. The 110 blocks were developed by AT&T as part of their Premise Distribution System (PDS). 110 Blocks are composed of two parts, a wiring block built in units of four strips, each holding 25 pair. The wiring is positioned on the wiring block and a connector block is punched down of top of them. Connector blocks are available with capacities of two, three, four, and five pair, and contain the actual insulation displacement clips. The building wiring or cable from a PBX or other equipiment goes under the blocks and jumpers are run on top of the connector blocks. Both the wiring block and the connector block are color coded. [Moderator's Note: Two sentences here were scrambled and unreadable. PAT] 110 Blocks are designed for 22-26 AWG PIC and PVC wire. In this respect they are not as versatile as 66 blocks. They are however, supposed to be better for high speed data and use much less space. Northen Telecom has a similar product called BIX. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com [Moderator's Note: This article arrived with several control characters imbedded in it and various instances of letters left out of words entirely. It has been reconstructed as I think he meant it with the exception of a couple sentences I simply could not figure out. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #669 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14972; 30 Aug 92 18:29 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07066 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:24 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA07838 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:16 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:16 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302142.AA07838@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #670 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 16:42:20 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 670 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? (Android Rubin) Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? (Pat Turner) Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? (John Gilbert) Re: PacBell Message Center Woes (John Higdon) Re: PacBell Message Center Woes (Sam Drake) Re: Voice Message Service (John Higdon) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Laird P. Broadfield) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Pat Turner) Re: 110 vs. 66M Blocks (David Ptasnik) Re: 800 Portability (Steve Forrette) Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Michael Rosen) Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News (Will Martin) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: arubin@Apple.COM (Android Rubin) Subject: Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? Date: 30 Aug 92 20:54:33 GMT Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA In article schuster@panix.com (Michael Schuster) writes: > Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar". Is > this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store? Do they have a > catalog? Graybar 2345 Paragon Dr San Jose, CA (408) 441-9009 Andy arubin@apple.com ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 21:10 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? > Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar". Is > this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store? Do they have a > catalog? You should have looked in the phonebook first. Graybar Electric has a office in Manhattan. The phone number I have is (212) 219 8840 They are set up to do counter sales, and will set up an account for almost anyone. (volume-wise at least, I'm sure you have to be in D&B, or otherwise have good credit) They will also take cash, check, or credit card at least in the southeast. They do have a catalog, but it's quite large, you may want to ask for a mini-catalog in your area of interest. Similar companies would include Anixter, Alltel, and North Supply. Alltel, if I remember correctly, includes prices in their catalog. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie.com ------------------------------ From: johng@comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) Subject: Re: How Do I Locate Graybar? Organization: Motorola, Inc. Land Mobile Products Sector Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:31:40 GMT > Some recent posts have referred to a supplier called "Graybar". Is > this a chain? Mail order house? Regional store? Do they have a > catalog? Greybar "Your One Source Supplier" has regional warehouses and sales offices throughout the country. They do have a catalog. In Chicago they are at: 900 Regency Drive Glendale Hts. Il 60139 (708) 893-3600 (800) BUY-ELEC (Chicago area only) (708) 893-3650 FAX Some of the 100+ other places: Boston 617-482-9320 NY 212-219-8840 LA 213-265-7000 Atlanta 404-355-1040 Miami 305-325-0910 Houston 713-224-6831 John Gilbert johng@ecs.comm.mot.com ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 00:14 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: PacBell Message Center Woes stieglit@orion.oac.uci.edu (Jeff Stieglitz) writes: > Just what is the problem with Pacific Bell's Message Center? I have a number of associates who have (for whatever reasons) Pac*Bell's Message Center. On the basis of their experiences I have opted to pass on the service for myself. The Message Center has been and still is plagued with difficulties of every description. I remember some inside scuttlebutt about the firm who was awarded the contract. Officials of the company supplying the VM equipment felt that they had it made in the shade when Pac*Bell selected their wares for The Message Center, but a number of Pac*Bell types shuddered in disbelief. The vendor selection was apparently based upon considerations other than performance and quality. IMHO, Pac*Bell is going for the "GTE Service Award" with this one. The Message Center regularly loses messages, does not answer the phone when it is supposed to, and has, according to my associates, done a number of other very quirky things. It is a breeze to hack, so your messages are not very secure; the amount of recording time you can store is severely limited; it is unreliable in recording; it is unreliable in retrieval; and it is more expensive than an answering machine in the long run. My advice would be to by a machine. Pac*Bell seems to be completely unable to do anything about it -- probably because the system is fatally flawed to begin with. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: Oddly enough, Ameritech's system operates quite well using equipment from a company in Texas called Tygon, which coincidentally happens to be an Ameritech subsidiary. Everyone has their own taste of course, but technically our telephone 'voicemail' is a decent product. I have it at home. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: PacBell Message Center Woes Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 16:03:26 -0800 From: Sam Drake Here in Northern CA, the Message Center was sick a lot last week, too. Rather than having the problem you mentioned, here the system was UP but didn't seem to be getting ANI from the main phone system. So if you called to get your messages it didn't know what number you were calling from and asked you to key it in. Worse, if someone called your number, rather than getting your recording / beep, they got a message center recording asking them to enter my "mailbox number" ... THEN they got my recording and the beep. I had the message center for four months, and had two major problems with it. Last week's failure was the final straw; I cancelled and plugged my "old fashioned" answering machine back into the wall. Pfui. Actually, the final straw was when I called Message Center repair to complain. The person I talked to actually told me to call all my friends and tell them that my "mailbox number" was equal to my "phone number", so my friends would know what to do if they called me and got the semi-broken Message Center. As {Consumer Reports} might say, I judged this suggestion Not Acceptable. Sam Drake / IBM Almaden Research Center Internet: drake@almaden.ibm.com BITNET: DRAKE at ALMADEN ------------------------------ Organization: Green Hills and Cows From: zygot!john@apple.com (John Higdon) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 15:01:13 PDT Reply-To: John Higdon Subject: Re: Voice Message Service On Aug 27 at 15:37, Scott Hinckley +1 205 650 0400 writes: > Around here only the COCOTs offer that leave a message on busy service. > Of course they charge much more for it ($1.00 I believe). I did not see a price for the Pac*Bell proposal. Do you know that it is actually cheaper? You bring up an interesting point, however. Notice how as with the information providing business, the field has been tried and tested by true entrepreneurs who had to put up real risk capital to try out their ideas. Once a market seems to be viable, then the telco muscles its way into the market with its network control and ratepayer subsidization. Then it offers a better product at a cheaper price, putting the competition out of business. Of course it does this with free money and its superior network access. Sidebar: Free Money: If the venture is successful, then no venture capitalists must be paid off. If it fails, then the telco goes to the PUC with a rate increase to cover its losses. Win/win. It sure is a good thing for the LECs that there are plenty of suckers out there willing to try out new technologies and markets. That way, the telcos can sit back, watch for new markets that look attractive, and then take over the ones that appear to hold promise for high profits. Note: The above correspondent asked that I submit his comment. It is herewith submitted at the top of this message in its entirety complete with my remarks. A two for one bonus! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: lairdb@crash.cts.com Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Date: 30 Aug 92 02:47:10 GMT In oberman@ptavv.llnl.gov writes: > In article , stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill > St. Louis) writes: >> I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will >> work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) >> RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will >> these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? > Actually, they both have notches, but the DEC connector (called an > MMJ) has the notch offset while the standard RJ-45 has it centered. If > you have MMJ hacks installed in offices you will need MMJ plugs for > them. The RJ45 will not work. Ummmm, careful there. I'm not sure (since he mentions a "notch") that he means an MMJ. There's also the "keyed RJ45" still floating around out there. Whether it's RJ45keyed *or* MMJ, the answer is still "no", though, the regular RJ45 plugs will not physically enter the jack. (This is an entirely different problem from the fact that everone seems to have chosen their own standard for not only what to carry on each pair, but even which pins go to which pairs, and even which pins *are* paired. Anyone who can explain the logic behind the AT&T pair arrangement wins a prize.) Laird P. Broadfield lairdb@crash.cts.com ...{ucsd, nosc}!crash!lairdb ------------------------------ From: turner@Dixie.COM Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 21:11 EDT From: rsiatl!turner@rsiatl.UUCP Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? > Actually, they both have notches, but the DEC connector (called an > MMJ) has the notch offset while the standard RJ-45 has it centered. If > you have MMJ hacks installed in offices you will need MMJ plugs for > them. The RJ45 will not work. > The jacks are the same, except for the notch. The difference is in > the cable. A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so > that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end. A notched > cable is wired straight. Actually two different connectors are being discussed. The MMJ is a six conductor modular plug whose top "key" (with the locking lever) is offset so it is asymetrical when viewed from the front. As the first author said it uses RJ type modular plugs. The RJ 45 is a eight conductor version of the RJ11, with an enlarged "shell" and is available in both keyed and unkeyed versions. The latter is usually used for voice telecommunications, and often for data as well. The unkeyed versions will fit either jack. As the second author stated analog RJ45 cables and unigender connectors are crosspinned (1-8, 2-7, 3-6,..). Dcom cables are straight pinned. RJ11/12/14's will plug into a keyed or unkeyed RJ45 jack, usually w/o any problem. Pat Turner KB4GRZ turner@dixie ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 17:29:50 -0700 (PDT) From: David Ptasnik Subject: Re: 110 vs. 66M Blocks edwards@world.std.com (Jonathan Edwards) wrote: > What is the difference between 110 and 66M blocks? I am wiring my > house for a mix of voice and possible future 10-BASET. All the wires > will end-run to the blocks in the basement. Should I use 110 or 66M > blocks? The technicians at the University of Washington (where I am an analyst) won't let me have a punch tool, they say that it would be to horrible to imagine. They are probably right. Still, I asked them the same question one day, as a group of them were roundly cursing the new 110 blocks. The 110 blocks take up a lot less wall space. As we were wiring outlets every 15 feet with four sets of four pair, this was VERY important. They claim, however, that the 66's are a lot easier to punch, and that you can punch more wires onto the same post (for those occasions where several single line phones share a line) than you can with the 110's, and that the 66's give you a good connection more reliably. 110's also use different punch tools for most efficient use (I think you are supposed to be able to punch five wires at a time on a 110)(when it works right). They also claimed that it was much easier to hook a test set up to 66 blocks for trouble testing (clip leads instead of a special connector). Overall the 110 review from this crew on that day was extremely negative. I suspect that a negative reaction to a "new" thing was part of it. Techs seem to be a pretty conservative lot. Your mileage will vary. All of the above is nothing more than the personal opinion of - Dave Ptasnik davep@u.washington.edu ------------------------------ From: stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) Subject: Re: 800 Portability Organization: Walker Richer & Quinn, Inc., Seattle, WA Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:17:16 GMT In article varney@ihlpf.att.com (Alan L Varney) writes: > Correction of problems is a major concern of the > industry. Anyone know of another industry that has multiple databases > with multiple owners with content specified by companies competing > against each other??? The only one that comes to mind is the default > carrier assigned to equal access lines. Problems with the 800 database will be of much larger scale than with the equal access default. In most cases, incorrect settings of the equal access PIC result in billing problems only. Call completion is so uniform between the carriers for 1+ calls that spurious PIC changes are often not noticed for some period of time (like when the bill arrives). However, any problem with the 800 database is likely to bring all calls to the affected 800 number to a screeching halt, as no carrier other than the correct one is likely to know what to do with the call. At least this will remove the motive for carriers to slam. Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 17:40:50 GMT I was watching Nickelodeon for Ren and Stimpy last weekend and noticed that in between features they have some sort of call in contest for kids watching. I only saw this twice, and both times the kids were calling in on AT&T Picturephones. They even said, "we've got Kim on the line with her AT&T Picturephone," or something to that effect. It was a jerky picture, probably taking multiple still-frames every few seconds. Is Nick doing some kind of promotion with these phones that everybody calling has one? Oh, I thought it was cool how they piped the Picturephone picture onto the screen. Michael Rosen Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 8:01:03 CDT From: Will Martin Subject: Re: 2500 Picturephone in the News Regarding the TV Jukebox channel discussion: Here in St. Louis, this is an over-the-air service on Low-Power TV Channel 58. (I suppose you can also get it through some or all of the cable services but I don't have cable so don't know for sure.) Anyway, I'm glad the topic came up, since I have several questions about it which I've never known where to ask! 1) Is this a nationwide service, fed from a satellite, so that everyone all over the country (or continent, or wherever) is seeing the same video at the same time, and there is one master "jukebox" feeding these videos in response to te 900-number calls? Or is this a localized service in which each region has their own "jukebox", so that what I see here in St. Louis may be entirely different from what is seen in another region? 2) Is there one single 900 number for the whole nation, going into that "central" site mentioned above, or different 900 numbers for each area? Or does a single 900 number feed into separate local "jukeboxes" depending on the geographic location of the caller? 3) Does this system use laserdiscs of the videos or what? Can anyone provide a summary of the hardware that drives it? 4) I note the three-digit codes for specifying songs skip over intervening numbers in the index displays -- for example, it could go 789, 790, 792, 794, etc. Are the skipped numbers actually invalid, or do they still point to previously-advertised selections which are still in the system? Is it possible to get these people to send you a "master list" of all the three-digit codes and what songs they point to if you call one of the 800 numbers they run? Regards, Will wmartin@st-louis-emh2.army.mil OR wmartin@stl-06sima.army.mil ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #670 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa16851; 30 Aug 92 19:16 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16980 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:26:25 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14741 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:26:16 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:26:16 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302226.AA14741@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #671 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 17:26:13 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 671 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: GTE California Changes (Richard Nash) Re: GTE California Changes (Gordon Burditt) Re: GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) (Leonard Erickson) Re: Monitoring Radio Broadcasts in England (John Pettitt) Re: Monitoring of Royal Telephone Calls (Richard Cox) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Leonard Erickson) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Charlie Mingo) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (William Sohl) Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts (Adrienne Voorhis) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 10:02:35 -0600 From: rickie@trickie.uucp (Richard Nash) Subject: Re: GTE California Changes Jeff Sicherman writes: > In article HOLDREGE_MP PacifiCare@mcimail.com> writes: >> John Higdon can no longer complain about the incompetant GTE reps in >> Thousand Oaks, CA. He soon will be able to complain about the >> incompetant GTE reps in North Carolina, Florida, and Texas. >> A GTE spokeman said that the job transfers are a part of a continuing >> effort to consolidate operations at company facilities in Texas, North >> Carolina and Florida, and to automate jobs now performed by humans. > Does this mean they will be programming the computers to ignore and > throw away trouble tickets ? Most network operations, surveillance operators have a pre-programmed hot-key on their workstations that brings up the ticket and automatically closes it with a "no trouble found". :) :) All they have to do while watching TV on the big impressive network status screen, is wait for the beep! Of course some types have unofficially programmed the workstations to completely do this, recognizing key trouble phrases such as NDT (no dial tone) and dispatching accordingly. A cross reference of trouble phrases to standard results has been built up over the years and much like the old artificial intelligence program ELIZA, can make about the same apparent intelligent decision. SNITS, Switching Network Intelligent Testing and Surveillance program is written in different flavors, (to accurately reflect the locale jargon). :) :) :) -- Richard Nash Edmonton, Alberta Canada T6K 0E8 UUCP: trickie!rickie@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt) Subject: Re: GTE California Changes Organization: Gordon Burditt Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 08:41:33 GMT > Probably no one. But then I doubt that you will notice any service > level reduction. It could not get much worse. I have reported trouble > in the Los Gatos CO on a Friday night, but of course it is Monday or > Tuesday before GTE can fly someone up from southern California to fix > it. John Higdon, you need to stage a coup on a GTE central office. Move yourself and your office into one. Change around a few street signs. Re-paint the outside of the building. Change the locks. It will probably be at least a month before they notice that they can't find the CO, and at least another year before they admit it. If you point the street signs so they think that your current home is the CO, well, they might be fooled indefinitely if you leave all your telecom gear in place. You do have to be careful, though. You need to keep generating and ignoring fake trouble tickets, because if you spend a few minutes a day fixing stuff, there won't be enough real ones. That few minutes a day paying for free phone service will be worth it, and you'll be providing service instead of feeding the Department of Excuses (today's excuse: Lunar Flares!). Gordon L. Burditt sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: GTE Fixes My DISA (One Year Late) Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 11:45:20 GMT jimmy@denwa.info.com (Jim Gottlieb) writes: > The message finally got through and they fixed it on Friday. While I > had their attention, I asked if they could please change my security > code from 1234 to something a bit more secure. "Sorry, it's > hardcoded" was the reply. I don't believe it. And I am surely not > going to pay for any calls when someone discovers this. Ask them to change it again. And insist on *written confirmation* that they can't change it. Then if you do get nailed, you'll have hard evidence that you *couldn't* have prevented it. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 22:47 PDT From: jpp@StarConn.com (John Pettitt) Subject: Re: Monitoring Radio Broadcasts in England In a recent Digest Mr. Chew asks if it is legal to monitor radio conversations in the UK. The answer is NO. What is more should you accidentally hear somebody elses conversation divulging the content is also illegal. The Wireless Telegraphy Act(s) (there are several I believe) prohibit doing just about anything in this area (unless you are GCHQ the UK equivilent of the NSA :-) Now in practice I have never come across anybody who has been prosecuted under the WT act. (I was arrested once for having a CB radio but that is another story :-). [I wonder the reference to GCHQ and NSA will cause this post to be read in those organisations - I you are a spook reading this why not send me some mail and say hi :-) :-) :-) ] John Pettitt jpp@starconn.com Archer N81034 apple!starnet!jpp Fax: +1 415 967 8682 Voice: +1 415 967 UNIX [Moderator's Note: Actually, no keywords are required. The Digest has a number of subscribers in federal agencies including NSA. All they have to do to see your message is read this issue when it arrives in their mail. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 18:08 GMT From: Richard Cox Subject: Re: Monitoring of Royal Telephone Calls Reply-To: mandarin@cix.clink.co.uk Laurence Chiu writes: >> the current scandal is the publication of recording of intimate phone >> conversations between Princess Diana and some unidentified "friend" in >> which the subject matter is embarrassing to say the least. >> The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just idly scanning the >> airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up the cell-phone >> frequencies. The last news report I saw indicated that the UK >> authorities had decided not to take any action against him. If we are to believe what the British papers tell us, two separate people "just happened" to buy a scanner, and recorded separate parts of that conversations [not last week but some considerable time ago] and then by coincidence the transcripts appear in the press, followed almost immediately by the official statement that the persons making and publishing the contents of the recordings would not be prosecuted. It would be most surprising if those papers had carried that material without some form of advance guarantee that no action would be taken against them. I will leave you to draw your own conclusions. Richard Cox Mandarin Technology, Cardiff Business Park, Llanishen, CARDIFF, Wales CF4 5WF Voice: +44 222 747111 Fax: +44 222 711111 VoiceMail: +44 399 870101 E-mail: mandarin@cix.compulink.co.uk ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 11:53:56 GMT voorhis@aecom.yu.edu (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: > jon@Turing.ORG (Jon Gefaell)> writes: >> It is illegal to disclose anything heard on any Radio Frequency in any >> mode other than public broadcast, Amateur Radio, and that's about it. >> This means that you can own a scanner and listen to the police, even >> covert operations (I listen to very interesting operations from time >> to time) but you _may not_ disclose those communications to any one >> else. > Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow > you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from > disclosing what was heard? I'm not a First Amendment lawyer, but it > would seem to me that if you lawfully became aware of information, > that the government could not muzzle you from discussing what you have > legitimately obtained. Check the Communications Act of 1933. That's where this comes from. And I think it's a matter of them *allowing* you to listen to private communications that cross yourproperty via radio. But you aren't allowed to distribute the info to others. It's stood up in court for a *long* time. And it is a situation that is not all that black and white. I believe that some folks have actually argued in court along the lines of "if I'm not allowed to listen to it, make them stop sending it to me!" With the exception of the nonense about cellular phone monitoring that crept into ECPA, this policy still holds pretty well. The only real change was that you are not allowed to decrypt transmissions that have been encryupted for purposes of privacy. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) [Moderator's Note: The argument which goes 'make them stop sending it to me and bombarding me with radio waves' has been tested in court on various occassions and always found by the court to be specious and puerile. Its like arguing about income taxes on the basis of whether the IRS is legally allowed to do it; ie, the irregularities under which the income tax came into being, the vote in Ohio, etc. The court says 'YOU LOSE!' PAT] ------------------------------ From: Charlie.Mingo@p4218.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Charlie Mingo) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:00:59 -0500 Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes: > Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not > royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of > intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some > unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to > say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just > idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up > the cell-phone frequencies. The last news report I saw indicated that > the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him. From what I gather from the British papers, there is no prohibition on eavesdropping on cellular or cordless calls. There is some sort of restriction on "using" material heard over the air, but it is not being enforced in this case. I remember thinking when recently reading _Diana: Her True Story_ that the royals seem to use cordless phones in strong preference to corded, even for the most intimate of conversations. Charles would reportedly take the phone into his bath to have a private chat with his mistress, Camilla Parker-Bowes. (Diana would discover this by pressing the redial button after he came out, and getting the P-B residence.) Also, the royals seem to use something they call a "scrambler," which is supposed to make their calls uninterceptable. I suspect it is nothing more than an audio-inverter, since there is no key used to control it (just tell the other party to "go to scrambler"). British laws concerning wiretapping in general seem to be rather loose. Recently, members of the press recorded conversations between the Minister of National Heritage (David Mellior) and his mistress, by tapping into an extension socket at the flat the mistress was using. They apparently had the *landlord's* permission, but not that of either party to the conversation. According to the {Sunday Times}, this activity broke no laws. ------------------------------ From: dancer!whs70@uunet.UU.NET (22501-sohl) Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts; Cordless, Cellular, etc. Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:46:14 GMT In article lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes: > In article voorhis@aecom.yu.edu > (Adrienne Voorhis) writes: >> What if a reporter, for instance, was listening to a police band >> radio and heard a newsworthy event? Could he or she legitimately be >> punished for reporting this information? Reporters do this all the time, although they probably do not rely on only what they heard to generate the story. Our local town weekly newspaper office has a scanner on all the time. They use it to learn what is happening and then often follow up with a story on the incident. I personally don't ever want to see any more restrictions on listening to what is being freely broadcast into the airways. I especially don't ever want to see any restrictions on the manufacture, sale and/or possession of any type of radio receiving equipment. This country does NOT need the "electronics police" to be looking over anyone's shoulder to be sure their radio equipment doesn't receive certain frequency bands, etc. Laurence Chiu writes: > Then I wonder if those laws apply in England. For those who are not > royal watchers the current scandal is the publication of recording of > intimate phone conversations between Princess Diana and some > unidentified "friend" in which the subject matter is embarrassing to > say the least. The tapes were made by someone who was apparently just > idly scanning the airwaves with his scanner and happened to pick up > the cell-phone frequencies. The last news report I saw indicated that > the UK authorities had decided not to take any action against him. While I'm no authority, I have heard that many other countries place severe restrictions on listening to certain types of broadcasts (eg. police, government, etc.) and some have restrictions on ownership of certain types of radio receiving equipment also. The bottom line in my opinion is that anyone that is concerned about other people listening to any radio communication they may be involved in had better resort to encryption to insure the security of their radio communications. After many years of effort here in New Jersey we finally got a 50 year old law changed that made it illegal to possess a radio (ie. scanner) in an automobile that could receive police, fire, etc. Because the law was so broad in scope and the current scanner frequency coverage so vast the law effectly made it illegal to have any type of scanner in a car since the police frequencies are all over the spectrum. We even had some ham radio operators prosecuted because their ham radio transciever included a receive capability that included police frequencies. The new state law does not make possession or use of a radio illegal, the law prohibits misuse of any information heard. Last night on New York TV channel 5 (Fox network) there was a brief news item (10pm news) where they showed how easy it is to listen to cordless (as well as cellular) telephones with a typical inexpensive (under $200) scanner. They did have an FBI person indicate it is illegal to listen to cellular, but they also pointed out that there is no prohibition against listening to cordless phones. From my perspective, they, at least, did not try to make any case against the manufacture, sale or possession of scanners in the news report. The news item seemed to be targeted as an informative piece to caution folks that their communications over cordless (as well as cellular) phones may be overheard by evesdropers. Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's. Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.) Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!dancer!whs70 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com ------------------------------ From: Adrienne Voorhis Subject: Re: Monitoring of Broadcasts Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 9:44:59 EDT Recently I, ( Adrienne Voorhis) asked: > Could someone please explain how the federal government can allow > you to legally monitor such broadcasts but can stop you from > disclosing what was heard? I appreciate the responses I received and found them helpful, but I don't think they sufficiently answered my question. First of all, I am not a First Amendment absolutist. I am aware of and fully support just about all of the restrictions to the "freedom of speech" clause that the Supreme Court has promulgated, such as libel laws. Second, I am not questioning that the state can preserve the confidentiality of these broadcasts. I merely question how, on the one hand, the government can classify these broadcasts as being in the "public domain" by freely allowing private citizens to monitor them, yet on the other hand prohibit them from ever being discussed. Steve Forrette responded: > I do know that there is a common misconception that the various > amendments prevent any restrictions whatsoever on certain activities. Agreed. > There are many cases where "lawfully obtained" information can be > legally discussed: > - The tried and true "fire in a theater" example. > - Trade secrets that you legally obtain in the course of employment. These examples demonstrate only that the First Amendment is not absolute. I don't think they really answer my question. There is no prohibition against telling people there is a fire in a theater, only against *yelling* "fire" in a crowded theater when the person knows that it's *false*. This is merely a "time, place, and manner restriction" on knowingly false and dangerous speech designed solely to create a public safety hazard. Here, I am talking about presumably true information that a private citizen is being prohibited from discussing, even for legitimate purposes of public debate. The trade secrets example is more to the point because it shows that speech can sometimes be restricted based on content. However the analogy fails because the restriction is only enforceable because the employee voluntarily agreed in advance not to disclose this information as part of a written contract with his employer. A news reporter scanning the airwaves has not entered into any such agreement. Michael A. Covington responded: > Hmmm? Never heard of confidentiality? Of course I have. However, I am also aware that even when the press publishes confidential information -- even secret goverment information -- they cannot be punished for it as long as they committed no crime in obtaining it and reasonably believed the information is correct. The government went after Daniel Ellsburg for disclosing the Pentagon Papers, not the {New York Times}. > The law simply imposes a kind of confidentiality on people who, > through technological pursuits, come into possession of other people's > private messages. Just like telephone repair personnel, mail > carriers, etc. I agree that the law should be able to classify certain information as confidential and prohibit private citizens from using electronic devices to obtain it in the first place (such as the person who uses electronic eavesdropping equiptment to overhear a private conversation inside someones home). I also agree that the state can prohibit those who service communications media, such as telephone repair personnel and mail carriers, from disclosing this information outside the scope of their employment, to ensure the privacy of the media itself. But these legitimate restrictions all treat the communications as confidential in the first place, unlike the one I question that gives private citizens the right to monitor them. > The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 goes further: it > forbids _listening_ to private radio communications (cellular phones, > ship-to-shore phones, etc.). But it also makes it clear that I believe this act is defensible, because it *classifies* certain communications as confidential before it restricts their dissemination. I don't question that the state can say you can't report conversations concerning private matters that you shouldn't be hearing in the first place. The whole purpose of the "freedom of speech" clause is to allow the citizens to freely discuss almost any matter without fear of government reprisal. The government can obviously create certain carefully deleneated exceptions, such as those I have agreed to above, based on overriding public policy concerns. But it is fundamentally unfair, and I believe inconsistent with the First Amendment, for the state to say to private citizens and the press "Go ahead and listen," but then say "You can never talk about it." Don't worry, Pat. I don't plan to continually stand on a soapbox and reply to future posts with impassioned comments on freedom of speech. I am simply curious if any TD subscribers are aware of a reasoned basis, or court approval, for the particular restriction on freedom of speech that this particular restriction imposes. Adrienne Voorhis Albert Einstein College of Medicine Bronx, New York Just MY opinion.... [Moderator's Note: I do not believe you are correct in saying you can 'state there is a fire in a theatre as long as you do not shout it.' If this were true, then you should be able to make false utterances to 911 with impunity. As a matter of fact the law in most (all?) states says that to declare an emergency exists when there is no emergency is a crime. To call 911 because you like to see and hear fire trucks racing down the street is a crime; your free speech rights don't take priority here. In actual practice here in Chicago, ONE false alarm is usually written off as 'mistaken citizen trying to be helpful', but subsequent false alarms will get you sued by the City of Chicago. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #671 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa18385; 30 Aug 92 19:55 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15978 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:03:06 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26642 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:02:55 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:02:55 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302302.AA26642@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #672 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 18:03:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 672 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Weird Intercept (Robert S. Helfman) Re: Weird Intercept (Randy Gellens) Re: Weird Intercept (Mark Rudholm) Re: Weird Intercept (John Higdon) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Aubrey Philipsz) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Anthony Clifton) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Laurence Chiu) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Julian Macassey) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Leonard Erickson) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Marc Unangst) Re: Modem Noise on Line (Hans Ridder) Re: Modem Noise on Line (John Rice) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman) Subject: Re: Weird Intercept Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:21:27 GMT In article cmoore@BRL.MIL (VLD/VMB) writes: > All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would > still be in 213, not in 310. I don't know what question prompted the above reply. The 663- (once-upon-a-time NOrmandie prefix) is mid-Wilshire-up-to- Hollywood, right around Normandie Avenue -- very definitely nowhere near the 213/310 boundary. ------------------------------ From: MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com Date: 30 AUG 92 05:20 Subject: Re: Weird Intercept a_rubin%dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) writes: > In MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev. > unisys.com writes: >> I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached >> this number before). When I dial it I get an intercept that says >> "We're sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone >> you are using. Please read the instruction card and dial again." >> (There are the standard SIT tones at the beginning.) This is odd >> since I'm calling from my office phone, not a pay phone. > Sounds like a PBX intercept to me. As far as I know, our PBX never gives voice intercepts (but it is very fond of reorder). Also, the intercept does have the standard SIT tones. The problem only occurs if I try and dial it as a normal PacBell call, that is, by dialing 9 for an outside line, then 1-213-663-xxxx. If I dial it via our long-distance network, or via MCI or Sprint, it works fine. Randy Gellens randy%mpa15ab@trenga.tredydev.unisys.com >>>>>>> If mail bounces, forward to rgellens@mcimail.com <<<<<<<< Opinions are personal; facts are suspect; I speak only for myself ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 13:37:10 PDT From: aimla!ruby!rudholm@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Rudholm) Subject: Re: Weird Intercept In TELECOM Digest V12, I668, Message 5 cmoore@BRL.MIL writes: > All I can find is that 663 is a Los Angeles prefix and thus would > still be in 213, not in 310. 663 is in 213 but much of the city of L.A. is not in 213 (parts are in 818 and 310). But prefixes that are _labelled_ as "Los Angeles" by TPC are all in 213*. Some prefixes that are within the city but are labelled something else are for example 310-444 (West L.A.) and 818-778 (Van Nuys). *There are a couple of exceptions such as some cellphone prefixes and the choke exchange (520) which is dialable from 818, 310, or 213. Mark D. Rudholm rudholm@aimla.com Philips Interactive Media ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 92 23:23 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Weird Intercept MPA15AB!RANDY@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com writes: > I'm trying to reach someone in the 213-663 exchange (I've reached this > number before). When I dial it I get an intercept that says "We're > sorry; your call cannot be completed as dialed from the phone you are > using. Please read the instruction card and dial again." This non-sequiter type of intercept is quintessential GTE incompetence. For instance, in Long Beach one of our Centrenet lines had the following recording in response to the simple dialing of '0': "Your call cannot be completed as dialed. You must first dial '950' and a carrier access code before the number". What? This is baloney. Not only does it not work, it could never work. It is complete and total nonsense. Mind you this is a "professionally" done recording, not some blathering by a CO dweeb, so the content at least came from Thousand Jokes. Get someone at GTE to fix it? HA! Now mind you that I understand that the wrong recording could simply be an erroneous channel assignment on the drum announcer. But the recording itself is complete nonsense. It has no application anywhere. It indicates a complete lack of understanding of even GTE's procedures. So why was it made in the first place? Heaven only knows. > This is odd since I'm calling from my office phone, not a pay phone. Yeah, well good luck trying to get it fixed. It sounds like you have a residual problem from the 310 cut. As you will recall, GTE made major news botching that operation up (of course, it was all Pac*Bell's fault to hear it from General). BTW, 663 IS still in 213. Call GTE repair about six times. That might do it. You will notice that I never had to ask if you were in GTE territory. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: The phraseology in the intercept you mention is not the greatest, but there is some truth to it. Usually the four digits following 950 are a portion of the same carrier access code one would dial as 10xxx; for example I believe MCI has 950-0222. When you dial a 950 number of this sort, usually after it connects you hear dial tone again (from the carrier) and you continue by dialing the number you wish to reach and your PIN. So if some customer wished to have no LD carrier assignment for whatever reason and dial everything via 950 with a PIN, the intercept you described would make sense if they attempted to one-plus dial. I repeat, the wording is not the best. PAT] ------------------------------ From: aub@access.digex.com (Aubrey Philipsz) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: Express Access Public Access UNIX, Greenbelt, Maryland USA Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:26:30 GMT In article ddssuprs!tom@uunet.UU.NET (Tom Gillman) writes: > I, too, would like to know why cellular phones are prohibited by law on > aircraft. Please post or email any relevant info. I have been told by someone in the airline industry that there has been a ruling on this which now allows for cellular use while the aircraft is on the ground; this was sort of confirmed recently when the Captain of a USAir flight borrowed my cell phone to allow an irate passenger to make a phone call when the aircraft had been holding, waiting for ATC to clear it to take off, for about an hour and a half. Use of cellular inflight falls under the much more broad restriction on transmitting devices. The basic reason is that electronics in an aircraft are pretty important to the safety of the passengers and crew. The draconian measures may seem excessive, but this is a "better safe than sorry" situation. I will note that there IS interference with navigation systems from radio signals, it really does happen, and it is a bit unnerving to have to shoot landings with instruments that you suddenly can not trust. Of course, there is always the question of operating a cell phone at 30,000 feet; sounds a BIT higher than the antenna altitude restrictions for cellular. Aub ------------------------------ From: aescherm@iastate.edu (A Person of Awareness) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:14:44 GMT The reason that you can't use a cell phone on an airplane is so you can't call for a rescue team to save you from the food. =-) Although, it WOULD be fun to order from Dominos while in the air. "Yeah, that's right I'm only a mile or two away. My address? Oh well, let's just say I'm passing through." =-) Anthony Clifton ------------------------------ From: lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: GCS Limited, Wellington, New Zealand Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 01:21:35 GMT Slightly diverging from the topic here, but I was wondering about the air-phone service that is now fairly common on US carriers. While on a trip to the US each time I flew (usually United) the air hostesses would always invite us to use the service, especially convenient since the phones were located in the seat in front of us (at least on some of the smaller planes like 737's). This led me to think about the movie Die Hard II where air phones figure prominently in the plot. In some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he checks the pager and calls her back on the plane. Is this possible or some Hollywood license? I never noticed any numbers on the air phone which indicated you could call one. Just wondering ... Laurence Chiu lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz ------------------------------ From: julian%bongo.UUCP@nosc.mil (Julian Macassey) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Date: 30 Aug 92 15:54:35 GMT Reply-To: julian@bongo.info.com (Julian Macassey) Organization: The Hole in the Wall Hollywood California U.S.A. In article shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes: > I have a residence in which I have two phone lines. The wire coming to > the house is a 'standard' four wire line (red, black, yellow, green). > For one line I use red/green and for the other I use black/yellow. On > one line I have my BBS attached and so the modem attached to that line > is quite busy. The other line is for voice. > The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of > hissing and noise heard on the voice line. The reason for this problem is the cheesy wire you describe above. This wire is known as "Quad Wire". It is not designed to isolate signals. The wire you need for this is called "twisted pair". For your installation, it would be usually called "Three pair". Three pairs of twisted wire. The colour coding on twisted pair is always white/blue stripe & blue/whire stripe etc. Most business telephone installations use twisted pair. The phone company uses twisted pair between your home and their central office -- yes this is why you can't hear everyone else's modems and phone calls. > Is there something I can do on my end or do I have to have the phone > company come out and string a second physical wire in support of the > second line? Yes, rewire the house with three pair or use three pair to wire in just the modem. You can do this ($), the telco can do this ($$$), or you can call in an electrician or independant phone installer (Called Interconnects) ($$). The big question is "Why are people still doing installations with quad wire?" 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: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 12:48:08 GMT shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes: > The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of > hissing and noise heard on the voice line. > What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can > use inside the house? Go down to Radio Shack and get one of their "special" adapters. The one you want in this case is one that plugs into a wall jack and provides 3 output jacks: L1, L2, L1+2. The L1 and L2 jacks have *only* the center two wires connected. This tends to be necessary with modems because many of them have "feature" that shorts the second pair of wires (the black/yellow pair) together. If that doesn't work, you'll have to go for desperate measure like replacing the regular four-conductor phone wiring with *real* twisted pair wiring. If you check, you'll discover that your internal house wiring *isn't* twisted pair! Thus, all the crosstalk. Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 03:10:16 GMT Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI In article shapiro@trade.enet.dec.com (Steve Shapiro) writes: > The problem is that whenever the modem is active, there is a lot of > hissing and noise heard on the voice line. It sounds like you are a victim of a pretty bad crosstalk problem. Most likely, it is the fault of your inside wiring, not the phone company. To determine where the problem lies, disconnect your voice line at the demarkation point, but leave the modem line connected. Then, plug a voice phone into the voice line at the demark while the modem is active. If you still hear crosstalk, then the problem is with the telco's wiring. Otherwise, it lies within your house, and you're going to have to either fix it yourself or pay the telco to fix it for you. If it turns out to be with your wiring, the problem is most likely that inappropriate cable was used for at least part of the wiring. Flat "silver satin" or "quad" cable should not be used for anything other than short runs between a phone jack and a telephone or other telecom equipment. This is because quad does not properly shield the two pairs from each other, resulting in mutual coupling and crosstalk in anything resembling a long run. If quad was used for wiring between the network interface and a phone jack, or if it was used to extend an existing cable run, you almost certainly will get crosstalk. The solution is to find all the quad in your house that was used inappropriately, rip it out, and replace it with "twisted-pair" cable. As the name implies, this is cable where each pair of wires is twisted together, thus shielding the pair and lessening the chances it will interfere with an adjacent pair. Since you're pulling new cable, you might as well plan for the future and pull more pairs than you need; four-pair cable isn't that much more expensive, and will save you a lot of trouble if you ever add lines. Marc Unangst mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us ------------------------------ From: Hans Ridder Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - DECwest Engineering Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:42:58 GMT You will probably hear from many folks that this type of wire ("quad") allows crosstalk between your phone lines because it doesn't have twisted pairs. I had quad in my last home, and used the BK/YL pair for my modem line, without *any* crosstalk. Actually, I did have a crosstalk problem but I was able to completely eliminate it. Mine was caused by four-wire modular (flat) line cords, not by the quad. > What can I do to eliminate this? Is there a special kind of wire I can > use inside the house? Assuming you have modular jacks and that you have both lines appearing at every jack in the house, here's what I did: First unplug all your phones *at the wall*. Then plug your modem and one phone into your two-line splitter plugged directly into the wall jack. Then make a test call. (Make a connection with your modem, and then pick up your voice line and then break dial tone by dialing a "1" or something.) In this configuration, my problem was cured. At this point, you'll want to re-install your other phones. You'll either need to use a splitter at each jack, re-wire the jacks to only have the one desired phone line, or use two-wire modular cords. The thing you are trying to avoid is having both lines running together over the same flat cord. If the above test doesn't cure your problem, then you'll want to rig up a temporary connection directly at the network interface (or "protectors") *making sure* you have the inside wiring disconnected. If you still get crosstalk, then you need to call telco. If so, then the problem is definitly your wires (or *something* inside your house.) > Is there something I can do on my end or do I have to have the phone > company come out and string a second physical wire in support of the > second line? You shouldn't need to have a separate run for your second line, but it might come down to that if you can't get your wire to behave. The trick is figuring out if the wire is the problem. If you are handy with a screw driver, wire cutters, etc. You should be able to do all these things yourself. Hans-Gabriel Ridder Digital DECwest Engineering ridder@rust.zso.dec.com Bellevue, Washington, USA {pacbell,pyramid,uunet}!rust.zso.dec.com!ridder ------------------------------ From: rice@ttd.teradyne.com Subject: Re: Modem Noise on Line Organization: Teradyne Inc., Telecommunications Division Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 19:11:56 GMT Some suggestions: Before you call 'TPC' you might want to disconnect both lines at the DMARC (telco box where the lines enter the house) and run a temporary wire from the modem to one line, and a phone to the other. Then test to see if the noise problem still exists. If so, then the problem is in the drop wiring or Telco Outside Plant Cables. Call repair and report that you have "cross-talk" between your two lines. If they suggest that you have inside wiring problems, explain the previous test. If not, then you may have a cross connection between the two lines inside your house. With standard 'twisted pair' inside wiring, this should not happen and no modem noise should be heard. If you have a number of phones, first try to disconnect all but one and see if the problem persists (the cross may be in one of the phones). If not, then the best way to trouble-shoot the problem is probably to physically trace out all of the connections. Find each terminal block where the lines are connected and look to make sure all of the colors match up. You may have to literally disconnect all of the lines and re-connect them one at a time, testing for the problem each time you re-connect another leg. The problem from a trouble-shooting standpoint, is that if the house is an older home, phone extensions are often 'daisy-chained' from one jack to another, as they were installed (at different times). There may be no logic as to how the connections were made. (This is often a good time to re-wire, bringing each extension/jack to a common hub. This makes future trouble-shooting or expansion more convenient). Hope this helps. John Rice K9IJ | "Did I say that ?" I must have, but It was | MY opinion only, no one else's...Especially | Not my Employer's.... rice@ttd.teradyne.com ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #672 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19721; 30 Aug 92 20:35 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA14300 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:45:42 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA18185 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:45:33 -0500 Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:45:33 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199208302345.AA18185@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #673 TELECOM Digest Sun, 30 Aug 92 18:45:24 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 673 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: Question About PBX Phone (Tony Harminc) Re: Question About PBX Phone (Michael A. Covington) Re: Question About PBX Phone (Leonard Erickson) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Holt Sorenson) Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show (Ron Heiby) Re: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review (Bob Clements) Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? (Robert S. Helfman) Re: FAXes Over Internet (Guy Hadsall) Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? (Bud Couch) Re: Pounding on an Octothorp (Syngen Brown) Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Michael Rosen) Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? (Todd Inch) Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar) (H Hallikainen) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 00:44:12 EDT From: Tony Harminc Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) wrote: > I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex > system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on > business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like > that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or > usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line > devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've > got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works > fine. Probably this just means that the phone is wired for A-lead control, i.e. the second pair in the modular cord is connected to an additional set of normally open contacts on the hook switch. This is used on old (1A2 etc.) key systems, but if plugged into a jack with a second line on it will short that line when the phone is picked up. The worst case is, as was mentioned recently, if a Princess phone with lighted dial was installed at one time, and the dial light transformer is still connected to the second pair. Then you may have a fire. You could easily disconnect and tape the red/black leads inside the phone to be safe. Tony H. ------------------------------ From: mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone Organization: University of Georgia, Athens Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 03:53:04 GMT In article dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) writes: > I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex > system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on > business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like > that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or > usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line > devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've > got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works > fine. Maybe it's the kind of phone that has a pair of contacts (for turning on a light, or something) across yellow and black. This would short- circuit a second line if you had one. Hayes modems have the option of working this way. + Michael Covington - Artificial Intelligence Programs - U of Georgia - USA + Unless otherwise noted, these are private opinions, not official statements. ------------------------------ From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) Subject: Re: Question About PBX Phone Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon. Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 08:58:50 GMT dcg5662@hertz.njit.edu (Dave Grabowski) writes: > I recently obtained a telephone that was used on a private Centrex > system. It has a sticker on the back : "Caution: For use only on > business lines or risk of electrical short circuit" (or something like > that.) I popped it open, and it doesn't have a matching transformer or > usual huge (.1mf, 450+volt) cap used in most other telephone-line > devices. My question: Do I need to bother adding this hardware? I've > got it on a line now and it's been there for a few weeks and it works > fine. It's probably set up to do A/A1 answer supervision. That means that when you take it off hook, it *shorts* the second pair of wires together. If you have two-line wiring, this'll "busy out" the other line. If you have one of those transformers mentioned recently, it'll short *that* out. (not good!) It's easy enough to check. See where the *outer* pair of wires connects inside. Then, while the phone is not connected to the wall, take it off hook. If the resistance between those wires drops to nothing, it's wired that way, and you should disconnect one of the wires where it enters the phone. Some modems have A/A1 supervision as a "feature". I was getting *quite* upset about the way one of our phone lines was failing to work until I traced the problem to the modem! Leonard Erickson leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com CIS: [70465,203] 70465.203@compuserve.com FIDO: 1:105/51 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred) ------------------------------ From: hps@sdf.lonestar.org (Holt Sorenson) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 02:59:07 GMT In article Jeff Garber <0005075968@ mcimail.com> writes: > On The Jerry Springer Show (Aug 19, 11 A.M., KCAL Channel 9, Los > Angeles) the topic was 911. Apparently, someone in the Cincinnati > area called 911 from a cellular phone because he believed a man was > having a heart attack on the side of the road. The 911 operator told > him that they cannot accept calls from cellular phones! They actually > played the recording from the call on the show, so I heard it with my > own ears. The man died, although he was not suffering from a heart > attack, and it was determined that he would have died even without the > delay in reaching help. I never heard what he actually died of. I recently witnessed an accident as I was traveling the loop that surrounds Ft. Worth/Dallas TX and I exited immediately to find a pay phone. Approximately 30 seconds elapsed from the time I saw the accident to the time I began to dial 911. The operator informed me that they had already recieved a call from a cellular phone and that help was on the way, so I know that here in 817, 911 accepts cellular calls. Holt Sorenson ------------------------------ From: heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com (Ron Heiby) Subject: Re: 911 on Jerry Springer Show Organization: Motorola Computer Group, Schaumburg, IL Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:51:44 GMT > [Moderator's Note: We don't have cellular 911, but we can call > 787-0000 or the operator and get connected to Chicago Emergency. I'm surprised that our Moderator didn't mention it, but in the Chicagoland area, they have put signs up all over the place that one should dial "*999" to report any sort of emergency from a cellular phone. I've used it several times to inform the authorities of stranded motorists, non-working traffic signals, possibly-drunk motorists, downed trees or power lines, and speeding peace officers. In Buffalo Grove, where 911 service was installed a year or two ago, they have found that the system "isn't getting enough use"! They tell us that people are only using it for truly life-threatening emergencies. We have been told, through the town newsletter, that we should use 911 *any* time we want fire/police/ambulance dispatch. So, the way I read it, if I have a fender-bender and need a police officer to come by to see what happened, from a non-cellular Buffalo Grove phone, I'm to dial "911", rather than the police non-emergency number. I think it's wierd, but who am I to argue? Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com Moderator: comp.newprod [Moderator's Note: Who are you to argue? You are a citizen with an above average knowledge of the telecommunications network. Don't fall into that all too common trap of criticizing some bureaucrat only to be attacked in return, 'how would you know anything about this?'. That is BS! Continue arguing that 911 is *only* for dire emergencies when immediate police intervention is required. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: Re: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:51:00 EDT From: clements@BBN.COM In V12,I641,M2, Mark Lottor gave us a review of the Sony IT-A4000: > The Sony IT-A4000 has been out for a while now. It is a speakerphone > and digital answering machine. [...lotsa good stuff deleted...] In summary, > it's a nice phone. It has some minor annoyances, mostly because you > know they could have just added a few lines of code to make it do > something differently. However, it easily beats having a machine with > tapes or paying someone for voice-mail service. It sells for around > $199. I would add just a few comments: 1) I'm glad to see that the price has come down, if that's accurate. I had to pay over $300 for mine. 2) I would have preferred this unit without the built-in phone, which must add a fair amount to the price. I've got plenty of better phones. 3) It isn't very good at ignoring no-message calls if the line it's on doesn't have CPC pulses. I run mine behind my Panasonic PBX, which doesn't give a CPC pulse on hangup, and I get a lot of silent messages and dialtone/busy messages. I've used other machines that were much better in that situation. 4) This one surprised me, and is the main reason for my posting: There's no way to stash your outgoing message in memory while you use a different one for a while. I'd never really thought about it, but with a cassette-based OGM you can set one cassette on a shelf for a day if that's appropriate, and then put it back in the machine later. On Rolm PhoneMail you can do the same thing - have a "regular" OGM and an "alternate" OGM that you change more frequently. But with this Sony machine, you have to re-record your "regular" OGM from scratch. There's no concept of saving an OGM. I say it "surprised" me but that's only because the thought that you might not be able to do this never crossed my mind. Just my additional two cents. Bob Clements, K1BC, clements@bbn.com ------------------------------ From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman) Subject: Re: Is RJ45 With Notch Same as RJ45 Without Notch? Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 20:11:31 GMT In article Jim.Rees@umich.edu writes: > In article , stlouis@unixg.ubc.ca (Phill > St. Louis) writes: >> I would like to ensure that these RJ45 wall jacks with a notch will >> work. (I am pretty sure that they are Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) >> RJ45 wall jacks that have been installed in some new offices.) Will >> these work with the standard RJ45 (without notch) plugs? > The jacks are the same, except for the notch. The difference is in > the cable. A standard no-notch RJ-45 cable is wired with a twist, so > that pin one is connected to pin eight on the other end. A notched > cable is wired straight. Not necessarily true. DEC uses their cables as null-modems by having the 'twist' in them. The wiring for RJ-12's is: White = DSR Blk = Rcd Red = Grnd Grn = Grnd Yel = Txd Blu = DTR So if you have a 'twist' cable connecting two devices, the effect is a null-modem (DSR <> DTR, Rcd <> Txd). I believe the RJ-45 setup is the same, plus RTS <> CTS. ------------------------------ Organization: The American University - University Computing Center Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:10:14 EDT From: GHADSAL@AMERICAN.EDU Subject: Re: FAXes Over Internet Someone a long time past (not in geological terms) "wondered" the same question; what was to be created from this initial "wonderment" was a listing of 'nets that would be willing to receive routed email, convert it to ASCII, then make a LOCAL phone call to the requestors FAX number. I have made myself, and my personal PC/Faxboard available to all email requests for the WASHINGTON DC metropolitan area. Please also note that given the legal *sling* I could potentially place myself in I reserve the right to return the email without transmission. NO COMMERICAL FAXES. Only personal (including *your name* address, etc) to potential employers, congressmen (people), etc that *include* correct fax numbers will be sent. I am not, nor do I or the rest of us wish to become FAX directories so please include the correct fax number. FORM is up to the sender; please put the FAX number in the header. Guy Hadsall Washington DC ghadsal@auvm.american.edu ------------------------------ From: kentrox!bud@uunet.UU.NET (Bud Couch) Subject: Re: How Can I Splice Telephone Wires Without an Overkill? Organization: ADC Kentrox, Portland OR Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 16:52:28 GMT In article smp@cathedral.cerc.wvu. wvnet.edu (Shailesh M. Potnis) writes: > Is there a terminal or connector which splices two ends of a telephone cable > to make a longer one? Essentially what I would emagine would be similar > to the two male connectors fused together. Well, there is always the old WECO 710 splicing connector, but it requires a rather elaborate tool to use, since it uses an insulation-displacement mechanism. I think that the tool runs about $300, and I don't think that AT&T will sell the connectors in quantites of less than 25. Personally, I'd use a pair of needle-nose pliers (and some wire strippers if you don't have the touch to strip wire with them), a soldering iron, a little solder, and a roll of electrical tape, but then again, I *have* been called a dinosaur (along with some other names!). :-) Bud Couch - ADC/Kentrox If my employer only knew... standard BS applies ------------------------------ From: syngen@dir.ulcc.ac.uk (Syngen Brown LNT) Subject: Re: Pounding on an Octothorp Date: 30 Aug 1992 10:45:55 GMT Organization: London Network Team Reply-To: s.brown@lon.ac.uk In article mandarin@cix.clink.co.uk writes: > In the UK, some people did call it an "octothorp" at first. But no > "e" on the end !. We *don't* call it the pound sign, however, for > fairly obvious reasons (like we have a pound sign all of our own !) > The common name for it here, is "hash": but BT, when they introduced > facility codes for PABXs and Network Services, decided they would give > it their own name. They sold phones with the "thorps" missing from > the octothorp symbol: and then told us all to call that key the > "square". This wasn't solely a BT invention. According to CCITT Rec. E.161: "The symbol will be known as the _square_ or the most commonly used equivalent term in other languages". My feeling is that this is a potential source of confusion; imagine the scenario in which a user is requested to press the square key -- yes, but which one? Syngen London Network Team, ULCC, 20 Guilford St, London WC1N 1DZ, UK +44 71 405 8400 Ext. 406 s.brown@lon.ac.uk ------------------------------ From: mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Rosen) Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci. Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 17:33:24 GMT Is it possible to make a calling card call and not have to wait for the to enter your card number? I'd love to be able to just dial it all straight and not have to wait those extra few seconds. Michael Rosen Tau Epsilon Phi - George Washington University mrosen@nyx.cs.du.edu Michael.Rosen@bbs.oit.unc.edu or @lambada.oit.unc.edu ------------------------------ From: toddi@mav.com (Todd Inch) Subject: Re: Dial a #, Connect Quicker? Organization: Maverick International Inc. Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 19:36:46 GMT In article stevef@wrq.com (Steve Forrette) writes: > One question that I have not been able to answer myself is why it > helps to hit # after entering an additional destination number for a > calling card call (that is, after hitting # to terminate the first > call). I can't think of a situation where it would be expecting more > than 11 digits, but it definately waits for more. Many international calls require more than 11 digits. ------------------------------ From: hhallika@zeus.calpoly.edu (Harold Hallikainen) Subject: Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar?) Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 22:44:02 GMT Years ago when we used an answering service, we got a call back from Graybar confirming some order. The answering service told us the call was from "gay bar". Harold [Moderator's Note: Did the answering service people look sort of askance at you after that whenever you were in their office? :) PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #673 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa27184; 1 Sep 92 1:43 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA05559 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:31:08 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00398 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:30:57 -0500 Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 23:30:57 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209010430.AA00398@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #674 TELECOM Digest Mon, 31 Aug 92 23:31:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 674 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Mark Brader) Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Michael Schuh) Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep (Bob Riegelmann) Re: A Bad Time To Fall Asleep (Ken Jongsma) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Blake Farenthold) Re: Cell Phones in the Air (Robert L. Ullmann) Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards (Jack Adams) Is AT&T's SDN (Software Defined Network) Any Good? (Jesse W. Asher) Re: Funny Answering Service Error (John Higdon) Re: Funny Answering Service Error (Anthony Clifton) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 03:53:00 -0400 From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader) Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep Our Moderator writes: > My thanks to Mark Brader (msb@sq.com) for suggesting this be reprinted. You're welcome, Patrick, but I now wish I hadn't. You see, a couple of hours after I sent that suggestion, I looked at the applicable section of Richard Rhodes's superb book "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" (Simon & Schuster, 1986, ISBN 0-671-44133-7). It implies, on pretty good evidence, that there is something wrong with Mrs. Fermi's story. Let me summarize the timetable: > "The test was set for 4:30 AM the next morning, so we returned to the > hotel and went to bed early. We got up at 3 the next morning and drove > out to the location ... The chronology that she gives after that is: 4:45... they return to town to telephone, but can't get the operator. 5:00 or just after... Fermi finds and wakes up the operator. They are back at their observation point 5 minutes before the explosion. > .... later, we got together with the others who had > been assigned there and found out that it wasn't the rain that delayed > things; it was that woman asleep; you see, the main people responsible > were linked by phones through Alamogordo; they had to coordinate what > they were doing and sychronize their work. All of them got the same > thing on the phone we got: no answer from the operator for 45 minutes! So this would imply that the operator's nap started at about 4:15, if not earlier. Okay, now to Rhodes. On page 664 of my copy: # [Robert] Oppenheimer, [Gen. Leslie] Groves, [Kenneth] Bainbridge, # [Gen. Thomas] Farrell, [Richard] Tolman and an Army meteorologist met # with [the meteorologist for the test, Jack] Hubbard at McDonald Ranch # at four that afternoon [the day before the test] to consider the # weather. ... They decided to wait and see. They had scheduled # a last weather conference for the next morning at 0200 hours; # they would make up their minds then. The shot was set for 0400 # and they let that time stand. As a source for at least part of this paragraph, Rhodes cites "The Day the Sun Rose Twice" by Ferenc Morton Szasz (Univ. of N.M. Press, 1984). Now on page 666: # Thunderstorms began lashing the Jornada [del Muerto] at about 0200 # hours ... Winds gusted to thirty miles an hour. Hubbard hung # on at Zero for last-minute readings--only misting drizzle had yet # reached the tower area--and arrived eight minutes late for the # 0200 weather conference at Base Camp, to find Oppenheimer waiting # for him outside the weather center there. Hubbard told him they # would have to scrub 0400 but should be able to shoot between # 0500 and 0600. Oppenheimer looked relieved. # # Inside they found an agitated Groves waiting with his advisors. # "What the hell is wrong with the weather?" the general greeted # his forecaster. ... Groves demanded to know when the storm would # pass. Hubbard explained its dynamics: a tropical air mass, night # rain. Afternoon thunderstorms took their energy from the heating of # the earth and collapsed at sunset; this one, contrariwise, would # collapse at dawn. Groves growled that he wanted a specific time, # not an explanation. I'm giving you both, Hubbard rejoined. ... # # Oppenheimer applied himself to soothe his bulky comrade. Hubbard # was the best man around, he insisted, and they ought to trust his # forecast. The others at the meeting--Tolman and two army meteor- # ologists, one more than before--agreed. Groves relented. "You'd # better be right on this", he threatened Hubbard, "or I will hang # you." He ordered the meteorologist to sign his forecast and set # the shot for 0530. Then he went off to roust the governor of New # Mexico out of bed to the telephone to warn him he might have to # declare martial law. For all of this material, Rhodes again cites Szasz, but he notes that Szasz in turn cites Hubbard's *contemporary* personal journal. This is pretty solid evidence, unless Hubbard had some reason to falsify it. The signed forecast would be even better evidence: has anyone seen it or seen it reproduced somewhere? According to Rhodes, Hubbard gave it to Bainbridge at "about 0508", following which the master switches were unlocked and the bomb fired with a 20-minute delay. There is further evidence that the telephones were not all down during the period that Mrs. Fermi mentions. From page 667 of Rhodes: # The meteorologist prepared his final forecast at S-10000 [the command # center, 10000 yards south of Zero]. He called Bainbridge at 0440. # "Hubbard gave me a complete weather report", the Trinity director # recalls, "and a prediction that at 5:30 am the weather would be # possible but not ideal. ... I called Oppenheimer and General # Farrell to get their agreement that 5:30 would be T = 0." Hubbard, # Bainbridge, Oppenheimer and Farrell each had veto power over the shot. # They all agreed. Rhodes cites a different source for this: "All in our Time" by Jane Wilson (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 1975). There is a further problem with Mrs. Fermi's story, which is this: the Trinity test site is 60 miles from Alamogordo! From her account it seems to be at most a 25-minute drive from the telephone exchange to the observing point, which she says is 15 miles from the site. (Unfortunately, while Rhodes mentions something about what Fermi did during the test, he doesn't mention where he did it.) I am left with three possible interpretations. One is that Mrs. Fermi's story simply never happened. A second is that it happened exactly as she said, except that after 20 years she got some of the times wrong, while Hubbard participated in a cover-up, and Wilson's source was also misleading. And the third, which I think most likely, is that Fermi's drive into town did happen, but the operator's nap did not really affect the timing of the test. In this interpretation, not all the telephones for everyone went through that operator; perhaps it was only the lines between the test site and the hotels where the scientists were staying, say. (Also, maybe the operator was not in Alamogordo but in a smaller town closer to the site, such as Tularosa or Carrizozo.) Maybe what someone really said was that they had been afraid that the test would have to be cancelled because certain people couldn't be telephoned, and then it was all right. I dunno. I'd like to believe the original story. But the evidence ... Mark Brader, SoftQuad Inc., Toronto, utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com [Moderator's Note: Well, my observation back then (1965) was that she was, to put it kindly, starting to get forgetful, particularly after a large pasta dinner and a couple drinks. The Windermere Hotel's dining room ('The Anchorage') did not serve skimpy meals or drinks ... PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 11:45:05 PDT From: schuh@mdd.comm.mot.com (Michael Schuh) Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep I enjoyed the article. Thanks for re-posting it. Fermi's method of locating the exchange reminds me of an anectode Feyman mentions in one of his books, using the denisty of phone lines to find the way back to town. Also, if all atomic/nuclear weapons could be stopped by napping operators, then we might never have had a cold war. Interesting concept ... Thanks again. Mike Schuh schuh@mdd.comm.mot.com [Moderator's Note: But then again, maybe it never happened at all, or maybe it happened, but a little differently than related. PAT] ------------------------------ From: bob@sunspot.noao.edu (Bob Riegelmann) Subject: Re: A Bad Time to Fall Asleep Organization: National Solar Observatory/SP, Sunspot NM, USA Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 19:51:17 GMT In article TELECOM Moderator (telecom@eecs.nwu.edu) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 667, Message 6 of 6 > Mrs. Fermi and I lived in the same apartment building on East > 56th Street, directly across the street from the Museum of Science and > Industry, and we chatted and dined together frequently. Then you must have lived close to my graduate advisor, Russ Donnelly. And knew one of my best friends, their son, Jim, (who was still in diapers I expect.) [Moderator's Interjection: I lived in the Windermere Hotel, 56th and Stony Island Avenue, and ate in the hotel dining room 'The Anchorage' most evenings.] > In Alamogordo, we checked into the hotel then drove out to where > Enrico had been assigned. It was set up that the scientists were > deployed over about a two hundred square mile area; we were about > fifteen miles from the target. I now live in Sunspot, 5000 feet straight up from Alamogordo and in the hills. > "Where we stopped was in front of a house on one of the residential > streets there, but what looked odd to me was on the side of the house, > there were hundreds of wires converging, coming in from a dozen > telephone poles which all seemed to meet in the back yard or on the > side of the house. And all these wires came down out of the sky you > might say, and went in the side of the house in a big bundle. This fits with the service I get here in the hills. No Class here for a long time to come. > "Really, I can't blame the lady much. The whole summer of 1945 was > just horrid. When we arrived the day before, the temperature was over > a hundred; This also fits well, the temps in Alamogordo lately have been in the 90's. When it gets really hot, I flee home to the hills, where I can see alamogordo, but the daily highs are in the 70's. > "When I was there in town two weeks ago for the (twentieth > anniversary) reunion, just from curiosity I went past that house; it > took me awhile to remember where it was. I could go ask, the house is probably still there. Small world, huh? Thanks for posting this, it made my day, I'll forward it on to Jim, if he hasn't seen it. Bob Riegelmann bob@sunspot.sunspot.noao.edu P.O. Box 58 Sunspot, NM 88349-0058 [Moderator's Note: I would suggest including the lead article in this issue with any distribution of the original article however. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 09:13:03 EDT From: Ken Jongsma x7702 Subject: Re: A Bad Time To Fall Asleep I used to live in Alamogordo a few years ago. The town is not that much larger today than it was in Mrs. Fermi's story. Twice a year, they allow the public to drive out to both the detonation site and the ranch house where the scientists were staying. Both locations are within the White Sands Missile Range and are usually not accessable by the public. I was fortunate enough to have been doing some test flights on the range one day and asked for permission to overfly both places. Ground Zero is about the size of a round football field. It's been fenced in and leveled, with a black monument commemorating the event. On the public access days, they allow a convoy of civilian vehicles to leave from Alamogordo and drive about two hours to the site. They usually have a mockup of the actual bomb there as well. The ranch house has not been used in many years and is pretty much weathered and falling apart. When you first ran your story a few years ago, I contacted the International Space Museum in Alamogordo and the Atomic Energy Museum in Albuquerque. Both were very pleased to receive FAXed copies of it for their historical records. Ken Jongsma ken@wybbs.mi.org Smiths Industries jongsma@benzie.si.com Grand Rapids, Michigan 73115.1041@compuserve.com [Moderator's Note: Alamogordo now has a population of about 24,000 I believe. I think a half century ago the population was less. Perhaps you also should send the lead story in this issue to the same places where you sent the original. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 10:55:08 CDT From: blake@pro-party.cts.com (Blake Farenthold) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: Corpus Christi, Texas' pro-party bbs +1 512 882-1899 > This led me to think about the movie Die Hard II.... What a classic for telcom continuity blunders. You caught only one ... > In some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he > checks the pager and calls her back on the plane. No can do. (Actualy I'm suprised SHE was able to call at all, whenever I really need the airphone all I get is a synthasized voice saying processing call please wait for about half an hour) Of course they are GTE air phones, I should have known not to count on them. The other telcom blunders I remember in Die Hard 2 are: Pac*Bell (Pacific Bell, serves California) payphones in what was supposed to be the Washington DC airport. Faxing fingerprints for identification. I can't even read half the typwritten stuff that is faxed to me ... nuch less make out the details of a graphic as fine as a finger print. ------------------------------ From: ariel@world.std.com (Robert L Ullmann) Subject: Re: Cell Phones in the Air Organization: The World in Boston Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 02:51:57 GMT lchiu@animal.gcs.co.nz (Laurence Chiu) writes: > of the smaller planes like 737's). This led me to think about the > movie Die Hard II where air phones figure prominently in the plot. In > some sequence, our hero gets paged by his wife from a plane, he checks > the pager and calls her back on the plane. Is this possible or some At the risk of somehow accepting-by-failure-to-rebut the other 100-odd totally hilariously stupid technical errors in the "plot"; no, you can't call an Airfone. That said: I watched it a couple of days ago on cable, and if you just watch the "human" story as a shoot'em-up, it ain't bad at all. Hell, all TELECOM readers should watch it just for the amusement of wondering what you could make as a consultant if Hollywood cared one whit for technical accuracy. This movie has almost as many technical idiocies as SPACE*1999 but not quite. Start with the idea that airplanes are somehow "stuck" at the outer marker when the radio goes down, continue through the idea that a pilot of a commercial passenger airplane would try to land without visual on the runway lights, and end with the idea that you can tap into and simulate an airport control tower by attaching alligator clips (or equivalent) to the cables and then hacking through them with an ax. In between, forget that blanks _sound_ different to any expert, and forget that if you toss anything larger than a small chicken through a turbine engine, it disintegrates. (The engine, not the chicken. Well, it too .. ;-) Robert Ullmann Ariel@World.STD.COM +1 508 879 6994 x226 ------------------------------ From: vixen!jadams@uunet.UU.NET (26070-adams) Subject: Re: AT&T SDN; New Calling Cards Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 13:15:48 GMT In article , drz@po.CWRU.Edu (David R. Zinkin) writes: > Question: what does SDN stand for anyway? And what makes it different ^^^ Software Defined Network (As of 1986ish!) > from standard long distance service? I believe SDN is a trademark of AT&T (possibly even registered). I'm a little hazy on this, but I believe SDN provides a multi-location customer (read as big businesses) with an economical alternative to a private voice network of dedicated trunks. Using the intelligence of AT&T's NCPs and LD net, all sorts of virtual numbering schemes are possible (Corporate universal numbering plans for instance). In article , johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes: >> Question: what does SDN stand for anyway? And what makes it different >> from standard long distance service? > It's Software Defined Network. In Olden Days when long distance rates > were much higher than now and switching was relatively much more > expensive than it is now, large companies usually rented lots of fixed > leased lines among their various facilities to carry intra-company > traffic. This saved money relative to toll rates and also sometimes > avoided problems of not being able to get through at peak hours. So far so good ... > {STUFF DELETED}. Once such hack is the "virtual private > line" which is a long distance ringdown circuit -- whenever you pick Are you sure about this? > up the phone at one end it quickly calls the other end to give you > pretty much the same effect as a leased line but at lower cost since > they don't need to provide bandwidth when you're not asking for it. > SDN is basically a bulk calling plan for large businesses that > replaces networks of leased lines. It's a little more technical than a "calling plan". It involves called number routing manipulation based on all kinds of things (Day of week, time of day, your telephone number, etc.). The routing is performed according to logic which resides in the Network Control Points (NCP) which are simplisticly speaking, large databses of these routing logic algorithms. > One dials 10732 to make an SDN This depends on your dialing plan of your LEC switch. > call (and gets a message saying to call your account rep if it's not a > line assigned to an SDN account) but as far as I know the calls are > carried just like other AT&T calls. In most applications of SDN, a second dial tone is played and the number dialed is captured and sent to the NCP in the form of a query. Based on your number, the number you dialed, and a lot of other stuff (mentioned above), your call is routed to its destination via the AT&T public switched telephone network. Jack (John) Adams | Bellcore RRC 4B-259 (908) 699-3447 {Voice} | (908) 336-2871 {Facsimile} jadams@vixen.bellcore.com | kahuna@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: jessea@homecare.com (Jesse W. Asher) Subject: Is AT&T's SDN (Software Defined Network) any good? Organization: G.O.D Inc. Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 01:28:49 GMT Does anyone have any information on how good AT&T's SDN offering is? Would it be useful for providing switched DDS lines? Is this really a rip off? Thanks. Jesse W. Asher Phone: (901)762-6000 Varco-Pruden Buildings 6000 Poplar Ave., Suite 400, Memphis, TN 38119 Internet: jessea@homecare.COM UUCP: ...!banana!homecare!jessea ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 23:52 PDT From: john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Subject: Re: Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar?) On Aug 30 at 18:45, TELECOM Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: Did the answering service people look sort of > askance at you after that whenever you were in their office? :) PAT] Back in my "big business" days, we had a young man in our service department who was apprenticing to be an installer. As is custom, he usually got stuck with much of the "gofer" responsibilities, such as making trips to distributors to pick up supply orders. He was newly married and his wife was a very young, insecure person who checked up on her hubby several times a day. Late one afternoon, she called for her man, only to be told by the service manager that he had not yet returned from Graybar. The next day, word was all over the shop about how when our young apprentice returned home, he was given all manner of hell about drinking on the job, and worse, doing it in a gay bar. In his honor, we all referred to Graybar as "gaybar" from then on. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 264 4115 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! ------------------------------ From: aescherm@iastate.edu (A Person of Awareness) Subject: Re: Funny Answering Service Error (was How Do I Locate Graybar?) Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:28:06 GMT Speaking of miscommunications: I worked for US West Paging in Iowa this last spring and we had a radio so we could act as an intermediary point between the police department and the towing company that does their impounds. I listened to a conversation one night that I will relate: Base: [name deleted], you might want to grab the private tow at 10th and Locust. It's a 79 Gray Dodge Van. Mobile: What color did you say it was? Base: Gray Mobile: What color, didn't get that? Base: Graaaaay GRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!! Mobile: Sorry still didn't get the color. Base: It's ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy GRAY!!!!! Mobile: You say it's a GAY van???? At this point I was laughing so hard my headset fell off and I almost disconnected some poor woman trying to reach an insurance company. Anthony Clifton ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #674 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa02745; 1 Sep 92 3:57 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA29624 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:56:08 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA16942 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:55:58 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 01:55:58 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209010655.AA16942@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #675 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Sep 92 01:56:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 675 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Major Phone Outage in Omaha (Jack Winslade) Hurricane Andrew Notes (David E. Bernholdt) A Non-Horror Story (Roy M. Silvernail) Disaster Reporting On Usenet (Rick Broadhead) AT&T to Cut Six Offices (Washington DC Times via Paul Robinson) Ohio Bell Announces DMS-100 for Cleveland East (Michael J. Logsdon) Which Uses Less Resources: Off Hook or On Call? (Paul Robinson) ATM Introduction Wanted (Kevin Beauchamp) Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In? (Scott Brenner) Computer/Phone Interface (David Gingold) Merlin+ Station Wires (Gabe M. Wiener) Advice Sought on Pay Phone Ruckus (Brian Capouch) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 23:03:33 CST From: Jack.Winslade@ivgate.omahug.org (Jack Winslade) Subject: Major Phone Outage in Omaha Reply-To: jsw@drbbs.omahug.org Organization: DRBBS Technical BBS, Omaha At about 10:45 AM this morning, a major malfunction in US West's 135th St. office resulted in the disruption of 3/4 of the phones served from the CO, according to the {Omaha World-Herald}. At press time, the exact cause was not known, but a US West spokesman stated that it was probably a problem with the switching or computer equipment. Television station WOWT reported that 'It was a computer error and not a cable cut' and that service was restored in the late afternoon. (The map shown by the station GREATLY exaggerated the area of the outage, showing large areas to the east and south of the area served by that office.) The 135th St. office serves some 33x and all 69x prefixes in the Omaha area. I've been told by an 'insider' that it is a #5 ESS . Ironically, both the west Omaha US West office (which includes residential service reps) and some of AT&T's offices are served out of 135th and were shut down. Non-emergency lines to the Douglas County Sheriff's office were out, but 911 was said to be in service during the outage. The CLID log on DRBBS shows a call from the 330 office at 10:24 AM with no other calls from the affected COs since. Calls from the surrounding offices appear to be coming through with no trouble. Good day. JSW ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 15:13:23 EDT From: David E. Bernholdt Subject: Hurricane Andrew Notes Not terribly telecom related, but since people have asked for info about South Florida, here's a second-hand account ... The secretary in our Project, Judy, has a sister in Homestead, in the center of the area devastated by Andrew. She and her husband left here Wednesday to go down there and help out; they returned Saturday morning -- they said they had to get some rest or they wouldn't be able to get to work today. Despite the fact that they are supposedly only allowing residents into the area, they arrived in Homestead unchallenged, though there were checks at a few offramps from the highway. (They were expecting checks and had prepared by contacting State Police, etc. in advance.) The place is (hardly suprisingly) a complete mess. She had pictures of her sister's block and in some places you couldn't even see the street for all the rubble. Though the TV reports are likely to show the places where the houses were of lesser construction and have totally collapsed, she says that many more houses were effectively just as bad because the roof had been ripped off, allowing wind and water to get inside the house. Pictures of her sister's block showed houses with the exterior walls remaining but no roof. There were four families, including Judy's sister, actually living in their houses in that neighborhood. Some other people would come in during the day and leave at night. They live close to Homestead Air Force Base. Despite reports that it was leveled, they did manage to clear some of the runways and are flying in and out frequently (lots of helicopters, apparently). What little they could see of the base (mostly housing) suggested it was in a similar condition to the houses in their neighboorhood -- windows blow out, many roofs blown off, exterior walls usually standing. They have no power. Water available, but the pressure was so low you had couldn't raise the hose more than three feet. Their telephone was working, but there were relatively few in the area that were (despite the fact that the area has underground cables). They foud the phone quite useful because it meant they didn't have to drive -- most cars were destroyed by the storm, including Judy's sister's. Newspapers are publishing, but they don't deliver. TV and radio are broadcasting, but you have to have batteries or a generator to run them. Generators are like gold -- Judy said she had heard of $500 units being sold for $1800-3000. I don't know about gasoline to run them. Fortunately, they brought a generator and some gas for her sister. As they were driving down Wednesday, and again heading up on Saturday, they saw convoys of ambulances, fire equipment, and semi tractors -- a dozen or so at a time -- barrelling down the highway behind a State Trooper using lights and sirens. Unfortunately, though, the aid does not seem to be disbursed very well. People have no way of finding out where it is being distributed, and if they did, most cars are inoperative or don't have gas. They only aid they saw was private citizens who had loaded up their cars and were cruising through neighborhoods offering it to people. The only law enforcement the came in contact with was 3.00 AM Friday They stopped to make sure Judy and company were armed. They said to be sure to shout "duck" to the neighbors before you shoot (it is a fairly densely packed area), and to choose you words carefully when the cops come back to investigate any shootings. The cops were a little bit miffed that they weren't allowed on the street earlier. Apparently, they had been held in a staging area waiting to respond to reports of looting. They'd rather just patrol. The insurance adjusters had also not yet been seen in her sister's neighboorhood, though Judy heard many were handing out initial ($2500) checks as soon as they had verified that you had an insurance policy with them. Judy said she slept about six hours in those three days, and they had two hot meals. The rest of the time, they just worked on cleaning up the mess. People were very helpful to each other. Judy said if it weren't for her job, she'd go back in a flash. They need lots of help down there, and it sounds like it will be quite a while before any sort of normalcy is restored. [Moderator's Note: This will go down in history as one of the worst natural tragedies ever to strike the USA. And help, in the form of practical household goods is still in short supply. Apparently they will not have electric service restored for *several months* if not a year or more as transmission lines are totally down. PAT] ------------------------------ Subject: A Non-Horror Story From: cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 14:51:46 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN I just moved into a new apartment in Minneapolis. The building is some 28 years old, and I wondered what the telephone service would be like. The manager gave me a look at the demarc, and I shuddered. It's one of those old panels with screw-studs. (I don't know the exact term, but you use a can wrench on them) The incoming cabling is a rat's nest, and absolutely nothing is labelled. The guides on the terminal frame are numbered, but the numbers don't match reality. Hoping for the best, I called US West. The local service number goes through an ACD, and handed me to a representative in fairly short order. She took my name, my new service address, and asked whether I had service in my name before. Then she offered me a measured-service line and a flat-rate line. Other than mentioning measured service first, I got no pressure to select that service. I was offered the standard custom calling options: Call Waiting, Call Forwarding, Three-Way Calling and Speed Dial. I declined all but Call Waiting, since my building's security system uses the telephone as a doorbell. Final cost for the line is 23.80/month, including LineBacker (because I didn't put the wiring in myself, I don't want to have to pay to get it fixed) and Tone Calling. She then asked if I had a computer or FAX machine. I had heard from a friend that there was some special on second-line installations, and asked. I found that the second line is $16.25 to install (first one is $18.75), but that she could waive all but $2.50 of that installation. I accepted and ordered a second line with tone calling only for $19.25 a month. When the day came, I checked the apartment, and found line 1 working, but nothing on line two. I presumed that a field man would have to visit the demarc from hell for that, and met him when he arrived. I told him that line 1 worked, but not line two, and he answered "did you want a second line installed?" This caught me off guard. He went on that there was a $58 charge to install the second line to my jacks. I told hin the jack work had already been done. Then he asked me if I had a two-line phone. I assured him that I did, and showed him to the demarc. After talking with the installer a bit, I found out why we miscommunicated at first. He said most people that order two lines want separate RJ-11 jacks. He didn't expect me to understand RJ-14. After he realized I wasn't the usual dunce, we got along fine. The installation proceeded smoothly. He quickly located and hooked up my second pair, and we tested them from the apartment. He almost gave me the ANI number, but didn't. (it's six digits with a four digit security code, changed every three months ... that's all he would say.) Footnote: Later, when I was setting up the phones and the modem, I had trouble with the second line. I finally traced the fault to an old ITT 2500 desk set I have. When the modular kit was put on this phone, the black/yellow pair was tied together on the G network terminal! Roy M. Silvernail |+| roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:11:35 EDT From: YSAR1111@YORKVM1.BITNET Subject: Disaster Reporting On Usenet Organization: York University I am surprised that Usenet, as powerful a medium as it is, has not been more widely used to coordinate disaster relief activities. For example, I am sure there would be great support for a group such as misc.disaster.coordination and/or misc.disaster.reports, which could be used by anxious friends and relatives to find out about friends and family in disaster areas, to disseminate information on relief efforts, provide addresses of those agencies accepting donations, and to report on the situation in affected areas. It is my feeling that the Usenet community would benefit from newsgroups that would act as a central clearinghouse for information of this sort when a natural disaster strikes, anywhere in the world. Are there any folks out there who have experience in creating a new newsgroup, and are willing to moderate a discussion and run a vote for the creation of newsgroups dealing with disaster assistance? Does anyone think this is a good idea? I don't have the time to get fully involved at this stage because of other demands on my time, but I am hoping that someone is willing to take this idea and work with it. Rick Broadhead ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDarcos@MCIMail.COM From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 17:36:12 EDT Subject: AT&T to Cut Six Offices AT&T to axe six offices in aim to serve 'efficiently'. By Kent Gibbons The Washington (DC) Times, Saturday Aug 29, 1992, Page B5 AT&T plans to shut six of 18 customer service shops in November, although one in Silver Spring [Md.] will remain open, the company said yesterday. The closings will affect 860 union workers and 83 managers, all of whom will be offered other work within the company if they qualify and are willing to relocate, American Telephone & Telegraph Co. Spokesman Mark Siegel said. The offices, where AT&T employees field questions about service and billing are being closed to serve customers more efficiently, Mr. Siegel said. He would not elaborate, saying that would reveal to competitors secrets about AT&T's call traffic. But he said the offices to be closed were targeted on the basis of their staffing, technology and operating costs. A union official said the plan "may satisfy some ill-conceived management scheme, but hundreds of working people, thousands of family members, and communities in six states will suffer." The official, Communications Workers of America Vice President James Irvine, said thousands of AT&T union members have become "high-tech migrant workers, following their jobs from one closing office to the next." Job security was a key issue in union contract talks with AT&T this year. Union employees who are not placed in other jobs will be given job retraining, counseling, outplacement help and up to 104 weeks' severance pay depending on length of service with the company, Mr. Siegel said. Offices to be closed are in Columbus, Ohio; Mobile, Ala.; Parsippany, N.J.; Radnor, Pa.; St. Cloud, Minn.; and Wauwatosa, Wis. Remaining offices are in Silver Spring [Md.]; Atlanta; Bloomington, Minn.; Charleston, W.Va.; Dallas; Itasca, Ill.; Kansas City, Mo.; Phoenix; Pittsburgh; Pleasanton, Calif.; Providence, R.I.; and San Antonio, Texas. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 19:13:39 -0400 From: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael J. Logsdon) Subject: Ohio Bell Announces DMS-100 for Cleveland East Reply-To: am339@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Michael J. Logsdon) We have just received a letter regarding the impending cutover to DMS-100 on 10/24/92 for (216) 321/371/397/932 xxxx. What do I need to change for our SRX business switch in this Ohio Bell Eastern Cleveland suburb? Mike Logsdon University School am339@cleveland.freenet.edu ------------------------------ Reply-To: TDarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 20:58:39 EDT Subject: Which Uses Less Resources: Off Hook or On Call? I'd like to start some discussion and some thinking over an issue which we had a bit of some hot discussion. If you have to make a number busy, for example, when changing the paper in a fax machine -- especially if you have multiple fax machines on hunt group so that a busy line rolls over to the next unused line -- that you want a line to be busy. (When someone sends to a fax machine and it's busy, they retry in a short while; if it doesn't answer, they figure it's out of order. (At least, I do.) So what is the least use of the telephone system for keeping a line busy? I said that you are better off, say, calling a silent line or calling the line itself and listening to its own busy signal except that some systems drop you on a call to a busy number after a time. Someone else said to just leave the phone off-hook. I pointed out this ties up a dialing sender. They claimed, yes, but only for the 30 seconds it allows you to dial, and is less resources than a call set-up and tear-down among the battery hold, etc. Someone want to settle this? Paul Robinson Tdarcos@MCIMAIL.COM ------------------------------ Subject: ATM Introduction Wanted From: kbeau@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Kevin Beauchamp) Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 12:15:28 -0600 Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #3, Edmonton, AB, Canada I would like an introduction to Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) technology. I would like a general overview of the technology, and perhaps a glossary of related terms. How does ATM interface with Ethernet? Will ATM interface with FDDI? What is the relation of ATM to SONET? ISDN? What is the projected maximum bit rate? When will product be available? How expensive will it be vis-a-vis FDDI? Can someone on the net help me out? Thanks, Kevin Beauchamp kbeau@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca ------------------------------ From: sbrenner@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (scott.d.brenner) Subject: Is It OK To Leave Cell Phone Battery Charger Plugged In? Organization: AT&T Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 13:44:20 GMT I have an OKI 891 transportable cellular phone that has a 12V NiCd battery (number RP 9021A/64-21055, if it matters). The charger for this battery (model RP9022A) doesn't have any warnings against leaving it plugged in all the time. My question is: would this be all right (leaving it plugged in)? On a related matter, why does my FM radio at work seem to get much better reception when the cell phone battery charger is plugged into the same power strip? a T d H v A a N n K c S e Scott D. Brenner AT&T Consumer Communications Services Basking Ridge, NJ scott@cimu03.att.com -or- sbrenner@attmail.com ------------------------------ From: gingold@strident.think.com (David Gingold) Subject: Computer/Phone Interface Date: 31 Aug 92 13:52:55 Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA I'm looking for hardware which will interface either a PC or a Mac to a phone line. It should be able digitize and play back sound and send and receive DTMF (Touch Tone) signals. A built-in DSP chip would be nice but is not strictly necessary. I'm willing to write my own software. Can anyone provide tips on what equipment is available and what is good? dg ------------------------------ From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) Subject: Merlin+ Station Wires Organization: Columbia University Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:57:07 GMT Merlin Plus stations take four pairs. Does anyone know what the breakout on these pairs is? Someone told me that it goes: blue/white = voice orange/white = line data green/white = control leads brown/white = thru-phone page Any accuracy to this? He didn't seem positive. Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ. gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu N2GPZ in ham radio circles 72355,1226 on CI$ ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 317 Aug 92 15:58:27 -0500 (CDT) From: Brian Capouch Subject: Advice Sought on Pay Phone Ruckus We are a small (1000FTE) rural-based college. A couple of years ago our local telco installed a 5ESS, putting an Optical Remote Module into it on our campus. At that time, after a pretty hard sell from both the local company and AT&T (who reportedly were financing the install) we signed up for Centrex. This setup replaced our aging PBX. We don't have phones in students' rooms. For at least the last decade, there have been two phones in each hall: a campus phone that would allow calls to any number in the same exchange, and a pay phone owned by the phone company. This summer, the head honcho at our carrier gave our administration an ultimatum: the pay phones weren't generating near the revenue they could. Lots of our students rent private lines from this same telco, and it bothered them that our students could call those lines from the "free" phone in each hall instead of using the pay phones. So we either had to block all calls not aimed at our Centrex lines or they would yank every one of our pay phones. I need to see what alternatives we might have, or to find out that we have none. The phone company rep will only talk to one person on campus, and she has told him that unless each phone generates $35.00 a month they would be losing money on it. Thanks for any help that might be forthcoming. Brian Capouch Saint Joseph's College brianc@saintjoe.edu [Moderator's Note: You can have the pay phones converted to semi-public; meaning you pay some fee to telco each month for having them there. The telco then has to leave you alone since you are paying for the phones. But I do think you would be wise to keep the centrex phones limited to calls on your system only. You are giving away a lot of local service which could generate quarters in the coin box. You might also (and I would be inclined to) call telco's bluff; tell them to come and get the phones out by a certain date or you will personally remove them. Before you do that, contract with a manufacturer of private pay phones (sometimes called COCOTS) and buy a few dozen of them at a good rate and then you get to keep *all* the money they take in. By programming the new COCOTS you purchase so they give free calls on campus and charge a reasonable fee for off campus use (and a very low rate for long distance calls) you can beat telco at their own game. If you own the COCOTS there will be no middleman looking for a profit. You can program them for something like 25 cents per minute on all LD calls and 15 cents a minute on local calls ... run them through your centrex lines on the trunks the hall phones are on now; that way you won't even need to pay the miserable telco for the extra lines. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #675 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa19360; 2 Sep 92 0:32 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA00136 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:16 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA15278 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:04 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:37:04 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209020337.AA15278@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #676 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Sep 92 22:37:10 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 676 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines (Derek Andrew) Summary: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? (J. Porter Clark) Pulse Diling Through to a PBX Extension (Michael M. O'Dorney) Automatic Call Router (Javier Henderson) North American ISDN Users Forum (Steve Rogers) Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone (Javier Henderson) Call Home Country Codes From UK and France (Fred E.J. Linton) Area Code 700 Number For ANI Read-Back? (Bill Mayhew) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: andrew@jester.pa.dec.com (Derek Andrew) Subject: Summary: Tapeless Answering Machines Reply-To: andrew@jester.pa.dec.com Organization: University of Saskatchewan Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 22:49:38 -0600 I recently posted a request for information on the various tapeless answering machines on the market. This is a summary of what I have learned. Panasonic, AT&T, GTE, Sony and Phonemate were the only manufacturers that I found anything on. The following features appear to be common to all machines. o battery backup o on the machines that include a phone, the phone usually has some speed call buttons, and maybe other features like redial. o when the machine supports day/time stamping, it appears to be the day of the week and the time of day. o all machines seem to support remote operation, but only the AT&T and MAYBE the Panasonic machines allow selective deletion of individual messages REMOTELY o NOBODY, but NOBODY supports Caller ID. AT&T 1337, 1339, 1539 $100-$200 The features of these models are the same but... The 1339 has the additional features of Day/Time stamping and voice prompts; the 1539 is the 1339 with a built in phone. o Capacity for seven minutes of messages. o Allows selective deletion of individual messages, (other vendors allowed deletion of only ALL messages). o Battery backup. o It has the standard play, fast-forward, back, pause, and delete buttons. Complaints o The toll saver feature will cause the machine to answer after two rings if there are *any* messages -- even if you have heard them before -- rather than just *new* messages. All messages must be deleted to reset it. o The OGM still sounds like it was recorded on tape. o The fast-forward button doesn't react very quickly, you have to pause about a second between presses. o It won't record a blank message if the caller hangs up before the beep, but it will record the sound of the phone being hung up if the caller stays on after the beep. o If the last message is a blank, then you have to start the play sequence over again and fast-forward to it in order to delete it, since the machine gives you no time to back up. Panasonic KX-T8000 o Eighteen minutes of messages o maybe has remote selective deletion of messages PhoneMate ADAM (All Digital Answering Machine) >$200 o Variable speed playback. o Will call another number when it receives a message. o Ten minutes of messages, expandable. o LCD display o Day/time stamping. o variable speed message playback o commands to skip forward or back to next message, and forward or back within message during playback. o phone included o smart enough not to record pauses Complaints o Poor sound quality. o Message playback is LOUD GTE 9821 < $100 Although there is a new model out, the 9831, I received no responses from any owners. Indications were that the owners of the 9821 would never buy another GE machine again. A vendor told me the 9831 allows ten minutes of messages and supports call screening. o two minutes of messages. o simple phone included Complaints o no way to screen calls o must listen to calls on the handset o You can't back up or go forward -- to review a call, you have to review ALL of your calls o bug: if someone talks to the full two minutes, it crashes the system, eats your outgoing message, and from then on it answers the phone, beeps at the person on the other end, and won't take messages. Sony IT-A4000 o Phone included. o Variable speed playback. o Time/date stamp. o Voice prompting. o three separate mailboxes. o Will call a phone number when it receives messages. Complaints o Poor sound quality (like the ADAM) o Cuts of messages from cellular phones (verified by manufacturer.) Another owner has not experience this bug. The following article is copied from a previous posting in the TELECOM Digest. I have included it here for comparison to the others. Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:02:08 PST From: Mark Lottor Subject: Sony IT-A4000 Digital Answering Machine Review The Sony IT-A4000 has been out for a while now. It is a speakerphone and digital answering machine. It has a very hi-tech design and a real nice backlit LCD display. The answering machine has three outgoing messages, which can be your own or ones from ROM. The first is the normal please leave a message message. Another is for when your recording memory is full. And another is for when you put the machine in announce only mode. When leaving a message, a caller can push *1, *2, or *3 to have the message tagged for a particular recipient. The phone does not tell them to do this, you put it in your message if you want to, otherwise things go into box one by default. The phone has three LEDs on three buttons; the corresponding one blinks when a message is left "in" a particular "mailbox". Also, the display shows how many messages are in each box. Then the recipient can just hit one of the buttons to play back that box. However, don't get the impression that this is a voice-mail system. Messages are time and dated. A memo button lets you record from the local speakerphone mic or the current phone call into message area three. The phone can also be set to call another number after a message is received. It will try calling every 30 minutes until you answer (or read the new messages). It plays a recorded message (your own or from ROM) and waits for your password to access it. You could potentially record touch-tones into your "remote access" message if you wanted it to call your pager, although I haven't tried this. The remote mode is voice-synthesized but has only minor prompting. You can do most functions from the remote mode, including turning the machine on/off, call transfer on/off, change transfer number, and change OGMs. However, you can not delete individual messages, only complete mailboxes (you can play, delete, and skip individual messages from the front panel). It is slightly annoying when you call it because it doesn't tell you if there are new messages or not; you need to try the play command (or use toll-saver mode). Also, it will only listen to DTMF commands when it is finished prompting you, which can be annoying but the wait is never more than a second or two. The sound quality of digitized messages is OK but not great. However, it does hold up to 16 minutes worth of messages. The phone has CPC, toll-saver modes, and speed dials. The LCD display shows time, modes, number dialed, minutes talking, and number of messages. It can only be set to answer after three or five rings, or TS mode. In summary, its a nice phone. It has some minor annoyances, mostly because you know they could have just added a few lines of code to make it do something differently. However, it easily beats having a machine with tapes or paying someone for voice-mail service. It sells for around $199. This article has been prepared from information obtained from the following helpful individuals: Dan D Grove David Whiteman J. Brad Hicks Jim Berilla Justin Leavens Laurence Chiu Mark Lottor Mark Wuest Michael Schuster Steve Atlas Tom Scheer Vance Shipley Willie Smith 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 ------------------------------ From: jpc@avdms8.msfc.nasa.gov (J. Porter Clark) Subject: Summary: RS-422-A: Which Way is Up, Polarity Wise? Organization: NASA/MSFC Date: 31 Aug 92 17:32:13 GMT Last week I inflicted this message upon the world: > Over here in the space hardware world we're trying to resolve a > documentation conflict about the polarity of the RS-422-A signals. > If I send a "1" (a *real* "1"), which lead, A or B, is positive with > respect to the other? > I know this has been a controversial topic in the past, with one > vendor doing one thing and another the opposite, but what is the > current thinking? I received several responses. I like Fred Bauer's explanation the best: From: Fred Bauer > According to the EIA Standards, RS-422-A is a _Mark Negative_ system, > which means that the A lead will be negative with respect to the > B lead when sending a binary One. Note that this definition applies > only to the _Data_ signals. For the Control leads, A>B means on. For the > timing signals, a negative-to-positive transition on the A lead should > be coincident with the data transitions. The definitions for control > leads and clocks are taken from RS-530, as RS-422-A only specifies the > electrical characteristics of the signals, not what they are used for. > The same definitions apply in the C.C.I.T.T. equivalent, V.11. > Some confusion may be caused when interconnecting RS-422 devices to > MIL-188-114C devices. The MIL standards specify a _Mark Positive_ System. > I am not sure as to the exact specification, as I don't have a copy > handy, but I believe that the polarity of the timing signals may > be reversed also. Fortunately, I'm not dealing with a MIL-188-114C system. I upgraded my mini-inews shortly before I posted my original query, and I soon regretted it. The "From:" line came out wrong and people couldn't send replies to it. Sorry about that, folks. All fixed now, I hope. As a result of this problem, a couple of people posted followups: Hans Ridder tnixon@hayes.com (Toby Nixon) There was some discussion along the lines of "What controversy?" I can remember a time in which about 90% of the industry was polarized the way it is now and 10% the other way. Apparently, this is no longer a practical concern and everyone is consistent. J. Porter Clark jpc@avdms8.msfc.nasa.gov or jpc@gaia.msfc.nasa.gov NASA/MSFC Communications Systems Branch ------------------------------ From: Michael M. O'Dorney Subject: Pulse Dialing Through to a PBX Extension Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 8:51:36 PDT In 1967, I called Columbia University (New York City) from Buffalo. I was using a rotary dial phone. I called a conventional ten digit number (212-xxx-xxxx) and received a recording to dial an extension and then a dial tone. I dialed the extension (I was answering a job and had the extension number) and was connected to the extension. This was either the biomedical engineering department or the electrical engineering department number. Does anyone know how this was done, how did the system pick up dial pulses reliably, was this Bell hardware or third party (or home-brew) by the school's department. I later heard that this system was called "direct inward dialing" and not "centrex", although later on, centrex and DID were used interchangeably in marketing hype from NYTelephone. (I do not know when "centrex" as a term was created.) 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 [Moderator's Note: I'll tell you who else used to accept dial pulses through their WATS extender: United Airlines on their Unitel network, a system which connects all UAL facilities across the continent. I have no idea how they could do it, but you could call into the WATS extender (which by the way went with *no password required* for several years) and rotary dial all over the immediate, local area network of United. Pulsing could not be done throughout the entire Unitel network however; tones were required to hop off-net and continue dialing through a remote PBX to an outside line in a distant city. UAL finally wised up, getting rid of progressive dialing in lieu of 'enter only the end destination number, we will route it' and also requiring passwords. PAT] ------------------------------ From: jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu Subject: Automatic Call Router Organization: Pomona College Date: 01 Sep 92 14:10:37 PDT Radio Shack has a device that accepts one phone line, and can automatically route voice calls to a phone and modem calls to a modem. It works by using a feature offered in some areas, with which you get a second 'phone number' for your line, that when dialed produces a different ring. RS sells its box for $119. My question to the net is, are there any other similar devices elsewhere that can be purchased for a lesser price? Thank you. Javier Henderson jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Aug 92 15:50:38 CDT From: srogers@tad.eds.com (Steve Rogers) Subject: North American ISDN Users Forum Dear Telecommunications and Messaging Industry Professionals: We are pleased to invite you to attend the October 28, 1992 meeting of the North American ISDN Users' Forum (NIUF) Messaging and Answering Group. This meeting is part of the October 26-30, 1992 NIUF being held at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Gaithersburg, Maryland. The NIUF has created a strong user voice in the implementation of geographically consistent ISDN and ISDN applications and has helped to ensure that the emerging ISDN environment meets users' application needs. More specifically, the NIUF Messaging and Answering Group focuses on how messaging and answering applications can be realized in an ISDN environment. Applications include defining ISDN interfaces for Voice Mail, Electronic Mail and Fax Mail, Transparent Networking of Voice Mail Systems (VMS), Centralized VMS, Unified Message Retrieval, and Unified Message Notification. At this meeting you will have an opportunity to preview a prototype ISDN application which provides an integrated desktop, including a single user interface for notification and retrieval of voice, email and fax messages. This service demonstrates functionalities addressed in the following NIUF applications: Unified Message Retrieval (Application #160009.0) and Unified Message Notification (Application #810035.0). Included as one of the TRanscontinental ISDN Project 1992 (TRIP '92) applications, this service is being developed specifically for use with standardized ISDN utilizing X.25 packet messaging over the ISDN D-channel. TRIP '92 will bring together members of the telecommunications industry to showcase real life uses of ISDN and the national scope of the ISDN network. We encourage participation from messaging vendors, enhanced service providers, RBOCs, and businesses with their own messaging needs. With your involvement, we can make these and other ISDN applications a reality. For more information about the North American ISDN Users' Forum and registration material, please contact: Dawn Hoffman National Institute of Standards and Technology Building 223, Room B364 Gaithersburg, MD 20899 Phone: 301-975-2937. Sincerely, Glenn Ehley, Siemens Stromberg-Carlson Chair, NIUF ISDN Implementors' Workshop ------------------------------ From: jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu Subject: Calling 911 From a Cellular Phone Organization: Pomona College Date: 01 Sep 92 14:14:51 PDT I live in the LA area, and use Pac Tel for my cellular service. Calls to 911 are free, and you're connected to a CHP dispatcher (I assume that most calls for help in this area are from stranded motorists). This dispatcher will connect you to other agencies as needed. Incidentally, the rep that programmed my phone said that even if the service is disconnected, 911 calls still go through. I never had my service disconnected so I don't know if he was right or not. Javier Henderson jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu ------------------------------ Date: 01-SEP-1992 17:10:26.50 From: Fred E.J. Linton Subject: Call Home Country Codes from UK and France France Telecom this summer was distributing a "Pays Direct" (Home Direct) prefix list, as follows. In all cases, one must await a new dial tone after dialing the initial "19". Service Number ------- ------ ATT USA DIRECT 19 00 11 BRAZIL DIRETO 19 00 55 CANADA DIRECT 19 00 16 COLOMBIA DIRECT 19 00 57 ESPANA DIRECTO 19 00 34 FINLAND DIRECT 19 00 358 HK <<< DIRECT 19 00 852 ITALIA IN DIRETTA 19 00 39 JAPAN DIRECT 19 00 81 MCI CALL USA 19 00 19 NEDERLAND DIRECT 19 00 31 NZ DIRECT 19 00 64 OTC AUSTRALIA DIRECT 19 00 61 PORTUGAL DIRECT 19 00 351 SINGAPORE DIRECT 19 00 65 SPRINT EXPRESS 19 00 87 SVERIG DIREKT 19 00 46 UK DIRECT 19 00 44 DEUTSCHLAND DIREKT 19 00 49 DENMARK DIRECT 19 00 45 IRELAND DIRECT 19 00 353 The UK's BT (British Telecommunications plc) offered a similar listing: Country number Name of Service ------- ------ --------------- Australia 0800 89 0061 OTC-Australia Direct Austria 0800 89 0043 Austria Direct Bahamas 0800 89 0135 Bahamas Direct Bermuda 0800 89 0123 Bermuda Direct Brazil 0800 89 0055 Brasil Direto Canada 0800 89 0016 Canada Direct Chile 0800 89 0056 Chile Directo Columbia 0800 89 0057 Columbia Direct Denmark 0800 89 0045 Danmark Directe Eire 0800 89 0353 Eire Direct Finland 0800 89 0358 Suoraan Suomeen France 0800 89 0033 France Direct Germany 0800 89 0049 Deutschland Direkt Hong Kong 0800 89 0852 Hong Kong Direct Indonesia 0800 89 0062 Indonesia Direct Italy 0800 89 0039 Italia In Diretta Japan 0800 89 0081 Japan Direct Japan (bis) 0800 89 0080 Japan Straight (IDC) South Korea 0800 89 0082 Korea Direct Malaysia 0800 89 0060 Malaysia Direct Netherlands 0800 89 0031 Nederland Direct New Zealand 0800 89 0064 NZ Direct Norway 0800 89 0047 Norge Direkte Portugal 0800 89 0351 Portugal Direct Singapore 0800 89 0065 Singapore Direct Spain 0800 89 0034 Espana Directo Sweden 0800 89 0046 Sverige Direkt Thailand 0800 89 0066 Thailand Direct Turkey 0800 89 0090 Turkey Direct USA 0800 89 0011 AT&T USA Direct USA (bis) 0800 89 0222 MCI CALL USA USA (ter) 0800 89 0877 Sprint Express USA (quad) 0800 89 0456 Phone USA (TRT) [Submitter's query: Who is TRT? Used to be the name of AT&T Mail's Telex Service.] Fred E.J. Linton Wesleyan U. Math. Dept. 649 Sci. Tower Middletown, CT 06459 E-mail: ( or ) Tel.: + 1 203 776 2210 (home) or + 1 203 347 9411 x2249 (work) ------------------------------ From: wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (Bill Mayhew) Subject: Area Code 700 Number For ANI Read-Back? Organization: Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine Date:Tue, 01 Sep 1992 01:31:15 GMT I was told that there is a 700 number that reads back your own number. A check of telecom back articles at our site doesn't pull up any references. If it exists, could somebody pass the number along? Bill Mayhew NEOUCOM Computer Services Department Rootstown, OH 44272-9995 USA phone: 216-325-2511 wtm@uhura.neoucom.edu (140.220.1.1) [Moderator's Note: None that I know of. 700-555-4141 tells you which long distance carrier is assigned to your line however. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #676 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21122; 2 Sep 92 1:29 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA23585 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:33:07 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA12898 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:32:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 23:32:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209020432.AA12898@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #677 TELECOM Digest Tue, 1 Sep 92 23:33:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 677 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago (Bill Nickless) Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia (David E.A. Wilson) GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL (Thomas K. Hinders) New Cell One/Boston Service in NH (Douglas Scott Reuben) Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line (John Galloway) Bell Canada Does it Cheaper (Alayne McGregor) Trinary FAX Number? (Nigel Allen) CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings (Phillip Dampier) Wiring Advice Sought (Joe Konstan) Finding Exchange Names (Rudolph T. Maceyko) ISDN and Dialing 911 (Johnny Zweig) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 22:44:21 -0500 From: nickless@antares.mcs.anl.gov Subject: Cellular 911 Equivalent in Chicago I've called *999 several times on the highways around Chicago to report drunk drivers and stranded motorists. Somewhere in the back of my mind I think it's only for the highway system. I called *999 from Indiana on my way to Michigan once, and they said they'd pass it on to the Indiana authorities. Bill Nickless System Support Group +1 708 252 7390 ------------------------------ From: david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) Subject: Cellular Mobile Phone Use in Australia Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 04:42:37 GMT At June 30 this year Australia had 441,256 mobile phones in operation, up 51% over the previous year. It is not just yuppies either, many blue- collar workers are finding it an essential tool of their trade. The breakdown by capital city is: Sydney 131,116 Melbourne 102,906 Brisbane 52,887 Perth 28,214 Adelaide 22,117 Hobart 3,431 Australia has had cellular mobile phones for the past five years and now has 25.1 mobile phones per 1000 people, more than either the US, UK or Scandinavia after five years. Scandinavia has had mobile phones for ten years and now has 58 mobile phones per 1000 people (after five years it had only half Australia's current figure). The mobile network covers 350,000 square kilometres making it the largest geographic coverage in the world. David Wilson (042) 21 3802 voice, (042) 21 3262 fax Dept Comp Sci, Uni of Wollongong david@cs.uow.edu.au ------------------------------ Date: 01 Sep 92 06:55:10-0900 From: /PN=Thomas.K.Hinders/OU=CCMAIL/O=CHAN.IS/PRMD=MMC/ADMD=TELEMAIL/C=US/@sprint.com Subject: GTE Cordless/Cellular Service in Tampa FL I heard a report on the radio (WMAL in Washington DC) that GTE is testing a new service in Tampa FL area. This unnamed service would permit you to use a cordless phone like a cellular phone. Calls would be cheaper and can be made in environments were cellular calls can't get through (tunnels, basements etc). The example cited was carrying a cordless phone while shopping, at work etc. It wasn't clear (a LOT wasn't clear) whether you used your existing phone number, or subscribed to another. The presenter of this info was reporting on stock market activity and not a techo-wiz. Thomas K Hinders Martin Marietta Computing Standards 4795 Meadow Wood Lane Chantilly, VA 22021 703.802.5593 (v) 703.802.5027 (f) ------------------------------ Date: 01-SEP-1992 16:37:31.67 From: Douglas Scott Reuben Subject: New Cell One/Boston Service in NH I was just up in Laconia, NH, and noticed that there is now service in the area, ie, from Concord to Albany (New Hampshire) to south of Laconia to Franklin. Suprisingly, the service is provided by Cell One/Boston, owned by SWBell, who provides cell service for the Boston Metro area. It is surprising because there is an intermediate system in Nashua, NH, so the Boton and Concord/Laconia systems of Cell One/Boston are not adjacent. The system is in effect a separate system, and is not (presently) linked to the Boston system, at least in a way that the casual user will notice. The NH system is run off of a Motorola EMX swtich (as is the Boston); indeed, it may even be that Cell One/Boston "partitioned" one of their Boston swtiches to run service in Franklin/Laconia NH. Metro Mobile does this with their Springfield switch -- e.g., although it can not pass calls between its Springfield (south central Mass) switch and its Pittsfield/Franklin County (north central and western Mass) system since they are now owned by a Bell outfit (Bell Atlantic), both systems are run off of the same physical switch. Cell One/Boston, up against similar regulatory constraints, may be doing the same thing. Anyone know about this? The SID code for the new system is 01485 (yes, it is different from Boston which is 00007), and the roam port number is (603) 229-7626. Since it is an EMX-based system, it will respond like the rest of the Motorola linked systems in the northeast -- your features like Call-Forwarding and Three-Way calling will work, if your phone is busy (and you have no Call Waiting) callers will hear a busy, you can place seven digit calls while roaming, etc. Moreover, the (603) 229-7626 port will respond to call-forwarding set in ANY other system. Thus if you are a Wilmington, DE customer who sets CF in Wilmington (or anywhere else in the "system"), someone dialing the NH port will get transfered as if they had dialed your number directly in Wilmington. (Some exceptions for CF via *71 to voicemail, though ...) Cell One/Boston, as well as all "New England Network" customers, pay the highly attractive roam rates of $.44 peak/$.29 off peak, and no daily charge. Cell One/Boston customers will NOT, however, get their Boston rates, as this is a "separate" system. Calls are not delivered between systems (due to regulatory problems, although this is easily cured via a "*28/*29" system using IXCs to pass calls between the two). However, when Nationlink/Roam America starts up in a few weeks, callers will be able to reach Cell One/Boston customers in NH. Since all features will work as well, the system will thus become "somewhat" transparent to Boston customers who use the Nationlink service. Finally, Cell One/Vermont just got Nationlink/Roam America, and thus a Cell One/Boston customer can get calls practically all the way from eastern New Hampshire all the way up I-89, through Vermont, and to the Canadian border. (They will pay a $3.00 per day/$.99 per minute roam rate in VT, though ...) As to when Boston will connect with its neighboring system in CT and Western Mass (Metro Mobile) who knows ... Metro Mobile is so busy trying to put Cell One/Litchfield (CT) out of business (and themselves in the process, it seems) that they don't seem very interested in doing anything else of use to their customers. After all, ever since the ENTIRE technical staff in one of their switches (Norwalk?) quit in protest a few months ago, handoffs from CT -> Cell One/NY haven't been working. For some reason, they can't figure out how to fix it after all this time! :( :( Anyhow, enough digression; I'd be interested to hear from anyone who uses the NH system about coverage, technical problems, etc. I don't get around that area too often so any input/info would be appreciated! Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet ------------------------------ From: infmx!johng@uunet.UU.NET (John Galloway) Subject: Cellular Providers Charge Air-Time Forwarding to Land Line Organization: Galloway Research Date: Wed, 2 Sep 92 01:56:01 GMT I was very disappointed to find that both Cellular-One and GTE charge normal air time rates for calls that are made to your cellular number, when you have your number forwarded to a land line. This seems like a real rip off since in this case the only resources being used are the land line connected switches, which likely have plenty of bandwidth, there is no cellular communication occuring (that I can see anyway, am I mistaken?). I had planned to get a cellular, then only give out that number. When I get to an office or am at home, I just forward the cellular to the number where I am -- simple. I only give folks one number and it either goes to where I am, or to my home phone with an answering machine. But, as I now realize, this would be very expensive. You can only control forwarding from the phone being forwarded, so executing this plan with (for example) my home phone as the base doesn't work, since I can not un-forward or re-forwad it remotely. RATS!! (Call your cellular carrier and complain TODAY! :-) internet jrg@galloway.sj.ca.us John R. Galloway, Jr 795 Beaver Creek Way applelink D3413 CEO...receptionist San Jose, CA 95133 Galloway Research (408) 259-2490 [Moderator's Note: *Which* Cellular One? *Which* GTE? Cellular One in Chicago does not charge for forwarding calls to landline numbers, nor does Ameritech, the 'B' carrier here. And regards forwarding of calls, Illinois Bell now allows us to *remotely* change our forwarding at no additional cost. I will comment more on this in the next issue. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 17:56:34 -0400 From: mcgregoa@cognos.com (Alayne McGregor) Subject: Bell Canada Does it Cheaper In , John Higdon writes: > "Pacific Bell plans to upgrade a small number of Pacific Bell Public > payphones in its franchise territory to trial Public Coin voice > Messaging Service (CVM). Our intent is to trial this service from a > limited base beginning the first quarter of 1993 pending regulatory > approval. CVM will allow a caller, encountering a busy or no answer > condition, to send up to a one minute message to their called party for > an additional fee above the cost of the call. Bell Canada has had this feature for quite some time now -- except it only charges you the quarter that you would have paid anyway to reach the person. Alayne McGregor mcgregoa@cognos.com alayne@ve3pak.ocunix.on.ca ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu Subject: Trinary FAX Number? Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 1:50:27 EDT The fax number for {Advertising Age} magazine in New York City, (212) 210-0111, looks as if it could be in base three. ------------------------------ From: Phillip.Dampier@f228.n260.z1.fidonet.org (Phillip Dampier) Reply-To: phil@rochgte.fidonet.org Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 00:30:19 -0500 Subject: CWA Comments on AT&T Sales Office Closings STATEMENT FROM CWA ON AT&T SALES OFFICE CLOSINGS WASHINGTON -- "Once again, AT&T has put the whims of its top managers above the well being of its workers and the communities where they live and serve," charged Communications Workers of America Vice President James Irvine. "Their decision to close six customer service offices later this year may satisfy some ill-conceived management scheme, but hundreds of working people, thousands of family members, and communities in six states will suffer." "AT&T allows its managers to make decisions of this magnitude without regard for the impact that it will have on the families and communities affected," Irvine continued. "The union has argued against these kind of consolidations and re-organizations in the past, because they ultimately work against AT&T's best interest." "People are told that they can uproot their families and follow their work, but that is very difficult for them. And thousands of our members have become high-tech migrant workers, following their work from one closing office to the next. Then the next manager decides to redesign the business for no good reason, and people are uprooted and displaced again. It just doesn't make sense." AT&T will announce next week the closing of six of its fourteen customer sales and service offices. The closing offices employ about 860 workers represented by the Communications Workers of America. The offices, which will close on December 1, 1992, are located in Columbus, OH; Mobile, AL; Radnor, PA; St. Cloud, MN; Wauwatosa, WI; and Parsippany, NJ. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 01 Sep 92 16:00:29 PDT From: konstan@elmer-fudd.cs.berkeley.edu (Joe Konstan) Subject: Wiring Advice Sought I'm moving to a house where we'll be having two phone lines (is this bottom 10% for Telecom readers?). Since we are renting, and neither want to pay for nor have to undo wiring changes, I'd like to do the minimum possible to use my single line phones properly. Three cases: 1. I do have one room where I want to use both lines. I already have an adapter that puts out line one, line two, and BOTH. That seems to be sufficient there. 2. For rooms where I want only line-one, should I just use a normal RJ-11 cable (four wires through) or should I make one that only passes through the middle wires? One of the phones has a lighted dial, but I don't think it expects power from the extra wires (AT&T Trimline). 3. For rooms where I want only line-two, is the easiest solution to just make a cable that's wired one -> two, four -> three without wiring two and three through? I have the crimpers and plenty of cable to make whatever will work best. The phones are old 2500 sets, an AT&T 5500, the trimline, and a "decorative" phone. Also, are there any useful standards for marking these special cables (something that other people might recognize)? Thanks, Joe Konstan konstan@cs.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ From: rm55+@pitt.edu (Rudolph T Maceyko) Subject: Finding Exchange Names Date: 01 Sep 92 15:48:57 GMT Organization: University of Pittsburgh A few weeks ago, I sought a list of exchange names in area code 412. I asked at the Pennsylvania Department of the Carnegie Library in Pittsburgh and lo and behold, under a very small stack of papers was a list of exchange names! I was surprised that it was so readily available. The librarian couldn't tell me how old it was, but it has "7-70" printed at the bottom of it, so I'm assuming that's a date, even though it seems too recent. (I'm told, however, that the names weren't completely abandoned here until about 1973 or so.) I have typed in the list, if anyone is interested. It also includes some exchanges from area code 814. By the way, the Carnegie doesn't keep telephone directories, even on microfilm. But they do have the City Directory, going way back to 1893 (?) or so (I didn't look at them since I had already found what I wanted). Rudy Maceyko Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania USA ------------------------------ From: zweig@cs.uiuc.edu (Johnny Zweig) Subject: ISDN And Dialing 911 Reply-To: zweig@cs.uiuc.edu Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1992 16:02:08 GMT I was chatting with a couple of friends last night about the rumored criminal case in which somebody died because Garth Brooks concert tickets went on sale and nobody could get a dialtone to call 911 with the switches saturated with thousands of eager ticketbuyers, and it occurred to me that the obvious solution to the problem may be forthcoming. The obvious solution, to me at least, is to have line cards that are smart enough to tell that someone is dialing 911, and some priority-based emergency override in the switch so that an emergency call goes through at the cost of possibly not giving a line to (or even taking bandwidth away from) a non-emergency call. My understanding is that current switches are designed to have the line cards just digitizing the customer's loop signal and send keypresses on to the switch for processing (it isn't clear to me if keypresses are decoded before or after digitization -- I could see arguments for either way of doing it). The problem is that the system needs a distributed way of detecting the emergency call -- there must be some resource that belongs to a line permanently, so that mobs of concert fans can't use it all up. Since line cards are the only piece of central office equipment a line is always connected to, that seems the logical place to put the emergency detection smarts. Then I considered that ISDN line cards might well be intelligent enough to more sophisticated processing of the signal coming from a customer's line. The must clearly be enough stuff for it to demultiplex out the D channel and send signalling information to the switch. It thus seems that the protocol that operates between the line card and the switch could be set up to allow an emergency override, so that dialing 911 on one's ISDN phone caused the call to go through no matter what kind of nasty stuff was going on in the switch. All that is needed is some way for a line card to demand attention somehow. Since the phone units are smart, they could generate a special signal to put on the D channel, regardless of whether there is switch capacity to give dial tone. So my question for the list is: Do you suppose that ISDN can and will create an environment in which everyone in town flooding a switch with requests will not cause people to be unable to dial 911 due to lack of dialtone? Johnny Emergency ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V12 #677 ******************************   Received: from delta.eecs.nwu.edu by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa12839; 3 Sep 92 2:55 EDT Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA02744 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist-outbound); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:52:08 -0500 Received: by delta.eecs.nwu.edu id AA26413 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for telecomlist); Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:51:56 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:51:56 -0500 From: TELECOM Moderator Message-Id: <199209030551.AA26413@delta.eecs.nwu.edu> To: "\\telecom"@eecs.nwu.edu Subject: TELECOM Digest V12 #679 TELECOM Digest Thu, 3 Sep 92 00:52:00 CDT Volume 12 : Issue 679 Index To This Issue: Moderator: Patrick A. Townson MCI Mail Automatic Autoforwarding (MCI Press Release) (Paul Robinson) Hardware/Software Position Wanted (Amir S. Hatefi) My Trimline Phone is Broken! (Roy M. Silvernail) FCC Docket 92-136 Available via Anonymous FTP (Paul W. Schleck) AT&T 'Buying' Back Customers (Justin Leavens) American Phone on British Phone System (Nancy J. Airey) Distinctive-Ringing Decoder (Alan T.C. Penn) Baudot Codes (Thomas E. Lowe) Conference: Commercializing Internet (Matt Lucas) How to be Listed in the Internet White Pages (Paul Robinson) Clever Phone Fraud by 900 Line (Paul Gloger) Looking For Off-Hook Specs in RJ12 or RJ13 Connections (Scott A. McMullan) Modem Access From Europe to North America (Rom M. Kieffer) Unadvertised SW Bell Offering (Charles Mattair) Travelers Offers Toll Fraud Insurance (Andy Sherman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Reply-To: TDarcos@mcimail.com From: Paul Robinson Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 21:28:01 EDT Subject: MCI Mail Automatic Autoforwarding (MCI Press Release) MCI MAIL INTRODUCES AUTOMATIC FORWARDING CAPABILITIES TO ENHANCE MESSAGING FLEXIBILITY FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Jane Levene (914) 934-6480 Internet: 2671163@MCIMAIL.COM Corporation (MCI), today announced a new electronic mail feature which allows customers to automatically forward their incoming MCI Mail messages to any destination including other MCI Mail users, X.400 recipients, and any fax, telex or postal address for a specified period of time. This new feature, AutoForward, is available immediately and gives MCI Mail users more control in managing their correspondence. The new functionality allows MCI Mail customers to have multiple AutoForward settings to control the starting/ending dates and the specific recipients or destinations for their autoforwarded messages. Customers with active settings are notified immediately when they log on to MCI Mail. Settings may be edited for future reactivation, cancelled to immediately terminate an active setting, or deleted entirely from a user's account. "The AutoForward feature is designed to make it easier for people to manage their day-to-day correspondence whether they are in or out of the office", said Jerry DeMartino, Vice-President of Sales and Marketing for MCI International, a subsidiary of MCI. "It is particularly useful for business executives, and people on vacation or personal leave who may not have immediate access to a PC. Customers can AutoForward messages to fax machines at their hotels. And market research suggests that AutoForward can be used to distribute market survey results and customer feedback. Other uses for AutoForward are limited only to our customers' imaginations." MCI Mail customers can use the Autoforward feature by typing CREATE AUTOFORWARD at the Command: prompt. MCI Mail will prompt the user to provide a start and end date, as well as the name they want to give their AutoForward setting and the recipients to whom they want their AutoForwarded messages delivered. Once the user has entered their setting information and confirmed that the information is accurate, the setting will become active based on the Start Date and Time provided by the user. For further details, customers may type HELP AUTOFORWARD at the on-line Command: prompt. MCI Mail provides a complete range of messaging services including electronic mail, EDI, X.400. fax, telex, hardcopy postal and courier delivery worldwide. Customers can access MCI Mail through a toll-free number in the U.S., through packet switched networks in over 90 countries, or via MCI Mail Global Access, currently offered in 27 countries. MCI offers a full spectrum of domestic and international communications services. In addition to electronic mail, other international services include worldwide direct dialing, MCI CALL USA, MCI WORLD REACH, 800 services, telex, private voice and data networks and television transmission. MCI offices in over 50 countries, Guam and Puerto Rico are positioned to provide and support the full range of global telecommunications services. -------------- [Moderator's Note: With all these improvements MCI Mail is making to their system, I wonder why they still have not managed to bring their service into compliance with Internet mail standards. There is not a week goes by that mcimail.com does not dump out at least one and as often as not two or three issues of TELECOM Digest undelivered due to a bad name on the list or some other problem. The rule is supposed to be that delivery of the same email to multiple names is not affected because of one bad name: you skip that one and deliver to the others. Several dozen readers at mcimail.com don't get their copy because MCI dumps the whole load. Of course then I have to pull the bad name from the list and resend the issue to everyone there. My solution soon will be to discontinue delivery of the Digest to MCI Mail and send subscrib- ers there a note suggesting they bring pressure on MCI Mail honchos to join the rest of the email world in conforming to standards set up to serve everyone. I've tried calling MCI Mail about this; I get nowhere fast. PAT] ------------------------------ From: hatamian@gandalf.rutgers.edu (ShAhin) Subject: Hardware/Software Position Wanted Date: 02 Sep 92 15:39:57 GMT Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Hello everyone, A friend has asked me to post this for him. Please respond directly to him by phone or to me via email. Thanks, S ----------- Hi, I am looking for a position in the area of computer software/hardware and netwroking. I have a MSEE with emphasis on Computer Architecture. Also, I have two years experience in designing both hardware and software for microprocessor based medical instruments. I also have about six months of experience in design and implementation of Ethernet LANs using NOVELL3.11. Please for further info and/or a resume call me at: (201) 848-0446. Thanks. Amir S. Hatefi ------------------------------ Subject: My Trimline Phone is Broken! From: cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 00:38:53 CDT Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN One of my best-ever garage-sale aquisitions is an old (and ugly yellow-green) ITT Trimline-type phone. Got it for $1, with no cord. It's been a faithful bedside phone for years, now, and gives me something to do with that little transformer I unplugged from the basement six houses ago :-). After this move, it's given up. The microphone isn't working. I checked the mic with my ohmmeter, and it shows a good connection. Changes resistance with audio, so I don't think the mic has gone. But I find no voltage across the mic when the phone is off-hook. Perhaps one of you might have an idea, or even a schematic they could pass along? The phone says "ITT 180447" on the flex-circuit in the handset. I don't really want to tear into it with no roadmap. E-mail preferred, and thanks in advance. Roy M. Silvernail (in the throes of a mail crisis, so try.... roy@tfsquad.mn.org) ------------------------------ From: pschleck@cwis.unomaha.edu (Paul W Schleck KD3FU) Subject: FCC Docket 92-136 Available via Anonymous FTP Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 12:20:33 CDT Just a short note to let everyone know that a copy of FCC PR Docket 92-136 (Ammendment of Part 97 of the Commission's Rules to Relax Restrictions on the Scope of Permissible Communica